children and is entitled to claim them so that single adults is probably less likely. but more broadly i think the lesson is that clarity and explaining and training are key aspects of reducing errors. >> is this something ways and means can take up? this is definitely an area we want to get into. that was a flood warning. don't worry we're not under any imminent threats here. mr. doar -- since we're on the second floor. could you -- i want you to expand on reducing disincentives to hiring and relocation assistance. can you expand the points you were trying to make there? >> well, under mayor bloomberg in new york city the mayor never made any apologies for all of the things he did to create jobs of all kind, and to have an environment in which employers were comfortable about hiring. so that included possibility jobs, retail jobs, and tourism jobs, and health care jobs, some of which wages may not have been as high but the encouragement

was always on hiring. increasing hiring. and i think that there are some aspects of the affordable care act particularly higher up the income ladder that the -- and on businesses, that they are reluctant to hire to the extent that they might have given the uncertainty or the requirements in the program. and that's just very difficult for people who are on welfare programs trying to help low income people get into jobs. because, sometimes those jobs are discretionary hires. you know they may not really need them or may not want to necessarily do it but they need to have an environment where they're comfortable and happy and positive about hiring people of all kinds of skills. and i think that we don't have enough of that in the country, and that's part of the reason why people are not in. and frankly, particularly on men who have struggled in the labor force a significant increase in the minimum wage up to $10.10 nationwide, regardless of the economic circumstances of a particular area, is not helpful

to encourage their employment. so that's another disincentive to hiring. >> mr. turner one minute. provider competition. this is something i'm very enamored with, which is a lot of times we have, you know, one vendor, or one unit of government providing a benefit measured based on inputs not on outcomes. can you give me an example basically of how provider competition can help improve outcomes? >> absolutely. yes, mr. chairman. i'm pleased to note that the proposed compromise on wia includes a provision which would require the wia boards to issue rfps. that's currently not the practice. and states get waivers from that, local boards do and it's not helpful, because they put out a cost-plus contract in which people get paid whether they get somebody a job or not. in a pay for performance

contract, you only get paid for putting somebody in a job that lasts at least 30 days and then you get paid more if they remain in the job for six months. so those are the two indicators. and what that does we've seen that in new york, in particular, it mobilizes the agencies around not only placement but following up with the employer, finding out if there's problems on the job because as you know, with many people who are not used to working, getting up and going to work and coming back day after day after day it's a work habit that they don't have not necessarily a work skill. so the best way to move that forward is to continue to work with people up through at least for six months. >> thank you. i think that's very, very important. mr. van hollen? >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i thank all of you for your testimony. mr. turner, with respect to your idea of having a jumbo tanf

grant where you put other programs into that, are you proposing to include medicaid as part of that? >> no. >> the reason i ask that is so you know medicaid is the largest of our means tested programs that we look at here in the budget committee. >> of course. >> lots in the budget. now dr. golden mentioned that one of the benefits of programs like medicaid and s.n.a.p. is that when you have any kind of recession or depression you have a countercyclical impact. and the concern many of us have with a strict bloc grant program is that you are providing a fixed amount of federal support to the states in both good times, but also very bad times. how would your proposal address

try and hope with the poverty and an economy goes through a cycle that collapses isn't that a legitimate concern and how would you address that? >> one way to address that is you can include as tanif does now, a provision if unemployment rate goes up, there is an automatic adjustment to the bloc grant. a program that is oftentimes remarked upon as being good for anti-cyclical reasons has created lots of problems. that's food stamps. in 2001, there were 2.3 million total nonworking food stamp house holds, and yet in 2006 a good economic year, that had gone up 4.2 and now it's 8.5

million.holds, and yet in 2006, a good economic year, that had gone up 4.2 and now it's 8.5 million. i don't see how cutting a swath deep into the middle class with food stamps and the growth of food stamps has been helpful for work. though it may appear to be anti-cyclical, it's anti-cyclical in a de dependency-inducing way. >> first of all if you look at the congressional budget office projections for snap, if you look over the coming years they project significant reductions to snap because they expect more people to get back into the work force as the economy improves. their assessment of our nonpartisan analysts is very different. secondly, and there's been a lot of misinformation about this. what the congressional budget office tells us and dr. golden if you could respond is that

currently four out of the five individuals who receives snap are either children and the elderly or disabled who are not expected to work or people who are working, but they're in a job where they don't earn enough income to be in the middle class, and therefore are eligible for food programs which we would hope we would want to provide to them and their families. >> yeah. let me say a little about the accurate facts on snap and talk about your original question which is what is the consequence when you have a cap program in a recession. so snap, as you say, the cbo notes that its increase has been due to the recession. some other evidence that suggests that is that case loads are starting to go down. they stabilized and are now starting to go down. when you look state by state at the increases and the impact of the recession, they fit together. the largest increases were the largest recessions. a large share of those snap

