chemicals involve. normally under the clean water act this would be required. >> there are i think 1260 something chemicals that could be added to this. >> i never had no problems until the gas company when i started having problems. all my calfs for 2008, eight live, ten dead, four blind, stillborn, and one had a cleft pallett and that's when they drank that water when they drilled up here. >> the calf that died there. the mother didn't even clean it up. and the gas company says, there's nothing wrong with the water. but it killed the cattle and it will kill the people next. >> there are other real issues. according to a report published in october 2013 by san jose state university, fracking wells using two to five million

gallons of fresh water for each fracking. an 90% of the water never returns to the surface, so it's permanently removed from the water cycle. >> fracking requires millions and millions and millions of gallons of water per well. >> there also seems to be a strong correlation between hydraulic fracking and seismic activities. >> a good example would be youngstown, ohio. just before christmas eve two years ago, a guy was pumping water into the rocks and kept pushing more and more pressure and the rocks went -- he created a little earthquake, magnitude 4. >> another issue it of the oil acquired by fracking is often proving to be more flammable than traditional forms of oil. >> and, for example, the baseline crude oil -- 40% of what is going in the rail cars are explosive, volatile, coming

from beneath the earth. what is called benzene -- and derivatives. >> the techniques need to be regulated. we need to do them responsibly. we need to understand that the chemicals that are being utilized here -- we need to make sure that water supplies are protected. >> dear congress. dear congress, dear congress. >> hydraulic fracturing could be rowley important for the growth of our economy. but if you want the critical support of the american people, some things need to change. you need to investigate the impact of hydraulic fracturing on seismic activity. and the use of recycled water instead of fresh water. you need to mandate testing of water near fracturing sites and you need to enter the state transportation of frack oil and gas. most importantly, the haliburton

loophole kneeses to be removed and -- >> they don't care. they got their gas. >> take the exemptions off the table. >> as we mentioned earlier this year we have three first-prize high school wins, and a first-place middle school winning entry as well for our student cam competition and joining me now some students. this is shelly ortiz, going to metropolitan art institute in phoenix, arizona, diagnosing the problem is the name of the documentary and you did this with nina and dean, and hannah

hood and your faculty adviser is stephanie lucas, tell us abouture documentary. >> well, diagnosing the problem, when we heard about the -- in july we were trying to fine a topic we were passionate about and we knew something about and we have a lot of friends around us that suffer from mental illness so we decided to pursue it. >> how did you come to the competition, fine out about student cam? >> my teacher came to us, this last year, and our seniors last year also participated in c-span student cam, and so we decided to get our team together and be ready for the prompt in july, and when it came we went for it. >> let me turn to peter right next to you. peter jasper, our middle school winning entry. your documentary, nsa, the links of america's security. you did with this antonia and madeline. how did you come to this topic

in the student cam competition. >> i go to eastern middle school with my fellow members, and can it's a mandatory project for us to do. the contest is everything in the magnet program does it. so that's how we came the project. we had to pick our topic by the certain date and that is when the news about the nsa was coming out, and our english teacher made us do a project on security versus privacy the day before, and we just sort of on a whim decided to do it. >> what did you learn about the surveillance programs? >> i learned there's a lot more that you don't know, and it's hard for the average person to know exactly what is going on because they don't know what is going on, and i think at it deps, do you value your security or your privacy or your privacy over your security? >> and did that make it difficult to due you documentary? >> somewhat. but it made it easier because it's easy to balance it.

you know there's two obvious sides. either for the nsa or against. and so we tried to balance our video on pro and antinsa clips and interviews so that we could try to achieve the balance feel that c-span wanted us to do. >> let go across the table to andrew, who is in tenth grade. his documentary, we the people, genetically modified, how did you come up with the topic and learn about student cam? >> i'd probably say i came across the topic on the internet, just simply threw watching youtube videos and stuff like that. but i figured it was really a great topic because unlike some of the other topics that of course are important, food is essential to life and transcends everything, and every requires food to live and a lot of people don't know whates being done to our food supply, and they just eat this food regularly without knowing what is inside it.

i found that very concerning. so that's i would i chose the topic. >> what was the most challenging part? >> getting all the interviews and interviewing everybody, because since this was kind of a controversial fringe topic, a lot of people were not really willing to talk openly about this on camera. namely, politicians, gross -- grosser grossers and a lot of people but i think it turned out pretty well. >> donald is a tenth grader as well. our murky future, about clean water in the country. you worked we gabrielle and aj. how did you come across this topic? >> well, we all pitched ideas, and immediately, from the get go can we knew we wanted to do some form of pollution. it was actually gabriel's idea to do water pollution, and jay

stonied stone when he said his parents work at dc water, our local wastewater management company. so that help us kind of get our interviews and get higher quality. >> why did you want to do something on pollution? why did you know that right away? >> i think it's just something we're all passionate about. we all care for the environment. we all wanted to just bring attention to that aspect. >> what did you learn? >> there's so much depth to water pollution than what we originally thought. i mean, there's cso pollution, litter, just so many different levels to our waterways than what meets the eye. >> so, how did you -- was this a required assignment from your

teacher? and who helped you along the way? >> it was a required assignment. our tv production teacher, mr. mayo, introduced us to the assignment and decide indicated one and a half months of his class solely to this assignment. we would make story boards, scripts, he definitely helped us every step of the way. >> what was most challenging part of putting this documentary together for you? mental health issues and you featured some people in your documentary. with mental health issues. how did you get them to go along with that? >> well, one of the most challenging was finding the interviews and reaching tout different organizations and some of them didn't get back to us, but we knew a lot of friends, family, acquaintances, who struggle with mental illness. one of my best friends in my film is affected by mental

illness, and when just presenting them to them, saying this could help people and reduce the stigma, wait easy to get them on board, and they were really sweet. they knew exactly what they needed to do. as figures to bring awareness to mental illness and drop the stigma. so, by doing that it was easier to bring in interviews and they were really great and cooperated really well. >> ron barber you spoke with. what was -- how did you go bat getting that interview? >> well, we just tried to contact different mental health advocacies, and the shooting with him and gabrielle giffords really brought up a lot of awareness to the person who did the shooting, who had a mental illness, and was ready to take that experience and use that for good, and try to drop the stigma