households that aren't elderly disabled or children are working, so that a key effective snap is -- i mentioned in my written testimony and briefly in my oral that among poor children, fully 1/3 live with somebody who is working full time, full year and still can't bring the family out of poverty. about 70% live with someone who is working, even if in 2012 they weren't able to work full year. there are a lot of people that need supplement to their work. snap responded in the way it was meant to. tanif and the childcare bloc grant were capped and unable to respond to the recession. in the childcare block grant led by a paper in my colleague's class we are down lower than a decade in tnff it's led to case loads that barely responded to

the recession overall, went down overall since the good times. and that puts states in a bind where their family need goes up when state budget goes down, and therefore, states made choices that constrain children. the spread among states got larger. >> just from my experience in new york city, we came out of the recession much earlier than the rest of the country. we were large proponents of food stamps as work supports for low-income people. our case load grows to 1.9 million. as we came out of the recession it did not drop. i don't think there isn't any question while there are a lot of people working and receiving food stamps and there are elderly and children, there are an increasing number of people who are not working and still getting food stamps. it is a problem. it may not be as severe as mr. turner said but not something we can ignore. >> let me ask you on that point,

mr. doar. with respect to able-bodied adults, we have time limits on how long they can be on food stamps. i think it's three months out -- >> that requirement was waived almost entirely by the obama administration except in new york city where we kept it in place. >> let me ask you a question. >> sure. >> thanks. >> we all would like to encourage work. as i said in my opening statement, a job is the best anti-poverty program. i hope we can all agree on that. >> we agree on that. >> if you are going to say in order to get food and nutrition assistance for a family, for example, working below the minimum wage or another family you should work okay are you willing when you have 6%, 7%, 8% unemployment to ensure they have a job? during the recession in the

recovery bill there was a provision for states to allow public federal dollars to help provide work. in fact, governor barber of mississippi was a big advocate of that. if you are going to require people to work as a condition of getting food and nutrition assistance when the economy is sinking, are you also going to make sure those who want to work have a job? >> the way the work requirements work in tanf and abod, you need to be engaged in activities that lead to work. there are alternatives not necessarily having a job, job search certain work fair program. it doesn't depend on the exact existence of a job right away. in a low wage economy there is a tremendous amount of churn and change. i would say in my experience running these programs in new york city with very good job placement agencies, that if you

leave people out of the requirement or the expectation they get into work, you're really harming them because you are not encouraging them and bringing them in to this fold that allows a case management person and an organization that is helping them move into work. >> if i could ask dr. golden -- we want to encourage people to work. what do do you? >> two comments. my perspective on what's happened in tanif is the assistant secretary in the clinton administration implementing it, states had resources both within tanif and childcare medicaid snap to invest in families and have a good economy. today what you've heard from mr. doar is not typical of states as a whole. states are different from each other. with a bloc grant, not only is cash assistance at a low level

investments in any of the work and training activities is at a low level. i had a chance to look at current state expenditures. what happened in the recession, states shifted money to fill holes in other parts of their budgets. they were under enormous stress. it was hard for them not to. >> this is exactly the concern, right? we all want to encourage people to get in the work force. at the same time states are cutting back on their programs. last point i want to make, mr. doar mentioned eitc. we want to expand for able-bodied adults. that costs money. the president's proposed that in his budget. it's about $60 billion. as we have this discussion, our concern is we remain focused on trying to address the poverty issues. if you save money as a byproduct of that, that's one thing. but starting with the assumption you are going to save hundreds of billions of dollars and then working backwards is not the way

you do it. >> thank you. gentleman's time expired. >> dr. price. >> thank you. i want to thank you for holding this hearing on an important topic and one going on a long time. america is a generous country full of compassionate people. for many folks the big picture is frustrating. we spent nearly $20 trillion in the last 50 years in the war on poverty. rates have come down somewhat, most people looking at that amount of expenditure would say we should have gotten, as some folks have said, a greater bang for our buck. mr. clyburn in his testimony talked about finite resources. we agree with that. it seems that the question ought to be how do we improve the programs that are in place? are they working? are they working as well as they can? what can we do to make them work more efficiently? mr. doar you mentioned snap oftentimes replaces work.

i wish you would expand on that. >> well, the feeling in the period after the end of the recession in new york city was that we had pushed the snap enrollment efforts as a work support and countercyclical efforts to help people going through difficult times to such an extent that the case load then as the economy recovered, that there were maybe households and families and individuals taking advantage of the benefit and not working to the extent they could have. we actually tried to, using volunteer programs and we had a work requirement to push people into our work programs to help them get the jobs. if you do look at the data there is a portion of the case load that is not seniors, it's not children, it's not disabled, but doesn't appear to be working. -just thought that that appeared to be a problem that we ought to address. you can't live on food stamps income alone. so something was going on there that was missing out in the work push of the tanif program we

ought to address. >> and you saw positive results when you did? >> when we had people come in and take advantage of the work employment programs that are tied to tanf and we expended to it some food stamp recipients they got jobs. >> there is a remarkable graph in your written testimony as jobs go down, poverty goes up. it's a pretty significant correlation, is it not? >> the economy is the key ingredient to improving lives. >> when we look at some of the programs the federal government institutes, oftentimes there are byproducts that may or may not have been intended. one as a physician closely looking at the aca over the implementation we've seen, and you mentioned there are significant disincentives to work within obamacare, within the affordable care act. can you expand on that? >> casey mulligan has done interesting work at the

university of chicago indicating, and this is not for the poverty population. it's more likely to be people much further up the income ladder who are receiving a subsidy, but the subsidy is tied to their income. to the extent their income goes up, they may lose more in the subsidy for health care, and i believe the congressional budget office wrote a report saying there was a job reduction aspect to the affordable care act. that's a concern. >> may i add on poverty -- >> on the testimony of the cbo director before this committee a couple of months ago was aca has disincentives for work within it. you mentioned you felt we should reinvigorate tanf. how would you reinvigorate a program that has worked in the past? >> as i look at the statistics across the country and look at what i see coming from the federal government, i sense an

ambivalence from the work reform program. the role of the federal oversight is significant. how often are they in your office? how often did they write you aler or ask why your statistics aren't getting better? in some programs child law enforcement, food stamps there was a significant involvement, in my experience in new york city. i had not seen that in the tanf. i looked at a chart to the extent which states had been in penalty status as a result of failing to need to work participation rates, and i don't think any state has been in penalty status in the united states in five years which just shows there may be less of an enthusiasm about the work requirement aspects of tanf. >> if i could comment on that, the federal government encouraged states to recruit food stamp recipients and they

give bonuses for the increase in food stamp recipients that states have measured as a percentage of everybody that's potentially eligible. this is a counterproductive policy. i think it contributes to the increase in the nonworking food stamp case load excluding aged and disabled. >> so i would add on -- >> from the able-bodied 2.3 million. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you the witnesses for appearing. i have half the time they had so i hope you would answer my questions very quickly. how are you, mr. turner? >> very good to see you again, representative moore. >> it is. we do have a history, mr.

turner. i know a lot of your experience you've done fantastically in your career was based on your work with tommy thompson at a time when i was a state senator. and so i do have some questions related to that. i'll just get right in there. are you concerned that some of the policies that you are promoting really promote women becoming a permanent underclass in our economy? the reason i ask that is because you focused on, for example work first. we all know sitting here all of us are educated in this room. that some kind of post secondary education gives you more opportunities in the job market. while there's a lot of agreement work certainly helps your income-earning potential, the strict denial in limited educational opportunity really

cuts that off. the day we passed so-called w-2 in wisconsin, 10,000 women in wisconsin lost their opportunity to go to technical college and higher education. that's my first question. >> yes. you'll also recall, senator moore, that milwaukee -- >> representative moore now. i'm entitled to both the titles. >> okay. i'm sorry about that. representative moore. the milwaukee poverty rate went from 34% to 26% in the first five years of w2. >> let's back up though because the economy is not doing well. >> yes, but that's because so many people were streaming into the labor force. just because they are not enrolled in a program doesn't mean people don't take jobs. >> we didn't keep data and statistics whether they were going into work or not. that was a deliberate activity.

i was there. let me ask you another question. when you talk about the 29% of tanf dollars don't go for benefits, and you say they are going for more productive uses. what was your thought of the $18 million in profit that went with that first round of tanf dollars? what productive use was that in the milwaukee area? i ask that question because i believe that all it did was incentivize people who were not necessarily public workers, as you propose, to keep people from getting benefits. remember we had these diversion specialists. you could walk in with a big belly, nine months pregnant, two kids hanging on you and it was their job to deny you as many benefits as possible. i want you to respond to what productive use you think the $18 million was. >> the 29% figure,

representative moore is the current proportion of tanf federal funds that go to cash benefits. that means 71% of all that tanf block grant money is going to childcare, working families, some going into the state. >> okay, good. i have one more question because my time is waning. you gave us an example section 8 housing in your review of the welfare state. $16 billion for section 8 to provide people with stable housing opportunities low-income people, and they've been receiving these benefits too long. there is a moral hazard dependency. what dependency does the $70 billion a year we spend on the mortgage interest reduction, which i look forward to every year, what kind of moral hazard is it and what productive use is the mortgage introduction of $70

billion versus $16 billion to our economy? >> as you may know, if you get a section 8 certificate that can be worth $250,000 in that present value, yet there is no connection between what happens once you get take a voucher like that and your obligations to go to work or to move on. >> i mean do you have to go to work to get the mortgage introductionerest interest deduction? i'm dependent on it. >> it's outside my area of expertise. >> it sure is. thank you. and my time is expired. >> miss rice. >> thank you for coming today. i'm a small business owner from