and help people with mental illnesses create awareness to realize what they have and it's okay to get help and it's okay to admit to it. so he is really open to getting a better future for people with mental illnesses to learn what they have and how they can help themselves. >> i want to show your documentary next, but first before we do that, what was the most challenging part for you? >> well, the most challenging part was probably the editing because i was editing the film with me teacher and my other teammates. i had a lot of help from them, and once we got the interviews, it was easier to put them into place so we just had to connect them all together to make a very nice flowing film. that was the funnest and the hardest and the most rewarding part. >> what about archives to find your footage. >> we had a very specific topic so it was harder to find more broad c-span footage. we found one or two clips on million -- mental illness but

they made it the best. >> you won $3,000. what are you go to do. >> we are splitting it. i'm using it to go to college and get a laptop to make more films on. >> that's your future. you're thinking about going into -- >> oh, yeah. >> what do you want to do what kind of film? >> well, i want to be mostly fiction film mostly cloudier but with documentary on the side. i want to be a director and a producer and that sort of sense. >> here it is, the documentary, first prize, high school winner for the division. its "diagnosing the problem." >> dear congress, our names are shelly, hannah, and nina, and we attend an saturday school in phoenix, arizona. throughout the years we have encountered people who struggle with enemy illnesses and thought the years we have seen how a lack of support for treatment

can result in devastating events as well as emotional distress for those individuals and their families. >> i am felix and i was executioned with skits sew affective bipolar disor. id up in the hospital after an episode like, luke an attack sent me there. went straight to being an inpatient. they diagnosissed me there after five minutes or so of talking to me, as bipolar, and treated me for two weeks. i got out of the hospital, and went from doctor to doctor, looking for someone who would actually listen. it took me over a year to find a doctor who actually did listen. >> rooking deeper into the topic of mental illness we discovered shocking statistics. >> 22 veterans commit suicide every day as a result of emotional problems.

>> unfortunately events. >> when i look back on the incident that took place in tucson, the tragedy, where i was shot and congress woman giffords was shot and 17 other people were wounds and six people died, the young man who did the shootings, who shot -- had been maying symptoms of mental illness two years before the time. >> and the san diego d stigma. >> mentally ill feel that people don't pay attention to them and try to predent they don't exist and that kind of isolation really can make a problem worse, and in addition to just being totally dehumanizing. >> in our research not only did we stumble upon he lack of help but also a substantial absence of help for veterans who struggle with mental illness. >> if we look back on what happened after the vietnam war, the veterans who came back to a

country very divided over the war and they were reviled and called baby killers, but what is even worse they weren't given the mental health services and treatment they needed and ended up homeless. >> if they're on their own, which is usually the case, it's hard to get that help that you need to start working towards getting yourself out of the right side. with things like ptsd, the longer it goes and skits frienda, bipolar, the longer your let it go without any dream and the more trouble the person gets in, the more isolation they end up with in terms of being as extra size -- ostracized from society and alien nailed from friends. >> we found facilities that help veterans come back from war. >> i'm a nine and a half year army reserve veteran.

here at the university of arizona, we have a vet center that is approximately 3800 square feet. entirely staffed by student veterans who have transitioned into the university of arizona and more familiar with the university of arizona, they're all using va educational benefits and it's a place for veterans to come and be around other veterans other, folk0s who have walked in the same boots and it's a hub of information for our tube veterans tom and find resources they mites need during thunder college career here at the university of arizona. >> kind of a nightmare at lunchtime. people i don't identify with. and find people who are closer to my background, i guess. >> i am jeremy. i was in the u.s. army. did two deployments to iraq, one in '05 and again in '08. -- no, '09. so to have space like this for

us is key because a lot of dues come home with issues, be them physical or mental. and having an area like this where we can get together with people that understand our experiences, can really help people out. >> it is also clear that this issue is an important one to our country. on december 10, 2013 -- the money win to help community health centers extend services to those living with mental illness and we commend the government for its attention to the issue. by talking to congressmen ron barber we saw a possible solution to educate and help those struggling with introduction of the mental health first aid act. >> for the mental health first ate aid act tries to get at the issue of public awareness and understand offering mental illness, reducing the stigma of mental illness so when people, parents, teachers, students, presents, see symptoms of mental

illness if they haven't bop through this mental health first aid program they will understand through the training what they're seeing when they're seeing it, what the symptoms might mean in terms of mental health issues and where they can get treatment and help for the person. >> if these were things that we were screening for, if childhood trauma was a thing you looked for in schools and treated, yeah, you could save a lot of substance abuse, a lot of later violence, a lot of later social problem. >> it's vital we reduce the stigma attached to mental illness and open door fob those who need hem. on the day we finished or film we watched president barack obama sign the omnibus bill for the first aid program but we have a long way to go. we encourage congress to provide funding for those who struggle with enemy illness and allocate resources resources

resources and develop programs for those in need. >> i'm just 0 to it. >> shelly ortiz and nina, handnarks handnark all part of the winning document, first prize high school winner, congratulations. it was a great video. >> thank you very much. we worked very hard on it. my team and eacher put all of our time into it. >> you're 12th grade. would howend others do this competition? >> definitely. it gives you something to focus on. whatever you're a high school or eight grade your doing it. it gives you amibition and you get to learn a lot about the state of america and what you can do to help as young figures. definitely. >> peter is our middle school entry winner, and he is part of

a team with antonia, ander to his and mad lynn. so, peter, tell us about how you decided to put your documentary together and how did you go bat seeking out interviews? >> so, we live in the d.c. area so we trade to contact congressional leaders and people there, and we also contacted the aclu of maryland because they're big on this sort of issues with privacy and that kind of thing. and we tried to sort of make our film balanced as c-span student cam wanted us to do. sew got interviews that were pro and anti so we could balance our film out, one after another, pro and antiand get a nice balanced feel. >> what was the assignment from joe hudson, your faculty advicer there at american middle school. what was the assignment. >> basically this contest. we lad to make a documentary,

enter its it in the contest and if all went well, like we did, do well in the contest. >> what did you think when you won? >> at first made texted me and was like, we won, and at first i didn't believe her. i was like no way. then i called the number she told me to call and i it was real. >> you won $3,000. what are you going to do with the snow. >> um, probably save it, maybe get a new -- get a video camera. >> you're interested in -- >> i'm interested in film, yeah. >> whats did you like about the process? >> it was really cool to make a film for a big cable -- c-span is pretty big, and it was kind of cool to just sort of be part of that. >> whatsth what did your opinions think? >> they were -- they immediately were like, are you sure? are you sure you won? they did not believe me at first. >> why not? >> just because winning like --