texas. we still employ people. i appreciate you all being here today. i guess my statement would be this. the best way to tackle poverty we talk about today is to create a job. we all agree to that. however, you create the job through opportunity not through a guarantee. a guarantee is not a job. an opportunity to grow and expand is. increase and hiring is up to the private sector, i believe not the federal government. the private sector offers you an opportunity. the federal government offers you a guarantee. we talked about distractions in hiring today. i can tell you big distractions in hiring. i'm glad to hear some of my colleagues on the other side agree the economy is not fixed. it is not good. distractions in hiring would be minimum wage increase. minimum wage increase does nothing but cost jobs and make prices go up. we should not be a country of

minimums, we should be a country of maximums. we should be able to compete for workers. high tax on business is another job destroyer where small business owners cannot they are paying too high taxes. then obamacare is a real disaster when it comes to small business owners and what we can plan and who we can hire, not hiring this many people so we don't have to be involved in the program. there is no work unless businesses can hire. small businesses, we are playing defense every single day. we don't know regulations, we don't know rules, we are not hiring people. i think the idea we talk about states and states competing is always a good thing to reduce unemployment, come up with good ideas. i guess my question would be to you, mr. doar based on your experience with the welfare reform, do you think these programs we are talking about, as well intended as they may be have the effect of trapping people? trapping people in poverty and creating incentives for them to

become dependent on the government? focus on having a guarantee in their life rather than opportunity in their life? >> i think they can if they are not run well. they are not run with a focus on employment as being the most important thing and a willingness to do everything you can to push people into work. so i think they can be but i don't think they have to be. there isn't any question that as the welfare commissioner both jason and i lived off the opportunities that were available for people who were seeking assistance but really wanted to work. and we also and we should point this out we were successful because the people we asked to go to work, went to work and they did it. and they wanted to do it. i think that we have to set up a circumstance that says to folks that are in need we have high hopes and high -- we believe in you and we believe in your ability to go into employment and want to make every opportunity available to do

that. >> to do that you have to tell small business owners it's okay if you make money, it's okay to take risks and reward hiring people. i want to hire people. i'm afraid to hire people unless they are on commission. that's a real problem in our country. thank you for your testimony, all of you. i yield back mr. chairman. >> mr. pascorale. >> when we fail we go back to the aca. i would ask you to finish what you were trying to say what is your take on that? >> my take on the aca as it affects families in poverty, those states that have taken the medicaid expansion have removed one of the worst disincentives to employment for parents. in those states that have not taken it the eligibility limit for health insurance for a

parent is typically 50% of the poverty level or less. if you are working minimum wage more than a few hours and you get the chance to work steady part time or full time you are placing your health insurance at risk. if a state takes the expansion, you have the ability to keep that health insurance and sleep secure at night knowing you have it. >> thank you. mr. doar in your testimony today you state the earned income tax credit, the childcare assistance public health insurance, food stamp ss can all be important work supports that make earnings go farther for a family. love is not enough sometimes work is not enough. correct? >> what do you mean? >> well your job may not pay what you really need to support your family. >> that is absolutely true.

wages can sometimes be lower than what is necessary to support a family in certain places. that's why we have these work supports. >> i think it's important to acknowledge how difficult it can be for americans to have jobs and working for low wages and how important a robust safety net is for those folks. what you are trying to do is reposition the chairs on the sinking "titanic." it seems to me if we want to look at ways to reduce our spending on these safety net programs, one of the most obvious way is to raise wages to the point where the families no longer need public assistance. >> well -- >> i didn't ask the question yet. we can do that most effectively by raising the minimum wage, unlike your position. let's use an example.

you like to use examples let me use an example. many americans would be surprised to learn that walmart, the nation's largest private sector employer, private sector employer is also the biggest consumer of taxpayer-supported aid. the corporation's employees receive a total of $6.2 billion in public assistance each year. why do they need public assistance? there is nothing more than corporate welfare that allows walmart to continue to pay poverty wages and it's the taxpayers who pick up the tab of up to $5,815 in assistance for each employee and $1.75 million

per store. so mr. doar do you believe federal spending on means-tested safety net programs for walmart employees would be reduced if these employees were earning a higher wage? >> okay. there is a trade-off. if the wages go up and the people's ability to go into the labor force diminishes, they are going to need to come to welfare and need assistance without the work. do we have a safety net built to help them? what we built through many years bipartisan effort is a work support system that shores up low wages. that's what we do and i think it's more successful than having more people out of work depending upon a safety net system. >> they could be working at a job that does not afford them the ink they need to raise a family. and therefore, they are going to have to look to public

assistance. public assistance is not for someone totally out of work or a child or older person who can't move. do you agree with that? s. >> yes. that is what a work support system is. >> thank you very much. i'm glad you support the system that exists. >> par for the course. >> i thank the chairman. i thank the witnesses for their compelling testimony. do you have any final response to mr. pascrell? >> no. i'm fine. >> sometimes we have single entry book keeping. walmart is one of the biggest wealth creators in the country because of the pressure they put on suppliers in producing low prices. when you take away their right to have a low-priced economy you are also hurting the people that are consumers there, as

well. and they are low-income people. >> great point. thanks for adding it to the record. i also add speaking with the ceo of mcdonald's the franchisee started out at the cashier. a minimum-wage paying job. i would cite that as one of the country's best and most efficient, most successful upward mobility programs to raise folks out of a life of poverty. >> may i also comment on upward mobility for low-income workers? a professor of georgetown looked at a data set and took people earning less than $12,000 three consecutive years and looked what happened six years later. these years were in the early