that can't be. had to be somebody else. >> what was the most challenging part of your documentary, the nsa, the links of america's security. >> it's about the nsa and i think one of the hardest part is the nsa is very secretedtive. i it was really hard to get the real facts and that's why we went to james stanford who open up the nsa and gave us good information. >> what about edward snowden? >> he is in russia. >> let's show the viewers. the nsa, the links of america's security. >> edwards snowden. thank you. thank you. for bringing to the attention of the world the fact that the u.s. government, the nsa, is engaged in massive information gathering. 125 billion cell phone conversations a month. >> a lot in the media about this situation. some right, a lot wrong. >> i have told you the examples

gave you how important they have been. the first core al qaeda plot to attack the united states post 9/11. we used one of this programs. another plot to bomb the new york stock exchange, we used these programs. now here we are talking about this in front of the world. >> to repeat something incredibly important the nsa is prohibited from listening to phone calls or reading e-mails of americans without a court order, period, end of story. look forward to your testimony. >> the nsa, what is it, what does it do? it was hard to answer these questions before edwards snowden, nsa contract, leaked thousands of detailed classified documents to the public. these documents showed full extent of the nsa's surveillance on america. >> the nsa is doing bulk data collection of americans' e-mails. it's not a limited in scope to

terrorists, to spies to people they have probable cause to believe that they're committing some type of crime. it as bull collection of data of american's e-mail. >> that's just one side of the story. many people believe the nsa is doing the right thing under a law called fisa. >> what the nsa is doing is trying to implement something called the foreign intelligence surveillance act, fisa, which is designed to try to capture communications and information from foreigners who are believed to be trying to do harm to americans or the united states. >> i think that fisa has a lot of problems. i have repeatedly during my tenure in congress actually voted to rein in and redefine the fisa court and fisa responsibilities. and so -- i think we have more work to do. i think if anything, all of the news we have all endured over

these last months about the national security agency, really tells us in a deep way that there are things we have to do to rein in and provide oversight as members of congress in what the responsibilities of the nsa are. >> the nsa's method has changed over time with the advancement of technology. >> change in technology. technology back then -- nods nod -- [inaudible] -- occasional telegrams but nothing more than that. today there's -- the nsa are limited in terms of who they can eavesdrop on. a difficulty for me is dropping hard wires in people's houses. the technology -- back in those

days, and today the technology is -- >> access data communication and sell you already communications. >> edwards snowden released thousands of documents that reveals the true nate tower of the nsa to everybody. not just the american public. >> i don't whack has done is ethical and right. i don't consider him to be a traitor because i don't think this intent or his purpose was to harm this country. i don't think that was his intent. but he clearly violated the law. there are clearly in my view, better ways for him to have proceeded. >> a lot of people have very different feelings on what edward snowden did. some people consider him a hero. some people consider him a traitor. i think the most important thing that edwards snowden did is start a conversation. he started a conversation about

what our government is doing and how they are spying on us, and it's a depression that america needs to have because people need to talk about what that balance is and where that balance should be, and before edward snowden, all we had to good on was the government saying, no, we're not a collecting your data. well, we know that's not true. so, he started a very important conversation. >> the nsa is very controversial and the only way to resolve the conflict is if congress puts this as their number one issue in 2014. >> it's causing enormous damage around the world. the german government is angry at the u.s. the brazilian president -- people in the u.s. angry at the

nsa spying on them. so, the nsa really needs to be reined in and i think after all these years it's time to do that. that's why it should be on before congress. >> peter jasper, our middle school winner, along with antonia and mad mad lynn. the documentary, the nsa, the lengths of america's security. congratulations. >> thank you. an enormous honor. >> very good job on that. congratulations. >> let me turn to andrew, who is in tenth grade, attends notre dame nursing school ohio. this it nose an assignment. >> the at school i create promotional videos for clubs and sports and stuff like that so one of my computer teachers at the school, she actually just forward me an e-mail she received about the competition,

and then as soon as i saw that and saw there was prize money associated with it as well then i kind of thought, this is something i can do, and i also had a background in filmmaking and videoed didding before, so i thought it was a great opportunity. >> do you think you'll continue to pursue film olympicing. >> lied to goo into media, communications, journalism, politics. >> what drew you to genetically modified foods. >> just the fight at it such an esoteric topic and nobody knows what genetically modified organisms are, and even more disconcerting is the fact that at grocery stores there's no type of regulation on these foods or any type of labeling on them, which i address in the video, and it is just something so simple that you think would be obvious to put on food but it's not there. >> what was the hardest part of making the documentary. >> definitely getting the

interview, also the editing. one of the main difficulties was gathering stock foot yang ba because when you're in northeast ohio and trying to film a documentary on food and wildfire in the winter, i had to purchase a lot of the stock footage i used because in the colder weather and everything it's difficult to good outside and film plans and everything. in...

these controversial matters and also another thing, some of the people it read to interview declined interviews and after they found out that i won they were willing to talk. another thing is that people aren't really willing to talk to you until you are successful so it's a life lesson i learned. >> host: that's interesting. you won $3000. what you going to do with the money? >> guest: invest in monsanto. no, i will probably use it for each are video projects because a lot of times they involve stock footage which is exposed -- expensive. i will probably put it towards better some sort of other video project in the future. >> host: it sounds like the next topic for the documentary intellectual property rights. >> guest: maybe. >> host: let's look at the video. we the people, genetically

modified. >> we warned the fda the time and this is 20 years ago that if they didn't label genetically modified foods they would be a consumer backlash against them as consumers would wonder what they were trying to hide. >> have your heard of the gmo or genetically modified organism? >> no. >> i think i've heard but i'm not really sure exactly. >> it's been a long time since i have been in college. >> it's where they had chemical to the fruit or veggies. >> is a cropper they modify the genes to increase the yield or the taste or something else about the plant. >> there has been a switch in the dna structure. >> we require restaurants to post calorie counts. >> what happens 10 or 20 years down the road? >> to obtain a better understanding i set out to interview experts in the field and those personally affected by genetic engineering. my first question.