1990s. only 29% of the people that were in that category were still low wage six years later. the median increase in their income was 86%. the point here is getting on the ladder is going to move you up wagewise. a manufacturer in wisconsin told us we hire $18,000 employee from the ranks of proven $9 an hour employee, not through people in a government training program. >> you raise the minimum wage and you can't get on the ladder. i notice when representative van hollen was questioning you, there was agreement that the best anti-poverty program is a job. i appreciate that that was recognized. then he said there were time limits put on welfare recipients

of the snap program. >> in the food stamp program there is long standing policy concerning able-bodied adults without dependents who should be working and have a work requirement. during difficult times, states are given the option of waiving that requirement. >> under the law or begin by the administration? >> under the law. then in the first act of the obama administration, they extended it for the whole period of the recession. most states took advantage of that. one place that did not was new york city. we kept the requirement because we felt the economy we felt had enough activity churning it. we believed in saying to people seeking assistance that work is where we need you to be headed. >> i'm sorry. mr. turner you were having an

exchange with representative moore. it seemed from trying to digest this that you made a point about snap recipients or coming back into the work force. her comment was well, i was there. i saw the data and something is not correct. did you want to respond to that at all? do you know what i'm talking about? >> i know what she said, but i'm not exactly -- i think what she said is the private companies made a profit and that profits made by private companies helping to put people to work were somehow illegitimate. i have the opposite point of view. >> please expand. >> when i was commissioner in new york city we had 138 employment vendors, which we reduced to 13 prime providers

with subcontractors, and they were only paid if they got people jobs and retained them. when we did that the first full year after we switched to performance contracting, which included for-profit vendors, our total budget for employment and training went down by 1/3 and our recorded placements doubled. some of the money that went for that purpose went for profits but it's not like nonprofit organizations don't have profits of their own. they have indirect costs, but it's the same thing. you have to make a profit if you are going to run an operation. >> thank you. >> i have a few questions. i wonder if dr. golden would like to respond. you were trying to respond on the question of work waivers under snap. >> the main point was that the law allows states to not have a work requirement for the able-bodied individuals when

unemployment is high enough and that problem will be solving itself over the next few years as state unemployment rates get stronger. it's part of the statute and reflects a reasonable responsiveness to states' economic circumstances. >> thank you. one of the questions congress has been wrestling with that has an effect on poverty or puts many americans in jeopardy moving from the work force into long-term poverty is the loss of extended federal unemployment benefits. in michigan for example, the governor and legislature rolled back from 26 weeks to 20 weeks of unemployment. it typically takes a working person, a person in the work force who lost their jobs, about 37 weeks to find that next opportunity. i just really nervous about what happens to those families in the 17 weeks on average that it takes them to survive on

nothing, and whether or not that potentially puts those families at risk of entering the cycle of poverty they otherwise would have been able to avoid. if you would quickly answer. >> sure. yes, losing unemployment benefits is damaging to families and to children. unemployment insurance is important as a way of keeping families out of poverty. i think one of the things i would highlight about our whole conversation today is we are, to a large degree talking about parents often with young children. we know a lot by now from research, far more than we did at the time of the war on poverty about the life-long effect not having economic security, good nutrition, stability in your life as a young child. i think you are right to worry both about the immediate and longer term effects for families. >> thank you very much. i wonder mr. doar there's been some discussion about minimum wage. i wonder if you might comment on minimum wage in this regard.

it was your position, i believe, that raising the minimum wage would have a negative consequence on those young workers that are trying to enter the work force. is it your position that the current federal minimum wage is precisely correct in order to accommodate entry into the work force? or it would be your position that we should reduce the minimum wage in order to increase, by theory, access to the work force? >> no. it would not be my position we should reduce the minimum wage. i should also say i also support not having the federal government determine the minimum wage for the whole country. >> no minimum wage whatsoever? >> no. that there should not be a minimum wage that is established at a level that will discourage work at a high level for the whole country. that's what a lot of people are raising concerns about a $10.10 minimum wage.

i don't think it's an anti-poverty program. i think it will hurt the most vulnerable, not help them. the current proposal. i don't object to the minimum wage where it is now. >> this is where i struggle. we hear about this and we hear objection to the establishment of a higher minimum wage but we won't own the notion, the implication behind that, which is that either there should be no minimum wage whatsoever, which apparently would support this notion this theory that lower wages are better because they allow walmart to offer lower prices which allow people making poverty wages to afford foreign-produced products at a very low price, that does not stimulate the american economy. to me, what we are describing here -- i'm sorry mr. williams is not here -- is a race to the bottom. he describes this notion we

ought to aspire to do well. the aspiration to do well should not be one that is just limited to people who own the so-called businesses who are the so-called job creators. the aspiration to do well should apply to everybody. i'm really curious about this notion that lower wages somehow supports lower pricing for retail outlets, and that somehow has a positive net impact on our economy. i was always thought that the notion was to have a cycle that takes us all up not one that takes us all down. >> i think we want a cycle that takes us all up but to get on that cycle you need to get a job first. the concern is that disincentives to hiring will lead to fewer opportunities for people on the ladder going up.