scientifically, how does an organism become genetically modified? >> a genetically modified organism or transgenic fad is when a gene is taken from one organism and put into a different species. it's typically either bacteria or a virus. >> for examples placing a gene responsibresponsib le for regulating the winter flounder's body temperature into a tomato would yield a frost tolerant crop. although humans have selectively bred plants forever agribusiness is like monsanto began truly genetically modifying seeds in the 1980s to maximize farmers crop yields and subsequently the global food supply. >> monsanto is a giant. >> they are trying to make products that sell. there products that people want and people want products that are going to increase yields. >> commercially known as roundup

is an herbicide that farmer spray on roundup resistant crops so the plants will grow but the weeds will die. >> they don't have to hassle. they don't have to be as accurate. roundup takes care of it, for now. >> by utilizing herbicides, pesticides conventional farmers can spend less and produce more but at what cost? >> only problem i don't like about monsanto as they come after us farmers. >> they have these patented seeds where they say farmers can't use our seeds for a second round of crops. you can buy buy the sedum planted and harvested and then you have to wipe yourself clean and start new. it's part of the agreement that farmer signed. >> you signed. >> you going to the farmer's fields and check even they are not supposed to. they trespass. we know it. >> monsanto has filed suit against farmers who save and/or replant these patented seeds to protect its multi-million dollar investment in genetic research.

a group of organic farmers in new york even preemptively sued the biotech giant in fear that they would be sued if patented seeds from neighborineighbori ng farms contaminated their fields via wind currents. how does this information affects the average consumer? >> foods that are most often genetically modified our tomatoes corn and soybeans but corn and soybeans are probably the most common. >> according to the usda usda approximately 90% of all corn and cotton and 93% of all soybean crops planted in the united states or genetically modified. despite suggestions of noble intent. >> there genetically modified with vitamin a deficiency throughout the world. >> if there are people starving in africa if we can get them the food that they need, why not? >> both the safety and nutritional value of gmos is inconclusive and highly disputed >> there's no difference between

all organic or regular food. it won't improve your life for your help for nothing. as long as you eat fresh. >> gmo salmon and farmed salmon also produce only one third of the healthy omega-3's that wild salmon halves of the nutrient value is down by almost 70%. >> some medical medical professionals to propose the increased consumption of gmos positively correlates with the 21st century rise in allergies, autism and fertility and even some forms of cancer. >> is it possible that some of what we are seeing is related to what we are eating? the answer is yes absolutely. >> others claim the intimacy between agger industry and the federal government has created a revolving door of conflict in interest at the consumer's expense. >> private corporaticorporati on sent someone to work in government who is an expert in a certain area.

that expert allows for certain advantages that companies take advantage of and moves back and forth between the private sector and the public sector. >> for example michael taylor former vice president for public policy at monsanto is a current food safety czar at the fda. the ultimate question is are these genetically modified organisms safe for human consumption? >> you watch these commercials for some drug on tv in the last 15 to 30 seconds of a spot is this long list of disclaimers warning you up all the effects and side effects of these drugs. if you had to do that with a tomato chances are people would not hide it. >> there are definitely scientists who will do a study with it and they will set up the research to show whatever their agenda was at the outset. i think there are probably people on both sides doing those kinds of things. >> i certainly think there needs to be more research done. right now we do not have conclusive evidence to show these products are in fact safe

for consumption. >> this global uncertainty has prompted more than 60 countries including all those in the european union to either restrict or outright and the production and sale of gmos. >> countries around the world has said we don't want this genetically modified food. >> because neither congress nor the fda has long get to mandate the labeling of gm foods despite grassroots propositions and protests some food companies have practically signed a nongmo seal to their products. >> we are going to for stringent labeling on everyone except in the case of -- it's where government has decided that in this case this particular area doesn't have to comply. >> it helps transparency from our federal government we are left in the dark. >> so who is responsible for determining whether not gm food should be labeled, band or simply ignored? you decide.

>> host: andrew demeter or high school winner for subdivision. congratulations. we the people genetically modified. while we were watching your documentary shelley asked to a great question that is, tell our viewers in doing this is a change the way you eat lacks. >> guest: it actually has to like i said i had prior knowledge before he made this so i had have many d differently for a little while now. but yeah it's definitely change the way i eat and how i look at things at the grocery store. i definitely find myself turning the package to see all the ingredients now. >> host: what is the best in your opinion? >> guest: we talked about the nongmo is the best. organic simply means the food is then produced with pesticides and then all natural means absolutely nothing. >> host: is that difficult to eat that way? >> guest: it's definitely more

expensive because all of the regulation goes into it so that's unfortunate but ultimately people should know that if they start transitioning to this new type of food ultimately the prices will go down. at. >> host: andrew demeter thank you very much. let me turn to donald de alwis representing the first prize high school winner for these division. he did a document to call the murky future. you are come from montgomery blair high school. how did you come across this topic? >> guest: we are all interested in the empire meant so when we pitched topics immediately we want to do some form of pollution. we finally settled on water pollution because andrew's parents work for d.c. water. that gave us better interviews and we exit out to visit the plant.

>> host: who did you interview and what did you see when you visited the plant's? >> guest: we interviewed the program cost and schedule banister and ryan payne who is a field engineer. we toured all the phases of treatment. it was just eye-opening to see. the water comes in dirty, brown and it goes out crystal clear. it's amazing the type of stuff they do at that facility. >> host: has it impacted the water that you drank? do you drink the water from the community? >> guest: from the faucet's? it's definitely clean because i have seen the process that the water goes through but i personally do not drink from it. >> host: why not? >> guest: i just find bottled water more appealing. >> host: what was the most challenging part for you and your team to put this together?