>> thank you mr. kildee. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, panelists, for being here today. i'm curious. i think the state employment rate is 6.3%? >> i don't know what it is. >> that is the state and federal rate. do you think that is an accurate reflection? >> no. it doesn't include individuals not included in the employment rate. for instance the disability case load has gone through the roof. the food stamp case load has gone up. people not actively looking for work are not counted. so our employment rate has been going down. >> thank you. mr. mr. doar, do you believe it is an accurate picture? >> know. the better is the labor force participation rate which is remarkably low. >> i think it helps us see trends. in every recession we ever had,

the recovery for those on the bottom takes longer than those better off so for low income mothers raising kids it takes longer to come back than it does are for the average across all 6.3%. >> mrs. golden, you said that the aca medicaid expansion was, took away a disincentive. it doesn't take it away, it just moves it further up the income level? if you're at 130% of the federal poverty rate and you are considering a job you lose that subsidy? >> not until 400% which is a decent level. in other words you have support through medicaid then you have support through the subsidy on the exchange. the law is designed so that by the time that help fazes out you are in better position to take care of your family needs. >> there is disincentive once you approach that 138?

>> i'm not a health economist. i look at these issues from the poverty perspective. i think it will depend a lot about the specifics of how your state has organized that exchange. in the states i'm working with, they are trying hard to have a smooth transition but i don't know the answer to exactly. i also suspect it would be different by person exactly how it would play out. but the key design of the law when a state takes the expansion is that there is ate about it to get help fazing out all the way until you are secure enough to pay for it. >> what is a living wage in san francisco? >> i don't know the answer to that numerically. >> what is it in south carolina? >> it's interesting. i'm doing work in south carolina. i would say what people share around the country and that's one of the reasons i think increasing the minimum wage is important, is the need to be able to feed their families have secure work, good quality

care for their children. it isn't as we've been hearing, isn't only from the minimum wage, it's the intersection of a better minimum wage which will help low-income people reduce poverty. >> san francisco is the living wage the same in san francisco? >> i think we always had a federal level we thought achieved a decent standard of living everywhere and higher levels in some places. >> is a living wage the same? >> no. it's not. >> mr. turner, is a living wage the same in san francisco as in dillon, south carolina? >> of course not. >> one-size-fits-all federal mandate, isn't that going to create hiring disincentives in areas around the country? >> yes, it will. >> okay. >> all of y'all mentioned that work is the best aleafation for poverty, right? you mentioned we need to do away with federal disincentives to hiring and federal disincentives

to work. can you name the primary federal disincentive to hiring, in your opinion? >> i don't even know where to start there. certainly the excesses of the great society taken as a whole have weakened families, driven men out of the labor force and are responsible for some of the social problems much of the social dissolution we see today. >> we've got disincentives to work and disincentives to hiring. can you name your primary disincentives? >> in hiring i'm not a business economist. i want them to be as few as possible to hiring people in trouble economically. on the federal policy, i looked at casey mulligan's work. unemployment insurance extensions are a principal culprit followed by concerns about what's happened with disability insurance. frankly, the welfare programs

are not as significant players in this disincentive to going to work as they might be. >> thank you. mr. cardenas. >> dr. golden, did you want to answer that last question? >> sure. i was going to highlight that a key issue for employers is the quality of workers and their skills. so i do think when the federal government doesn't invest enough in early childhood education in k-12 and access to longer-term educational opportunities, particularly for kids who start out behind, that that, in turn, ends up as a disincentive to hiring. failing to invest sufficiently is one of the things we should have on the list. >> early investment seems to pay very well when it comes to the economy on the macrolevel down to the individual work level and individual household level correct? >> yes.

>> on that note, walmart was given as an example the biggest private employer in the country. would you say they are more of a short-term investor in our economy when it comes to what you just described or are they a long-term positive or short-term positive? >> again i'm not an economist expert in individual firms. maybe i'll comment on low-wage work more broadly. >> excuse me. what i'm referring to was talked about earlier. disproportionate percentage of walmart workers are actually on public assistance. in that context is that a good short term or more of a long-term effort, so it seems? >> it's clearly -- two things. the first one is that i do think having a safety net that's able to provide for example, health care no matter whether your employer provides it or not is an important place to be. i think that's part of it is having the public safety net.

in terms of the employer like walmart, clearly when employment is unstable and low wage, i think one of the other issues we've been working on at clasp that is a contributor to big problems for families is schedules that make it impossible to raise a child and work. when employers carry out those practices, low wages and a whole set of lack of benefits and bad practices, they are not successfully investing in the work force they need in the long run. i would say from that perspective, it's not long run either for them or for the country. >> one of the things that really bothers me, i think most americans have an idea of what the face of poverty is what an individual in poverty actually looks like, and i think these recent times people realize it affects everybody, rural, big cities, small communities et

cetera, of every color, every persuasion. today as it stands, do any of you know whether or not when it comes to the percent of people on public assistance, is the majority of people on public assistance nonwhite minority or nonminority white? anybody know that figure? >> i don't know the figure. >> the most recent figures you've been aware of? >> i can tell you about child poverty for the broad programs like medicaid, i would be almost sure it would be nonminority white. that covers a broad swath including the elderly disabled. for child poverty, that's divided roughly 1/3 1/3, 1/3, white, african-american hispanics, slightly more hispanic children are poor but it's pretty close across the three of them. >> the reason i ask that question is because what frustrates me is every time we see people getting a welfare check or something they always go to the poorest inner city places and show a line of people

and it tends to be of one color. when you step back and look at the nation as a whole it's my understanding it's well over 50% white people 0 on public assistance closer to 60%, actually. that is not the picture america sees. i think that adds to the stigma and idea people are lying on the couch. >> when you see the picture, you don't see the person working long hours. i'm struck in the work i'm doing in these six states. the people they see on snap or medicaid don't have time to stand in the welfare office for four hours to get their benefits because they are working a couple of low-wage jobs. and trying to take care of the kids, as well. that is another aspect of the accurate picture that doesn't get shown. >> dr. golden what is your answer to this question? should poor families be able to save money while they are still retaining benefits? >> yes. i think there is evidence that contributes to stability in the long run. that's why so many states have

chosen where they have the possibility not to enforce tests that would get rid of all their savings. >> i felt the move to eliminate asset tests for medicaid receipt and snap receipt has been a mistake. there is no limit on assets in new york to offering up an option. people can have hundreds of thousands of dollars or $100,000 and still be eligible for these programs. i think that is a mistake. >> thank you. mr. mcclintok. >> did some states not follow the welfare reform requirements? i know back in california the state excused people the

five-year time limit slightly reduced their benefits. the state's unemployment rate which had been running well below the national average had been running well above it. the reduction was miniscule to those experienced by other states. did you study such comparisons? >> i have not done a full-fledged study of all the states and their approaches. there was flexibility but supposed to be strong strings attached that would be enforced by penalties should they fail to comply. >> mr. turner, any observations? >> the observation i have has to do with a growth of disability. it's taking over a lot of the low wage employment marketplace. 13% of philadelphia working aged adults are, are either receiving ssi or ssdi. a lot of them came on when the rules were relaxed and allowed people with -- >> i'm looking for a contemporaneous comparison

between those states that follow the 1996 act. >> i can comment both as assistant secretary then as researcher at the urban institute. early information from the late 1990s suggested there was not a race to the bottom by states. one of the worries had been all the states would all make choices that would cut back their benefits. states focused on work but did not, in fact, reduce their investments. unfortunately, in the most recent few years, that hasn't been the case because of the nature of the bloc grant. what you see is sharp cuts. >> in california performing very poorly compared with the rest of the nation after it essentially opted out of the welfare reforms the state only cost the state about $1 billion. the reduction in our welfare roles was minimal compared to other states. go to the breakdown of the family. seems to be provides strong safety net. first line of defense, the

interdependencies between a mother and father and between the parents and the child are the strongest bonds in our human nature. parents care for their children when they are helpless. parents care for each other throughout their lives. children then care for the parents when they become helpless. is that system breaking down? if so, why? >> i would argue it's breaking down over time because the federal government is replacing many of the roles that used to be the purview of parents and families. the greatest single income transfer program is between a father and mother and their children. once you start having the federal government providing benefits directly on behalf of children, you are taking parents out of the equation. >> so we are basically destroying that natural safety net that ought to be our first line of defense against poverty and against want?

>> yes. >> do we have data on the reemployment of individuals as they approach the benefits cut-off? >> there is apparently a study in one of the carolinas people went back to work rapidly as benefits were cut back. i don't knowktcts on that. >> there is u-shape where people become employed the employment rate goes down flat, right before it ends, it starts going up again. >> do we have data on how much, on the relationship between the time one spends on unemployment and their difficulty finding reemployment? >> we do know this recession has been a particularly problematic one on both dimensions with long-term unemployment and difficulty in reemployment. >> let me touch on the remaining time on minimum wage. do we have data how long people

stay at the minimum wage? >> we have data showing that if you stay in a low wage job starting at minimum wage the likelihood you'll be out of that category within six years is 5-6 chances. >> we know a lot about the fact minimum wage jobs are frequently intermittent and not as secure. i think there is a complicated dynamic there. >> thank you. my time expired. >> thank you very much. this has been very informative, very enlightening. i appreciate all three of the witnesses spending their morning with us this morning. thank you so much. this hearing is adjourned.ration in

a 15-minute interview.