>> guest: definitely making the script, getting it to flow because we have to pac in so much information in such a short amount of time. just making the audience interested in the topic was the hardest part. >> host: what about editing? how many hours do you think you and your team are editing? >> guest: it's got to be 150, somewhere around there. >> host: that was hard? >> guest: was definitely hard. >> host: how was it to go through the c-span archives and find information that you need to include. that's part of the criteria that you have to use c-span footage in addition to keeping it under eight minutes. >> guest: there is definitely not a a lot about a topic which makes it so important that they clips that were available were easy to find on c-span's youtube page and c-span's video library. >> host: would you recommend

kids in your class are younger than you to do this type of project? >> guest: definitely. it's an eye-opening experiencexperienc e. you get to learn a lot about what goes on around you that you may not have been interested in or aware of in the past. it's just incredible. there are so many aspects of it that i would definitely do it again. >> host: what was your reaction when you found out that you and your team one? >> guest: we were dumbfounded. we had no idea that we even had a chance of winning. we watched it over in class and we were all bummed out about the audio. it wasn't equal. it wasn't up to the standards that we had expected so at that point we were done. we didn't think that we had a chance but we did. >> host: you did and you want $3000. what are you going to do with the money? >> guest: we split it up $1000 each. gabriel is advancing his filmmaking career.

he's going to buy new equipment that believe jay is putting it in the bank. i'm opening up a ranch of local nonprofit that will help in a fit third world amputees in third world countries for prosthetics. >> host: what got you interested in that? >> guest: i broke my leg last october and it just kind of opened my eyes to how hard it is to live just without all your limbs. i realize that so many people were going through their lives limbless. it was insane. i mean the amount of work that you have to put in. i mean when you have the cast on , getting it off and rehabbing so i really want to help other people. >> host: did this document make you more aware of outside of clean water, did it make you

more aware of other issues like this nonprofit you are talking about? >> guest: definitely, yeah. i think i was kind of sheltered from the outside world originally. i didn't read newspapers very often but after this project i'm getting more involved in the stuff that goes on around me. in that way was very beneficial. >> host: let's take a look at the winning video, a murky future. >> water, it makes up 75% of our bodies. take water away and humanity would perish within one week. water is the most vital substance to the human body yet it is because of us humans that nearly 50% of all stream, lakes, bays and estuaries are unsuitable for use due to pollution.

♪

>> one of the most polluted rivers in the state of maryland is the anacostia. the anacostia was once full of life and ecological diversity, symbol of prosperity in the d.c. area. it's now known as the forgotten river. the entirety of its eight miles is polluted beyond recognition by sediment, pathogens and wastewater. between 75 and 90% of this pollution is combined sewage overflows or cso's. washington d.c. and the surrounding area uses the system that carries sewage and stormwater in pipes. about twice a week the system overflows into local rivers. the hardest hit being the anacostia. between the 17 entry points to the river two to 3 billion-dollar -- gallons of sewage go into the anacostia every year. d.c. waters has become a long

term projects the clean rivers project. the clean rivers project sets out the schedule for the construction of massive tunnels of a capture and store's cso's. we took a tour of the d.c. water waste treatment plant blew planes to learn more. >> said this time all itself is designed as a storage tunnel and a conveyance. what that means is that when the cso overflows the combined system instead of going into the anacostia and potomac rivers specifically the anacostia tunnel it will overflow into this tunnel through deep shafts, filling up the tunnel and transferring all of that overflow water down here at blue plant but then it can be slowly bumped back out so it captures, its stores in conveys it to the plant for treatment.

>> one of the biggest sources of pollution is -- so at the end of the prior checks that will be essentially eliminated. so it will make a huge difference. instead of what we are throwing in 70 or 80 times a year which is more than once a week it will overflow twice per year which will make a huge difference to the river. there is a major combined oil flow going out there twice a week. it's unsafe to be on the river during those periods. there are high levels of bacteria. he you can get sick so they team rivers project will fix that. 98%. it reduces the overflows to the anacostia by 98%. >> when fully implemented this project is expected to help take the anacostia river up the list of impaired waterways in the u.s. but d.c. is not alone in its struggle for clean water act. >> raw sewage, industrial and

stormwater come pouring into the environment. we need to stop them. >> would be nice of you to jump off your boat and not worry about what you're going to get. >> one of the problems we still have to address is sewage pollution. >> 772 american cities were built with combined systems. >> overflow. >> overflow. >> combined overflow. >> the clean rivers project and other initiatives like it will help if the waterways tremendously but it all comes at a price. >> one of the obstacles is obviously the funding. it's a heavy burden. the biggest burden is to help fund it and take some of the burden off. >> behind every river there's a wastewater treatment entity trying to scrape together funds in their quest for clean water. congress in 2014 you must

provide federal funding to wastewater truth and agencies across the country. the lifeblood of our nation is tainted with -- of generations and it must stop here. >> host: donald de alwis and gabriel and jay a murky future is that documentary. congratulations. also your teacher. you did a great job so thanks for participating and the studentcam competition. shelley ortiz is 12th grade a metropolitan arts institute diagnosing the problem mental health hazard documentary with nina nadine and stephanie lucas duda teacher helping you a lot as well. and andrew demeter who's in tenth grade at cathedral latin school in ohio. we the people genetically modified is his documentary about genetically modified foods. congratulations and thank you for participating.

and then our middle school entry winner peter jasperse who along with antonio -- antonio liebman and madeline hutchens created the document -- documentary the nsa the links of america's security and your teacher jill hudson. thank you all in congratulations. we appreciate that you participated. we hope that those out watching other students will participate next year because it's never too early to be thinking about c-span studentcam competition for 2015. go to our web site c-span.org and beginning in july you can find more details about next year's theme.

top officials from all branches of the military will be on capitol hill tuesday for a hearing on military compensation will bring you live coverage of the senate armed services committee hearing at 9:30 a.m. eastern on our companion network c-span3. >> officials from the state, treasury and defense departments discussed russia's intervention in ukraine tuesday when they testified before the senate foreign relations committee. you can see it live at 2:00 p.m. eastern on our companion network c-span3.

john podesta's senior adviser to president obama spoke to reporters at monday's white house briefing about u.s. energy production and climate change. he talked about efforts by some members of congress to block epa's proposed greenhouse gas rules. these remarks are 20 minutes. >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. happy monday. i hope everyone has recovered from prom and had a fine time on what turned out to be a glorious weekend weatherwise. as you can see i have with me

today john podesta's senior adviser to the president. he is no stranger to many of you or even to this briefing room. he is here to talk about issues around energy and energy efficiency that the president will be discussing this week. he will make a presentation at the top and stay for questions on his issue areas. as we traditionally do if you could direct questions to him at the top and then when that's done we will let him go and i will remain for questions on other subjects. but that i give you john podesta. >> thank you jay. it's good to be back here. >> not really. [laughter] >> you no i don't lie. i'm going to run through a few slides. as jay noted president obama pledged to make 2014 a year of action and the and the american economy are firing on all

cylinders when it comes to producing more energy, cleaner energy and more energy efficiency as well as combating climate change. we prepared a few slides because we are doing a number of activities this week to give you some background and provide some context that were done by the cea, jason is out of town today so forgive me. i don't have a ph.d. in economics but i think i can walk you through the slides. the first one -- i think you all have copies. the united states is now the largest producer of natural gas in the world and largest producer of gas and oil in the world. it's projected that the u.s. will continue to be the largest producer of natural gas in 2030. for six straight months now we have produce more oil here at home then we imported from overseas. so that is all a good news story. go to the next slide. domestic energy production as boosting economic growth overall

in 2012 and 2013 it accounted for .22 and .24% of growth which is the highest on record. if you go to the next slide, as you can see that's had a direct impact on employment. we have added 133,000 jobs in the last three years in the oil and natural gas extraction sector and those numbers are projected to continue to grow. next slide please. but at the same time as we been producing more oil and natural gas at home we are cutting our energy usage dramatically, improving energy efficiency. that's what part of what the president means when he says that we have in all of the above energy strategy trying to produce more domestic energy but also using it in a much more efficient way. as this slide shows the efficiency standards like the fuel economy standards finalized

in 2012 are driving down the amount of energy necessary to produce a dollars worth of goods or services. consumption of gasoline is well below the expected trend lines that you can see from 2006 and even 2010. that is expected as the energy efficiencefficienc y standards come into place, but that's go out to 2025, that's expected to save consumers $1.7 trillion. go to the next slide. and where evolving a cleaner overall energy mix even as we boost domestic oil and natural gas production and improve efficiency. renewable energies on the rise and the fastest growing part of our energy mix including natural gas it's only fossil fuel that's growing as a share of the energy mix. these trends will keep united states economy competitive. they will keep the u.s. economy growing. they will help us achieve the president's goal of reducing

greenhouse gas emissions in the range of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. please, the next slide. since president obama took office with increased electricity generation from solar by more than 10 times and triple electricity production from wind power. last year solar energy was second-largest source of new electricity added to the red after natural gas. every four minutes another home or business went solar. federal government is doing its part to make sure these trends continue and more energy is produced by clean renewable sources like wind and solar. five years ago there was not one renewable energy project on the hundreds of millions of acres of public lands. today doi is on track to issue permits for enough renewable energy generation on public lands to power 6 million homes. finally -- the last slide

please. power plants that create electricity by burning fossil fuels are still the largest single source of co2 emissions in the u.s. in 2012. they counted for 38% of co2 emissions and 31% of greenhouse gas emissions overall. the transition to natural gas increases and efficiency and deployment of more renewables has meant that our co2 emissions or amenity production are trending the right way, and that is down. but we have more work to do. so that is what we are up to this week and i will just finish with just to give you a sense of where we are. we are working every day to implement the president's climate action plan. we have made i think important gains on all three fronts of the climate action plan that he released last year. mitigating greenhouse gas emissions as i've talked about building resilience in american communities to the climate impacts we know are coming and leading the international negotiations to tackle this global challenge.

this week we are taking further actions. an important part of the climate action plan was calling forth the national climate assessment. that will be released tomorrow here at the white house. as part of that release the president will be spending some time speaking to meteorologists about but the reports findings will mean for communities across america. the third national climate assessment will be the most authoritative and comprehensive source of scientific information ever produced about how climate change is going to impact all regions of the united states and key sectors of the national economy.

the president has been using the power of his phone and all of a sudden the white house have been working to get more commitments from more partners in these key sectors to get more efficiency and are billed sector more deployment of solar across the economy. we will have some announcements at the end of the week. we obviously need all hands on deck if we are to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of climate change, the impacts that the ipcc warned us about a month or so ago and the national climate assessment will bring into sharp focus with respect to the u.s.. so with that let me go ahead and take some questions. >> juli pace. >> thank you. i had a question on power plants. you mentioned this briefly as it relates to your last slide. can you give us any sense about what the president is planning on that front in terms of the executive actions and regulations perhaps later this year? >> obviously the president has

asked the epa to move forward to regulate existing power plants under the clean air act. he said a june 1 deadline. i think we will meet better be close to it and the epa has modeled a proposal that's being viewed through an interagency process right now. so we will have a proposed rule out in the beginning of june. >> mark. >> one of the charts showed the declining use of gasoline and a greater more efficient use of gasoline. and impact of that is that the highway trust fund is running out of funds. the highway trust fund as you know has been the source of funding for infrastructure repair in this country. to what extent with the administration support increasing the gas tax to replenish the fund to replace funding in some other way? >> as you know we just put forward a bill on surface transportation which replaces it in a different way.

stable funding for the great infrastructure needs that the united states is currently experiencing, whether that's crumbling roads and bridges or building a more modern infrastructure across-the-board to move our goods and freight more efficiently, to make the driving experience more efficient, building more transit to move people inside urban environments is a pressing need. the secretary of transportation just sent legislation to the hill last week on thursday i think, that covers both what we need to do and how to pay for it. >> john carl. >> your chart shows and it's been a big story for a while the rapid increase in natural gas production which is much cleaner than coal obviously. how much of an environmental downside has there have been to this boom in fracking? >> for the most part there has

been an upside as we have seen cleaner natural gas replacing dirtier fossil fuels and electricity system in particular but there is a concern that gas that is for active you will produce through that method compound is done in the cleanest and most efficient way. in particular the administration released a method strategy a couple of weeks ago that goes to the crushing of how we ensure the best production methods are used in the production of both oil and gas in that process. for the most part that is regulated at the state level but i think there are ways in which the united states and the federal government can take steps to ensure that we use the best practices in capture the methane and ensure -- which of course has a heavy effect on the

climate. it gets just allowed to be released in the atmosphere but i think there are ways to control that and we are working both in discussing that at the oil and gas production level and also at the transportation level. the secretary of energy has had intensive negotiations -- discussions with the transportation people because there is a lot of leakage in the system at that level as well. we need to get that methane leakage down but i think there are practical ways to do that. >> peter alexander. >> mr. podesta is it possible for the president's aides have suggested to climate change be one of the key components of his legacy and also to support the keystone pipeline? are those two things and conflict? >> i think you know when i came here i said i'm not going to work on the keystone pipeline so i'll just defer that to a later

question. >> bill. >> given the fact that most of the extraction stuff is regulated by state governments what can the federal government do to ensure that water quality is unharmed and geologic disturbances, all of this reported very much by people, local people whether fracking is taking place? >> well i think we have resources or the pa that certainly can support this and that the department of energy which has a major research program going on to provide state regulators up-to-date scientific knowledge about the best practices that can be utilized. but at this point i think we are trying to work with the states to ensure that people can be reassured. obviously different states are going different ways on that question in terms of providing effective regulation of oil and gas production or deciding to

have no production at all. >> there's no federal regulations? >> i think again the methane strategy will produce again some steps to deal with that issue. but for the issue around particularly fracking fluids is large we managed at the state level. >> john, when democratic candidates here either their opponents are challengers say that they are not supportive of the oil and gas industry, that the administration is not being supportive, when you look at the state and you look at this day to what is message they have to counter those criticisms that the administration is against oil and gas? >> obviously we have seen a big increase in both oil and gas production. i don't think you would see that if he didn't have a practical approach. obviously in the first term we went through the largest oil spill in the country's history

with the bp spill in the gulf that we are back on track to produce more oil and gas in the gulf itself. i think with better procedures we are making sure that is done in a safe and effective and environmentally friendly way. so i think the statistics that i just presented alive the argument. people make that argument but i think that if you look at the overall as i said, of the overall mix, it's cleaner. it's more domestically produced. we have turned the corner so that we are not producing more oil than we are importing. those are all facts that i think can be utilized by candidates who make the case that we are on the right path to have a cleaner , better and more secure, more of american made energy future for the country. >> steve. >> mr. podesta this is really sort of seems like the centerpiece of the president's

pen and phone agenda. you said we need all hands on deck. is there anything that you think you can get through congress this year? anything that you are working on or that you see happening in congress? >> the senate is taking up energy efficiency legislation this week. we will see if that and get passed on to the floor. it's an important bill. it will move us in the direct dread -- right direction on energy efficiency. they're still a question of whether that will be filibusters so they won't be able to get to it this week. >> you mentioned the catastrophic impact of climate change. as you survey everything that you've seen coming and what you think are the areas that need the most immediate federal attention and? so much has been written about it. how far off is that and so forth? >> again we put out at climate.data.gov the first tranche of information about sea level rise. this particular going to affect

communities on the eastern seaboard and florida and and in the gulf. so i think that's building resilience towards what is certain to be a rising sea level is something that communities need to grapple with and need to grapple with that right now in terms of their infrastructure investments and how they are thinking about the future. a obviously we are in the midst of experiencing major droughts in california in the colorado river basin. that's comes along with greater fire risk and the administration has put forward a new way of budgeting on the question of fire risk going forward. we are seeing that already with intense fires already in the plains in oklahoma and california. so i think if you have to pick two, i would say those would be

two good ones to attend to. as you know peter the president recommended a billion-dollar fund in this year's budget that will begin to support communities to develop climate resilience plans and you better planning congo to take a look at what you'll see tomorrow which is a national climate assessment which begins -- it doesn't localize per se but it against to take the climate discussion down to a regional level. so it takes the country apart and anticipates what's going to happen in each region. there's another separate breakdown on happening in the ocean because of the increase of acidification and what effect that may be on the productive economies that are around particularly coastal communities and ocean oriented economies. so i think that kind of information will help communities plan and the funding

that we have proposed they think will provide the resources that would be useful to give communities a jumpstart on their planning. some communities obviously are already on top of that as a result of catastrophic events really particularly as a result of what happened in the gulf with katrina and what happened with superstorm sandy in the northeast. >> and to climate change doubters you say what? >> i would say probably look out of your window and you'll begin to feel the effects. 97% of scientists agree there's an overwhelming amount of evidence that exists that climate change is real. it's happening and it's caused by co2 pollution and other pollutants that we are putting into our air and that cause climate change. it's a well-known science now.

the data continues to come in. if anything we are seeing some of the effects that are predicted by the models coming in more quickly than were predicted in the models that existed even a decade ago. so i think if you want to particularly, if you want to try to side with the polluters and argue to the mecca public that climate change is not happening today, tomorrow and certainly in the future that's going to be a losing argument. >> mike. >> the statistics you presented pretty much read like a wholehearted endorsement of fracking. and when the president was in brussels a couple of months ago he recommended that eastern european step up there technology. my question is is fracking the answer to the world's energy needs or is fracking a disincentive to develop renewable energy? >> i think again we put a major emphasis on 10 time increase in

solar ,-com,-com ma three times increase in wind. at this moment as a bridge at the well from my world in which there are still a need for fossil fuels to power our economy to a world in which we can get more from zero carbon source energy, whether that's through new technology because we can sequester the carbon that's coming from the release and power plants or from more renewables in the system, gomorrah zero carbon source energy in the system, we think it's a practical and viable way to reduce emissions in the short-run. so obviously there are environmental issues around the production of gas and oil but again in the administrations view that can be dealt with through the proper application of the best practices to produce that oil and gas. >> time for one more.

>> you mentioned the energy efficiency bill in the senate. i was wondering what level of concern you have that republicans might try to tack on kind of a pushback on some carbon emissions regulations to that bill and what work if any you guys are doing to shore up democrats in the senate on that issue? >> well i think the question of whether they will find various ways particularly in the house to try to stop us from using the authority we have under the clean air act, all i would say is that those have 0% chance of working. we are committed to moving forward with those rules. we are committed to maintaining the authority and the president's authority to ensure that the

>> thanks. >> thank you, john.

officials from the state treasury and defense department discuss russia's intervention in ukraine tuesday when they testified before the senate or in relations committee. you can see it live at 3:00 p.m. eastern on our companion network , c-span3.

attorney general eric holder spoke about the importance of confronting racial and sentencing disparities. his remarks came at a meeting of the national association of attorneys general and the national district attorney's association. this is 15 minutes. >> good morning. you are right jb we have to stop in those backrooms you know. i want to thank attorney general van hollen for that kind introduction. it sounds like i can't hold a job the way he describes it.

also for your leadership as president of the national association of attorneys general i'd also like to recognize district attorney henry garza for his service as president of the national district attorney's association. i want to thank the leadership teams the professional staffs and the dedicated members of both organizations for the outstanding work you perform every day and all you've done to bring us together for this really important symposium on the reduction of crime. a staunch advocates for the rule of law and his champions of the cause of justice that drives the efforts of local prosecutors and state authorities across america be your two remarkable organizations have for deck is provided indispensable leadership and guidance in the advancement of dialogue about criminal justice issues through the work of the national attorneys general training and research institute to important events like this one and through gatherings like the mba

conference that i attended earlier this year. he routinely bring innovators, public servants and long for some leaders together to address what are the most pressing public safety challenges of our time. to privilege for me to help open this critical forum and to stand with you all yet yet again as we convene to share knowledge and expertise to speak very frankly about the threats facing our respective jurisdictions and to discuss cutting-edge strategies for reducing crime and victimization throughout the nation. i know that you and your colleagues serve on the frontlines of this fight every day and you are working closely with u.s. attorneys fbi agents and other justice department officials to protect the citizens that we are all sworn to serve. together we are reminding policymakers here shinki in something that is very important, that dialogue under the most difficult and divisive issues need not break down along partisan lines. disagreements are inevitable.

whenever passionate people confront questions of that magnitude that we are showing vigorous debate is not only healthy but stands to make our work stronger and more effective because we are all responding to the same things. we have come together in pursuit of the same goals reducing crime holding individuals responsible responsible for the actions of detecting the american people and improving criminal justice outcomes. especially in recent years these common aims have led us to find common ground to take meaningful steps forward on a range of efforts to recalibrate chyme friday -- crime-fighting policies and actions and initiatives have arisen from state and local leaderships. these collaborations have been pioneered by leaders from across the political spectrum. they are driven by the

recognition and the broad-based consensus that we have the responsibility and the opportunity to make our criminal justice system more fair, more efficient and more effective than ever before. the importance of these efforts and the urgent need for action on these historic changes that we are working to bring about was really brought into sharp focus by a landmark study released just last week by the national academy of sciences and national research council. as the report was funded by the national institute for justice as well as some private foundation. its findings are based upon a really comprehensive nonpartisan and independent examination of incarceraincarcera tion rates in the united states over the past four decades. over the past 40 years. as the study makes clear the rise in incarceration that we witness over that period was and am going to quote now historically unprecedented and internationally unique unquote.

the current rate of imprisonment in the united states is roughly five to 10 times greater than incarceration rates in other democracies. the shockingly high rate has resulted in extreme disparate racial impacts and devastating consequences for already disadvantaged communities including afflicted urban areas in predominantly minority communities. these conditions have been shown to family instability high unemployment as well as to low wages. they often correlate with high rates of poverty and serious public health concerns. they not only feed they exacerbate the vicious cycle of poverty criminality in incarceration that traps to many individuals and devastates entire communities. the nas report's principle conclusion was u.s. policymakers at every level must take steps to reduce incarceration rates by making targeted reforms to

criminal justice policies including sentencing for prison reforms in addition to broader social policy changes. these recommendations are entirely consistent with the work that is underway to the justice department's smart on crime initiative which i launched last summer to improve the federal system at every level as well as efforts being led by many of you. the study's findings catalogue the realities that so many of us see every day as we strive to reduce crime and violence in the jurisdictions that we serve. to illustrate the cost of our nations over reliance on incarceration are far too high to bear and big show increased incarceration rates and excessive chris in terms impose these costs without materially improving public safety, without significantly reducing crime and without benefiting our nation in a meaningful way. fortunately the leaders in this

room are not only uniquely qualified to guide our national conversation on these issues, u. r. also empowered to make a lasting positive difference by advocating for the proposals that you believe in, by calling for reforms to improve the lives of our fellow citizens and by implementing strong tested policies that can move our country forward. with new re-entry in the diversion programs like drug, mental health and veterans courts we can keep the plot of resin and help them successfully rejoin their communities. with the new sentencing measures and the careful and appropriate exercise of prosecutorial discretion we can ensure that punishments are fair and are proportional to the conduct at issue in every case. and with the support of a broad new coalition of experts committee leaders law enforcement officials and other stakeholders we can conserve resources. we can improve public safety and we can bring our system in line with our society's interest in

our nations highest ideals. many of you are already showing i think tremendous leadership in this regard. in recent years a total of 17 states, 17 states supported by the justice department's reinvestment initiative led by state officials again from both parties have drafted significant funding away from prison construction and toward evidence-based programs and services like supervision and drug treatment that are proven to reduce recidivism while improving public safety. i'm pleased to note that rather than increasing costs one report by the fear of justice system projects that 17 states will save $4.6 billion over a 10 year period. and the full impact of these policies remains to be seen. it's evidence that they already show significant promise. they should be studied. they should be emulated and we must continue to support this

innovation to expand on improving strategies in real force the robust federal state and local partnerships that can amplify our individual successes. at the federal level are smart on crime initiative is bringing major shifts with sentencing and incarceration in re-entry and executive lamented policies. last year under this initiative i took steps to ensure that stringent mandatory minimum sentences for certain federal drug-related crimes will now be reserved or the most serious criminals. defendants accused of low-level nonviolent drug offenses will face sentences befitting their individual conduct rather than penalties that are more appropriate for violent traffickers are drug kingpins. i also ordered a new focus on prison re-entry diversion and all 94 of our u.s. attorneys offices. i've been encouraged to see more and more people from both parties stepped forward to take

up this cause to help ensure our criminal justice system is used to punish, deter and rehabilitate and not merely to warehouse and to forget. at this year i was proud to be joined by senator rand paul calling for state and local leaders to restore voting rights to those who have served their prison terms in jail or prison and completed their probation and paid their fines. i urge each of you to take up this fight when you return home because the free exercise of our most fundamental rights should never be subject to politics or geography or i think the lingering effects of flawed policies. i also ask you to chime in working with congress to advance common sense legislation like the bipartisan and i emphasize the bipartisan smarter sentencing act which would give judges additional discretion in determining sentences for people convicted of certain federal drug crimes.