>> commander steven swanson welcome to c-span. >> thank you very much. >> host: if you would not mind, tell us a little bit about the current activities of the international space station, how many members of crew you have and generally what you were doing. >> guest: the great question. we have six crew members up here right now. three russians to americans and one german. mostly what we do is science up here. over 170 experiments going on right now but also we have to maintain the station and keep it running smoothly and efficiently >> host: commander with the science experiment you are currently conducting can you tell us a couple of things, generally what areas they fall

into and why is it that these need to be conducted in an atmosphere such as yours. >> guest: yes. so they vary tremendously. we have outside the house of magnetic spectrometer, which is looking for dark energy and dark matter. something we are trying to figure out the basic physics of our universe came to be. from that we go all the way to a human research on our bodies. how do we change in a microgravity environment specifically our eyes, muscles bones and we are looking in detail about that which can have applications on earth with people who have different diseases. we get to see it at a more rapid pace of pier. that is pretty much for all the science. the idea is that things change appear enough that people can analyze how different pieces or science objectives change in

this microgravity environment. it is just different than on earth which gives us another data set to look and compare to and that gives them a lot more understanding of the problem. >> host: so commander, because you are up there in the microgravity talk a little bit about the extent of the science. are we talking basic research or advanced research? >> guest: well it is both. i feel advanced research is looking for dark energy. also advanced research in combustion and cancer research, looking at t-cells but there is also basic science research trying to understand basic physics properties. it is both. there is just so much science going on. it is just amazing. >> host: experiments that you conduct, how many are nasa sanctioned taxpayer funded how many come from private sources, experiments you take on from

other sources? >> guest: you know, i don't really know the numbers but they definitely come from different areas. we have some nasa ones some from the european space -- space agency, the japanese space agency the russians and a whole group which takes science experiments from all over the u.s. and combines them into a group from that area. they did to the be on board. it is a difference -- the whole bunch of different places. i just not know the exact numbers. >> host: you spoke about life in microgravity. i suspect -- and you kind of address this -- the toll that it takes on your body. can you describe what it is like living there without gravity, and if you could move around a little bit to give folks a sense of what it is like. >> guest: yes. that is a good thing. first of all anything you hold just floats when you little of

it. that is good and bad. if i don't watch this and about ten seconds it will float of. that is a negative. moving around is very much fun. i will give you a quick example of something to you can do. it -- [silence] i am not a dynast on earth. this is the only place i get to do that. >> host: do you hit your head? how long does it take to get used to? >> guest: definitely at the beginning it is more difficult. we have competitions. you have to get their rotation without any side movement, and you can see how many rotation's you can do before you hit anything. >> host: give our viewers a sense of how long gestation is. what are we talking size was?

>> guest: it is about the volume of a 747. it is quite big quite large about 250 feet long. in certain spots it is maybe 130-140 feet wide. it is actually quite a big. only six people up here so it is not crowded at all. >> host: you said there were six people, again from different countries working together on this. what is the working relationship like between the countries? >> guest: it is a very good working relationship up here. we have trained together beforehand as a crew and so we got to know each other very well. we worked together on a daily basis and really have no issues. there are always differences but we have learned those. we are all good friends and it seems to go quite smoothly.

>> host: here on earth there are current issues concerning tension between the united states and russia. you have three russian cosmonauts on board. to those issues it discussed and do you get any discussions about what is going on on earth? >> guest: yes they do get discussed just like any news event. we all discuss it. it is not like there is any negative to it. we understand there are politics going on. we also understand it does not affect our work and relationships. it really does not affect us but it is discussed. >> host: what are the nature of the discussions like? >> guest: that is a good question. it varies of course, on the topic. on the u.s.-russia relations we could build into more politics of the country and more of the

details about the culture and what that means in each country. if you break it down that way you can kind of see what is going on of little more clearly. >> host: on the science side commander, for instance if russia decided because of relations they wanted to pull back on work at the space station how is the united states affected by that and how are the science experiments affected by that? >> guest: well, right now the science is pretty much separated between the u.s. side which includes the european space agency canada, all of those and then the russian side. the science is somewhat separated. however, we do require the russians for us to get up here and get back down right now. hopefully in a few years we won't need that, but right now we need that to happen. that is probably the biggest deal right now. if we can't keep up here we can

do the science. >> host: commander, you can move around if you are tired of holding that position if you want to take the mike with you. as far as manning and staffing of the station much of that now depends upon commercial aircraft what has been the experience with these commercial spacecraft stopping and supplying the station? >> guest: right now they are just supplying the station, and we are very happy that we have american cargo vehicles coming up. it is a great advancement. these are good vehicles. it does offload our dependence upon russia and other countries for that. so we are happy about that and definitely looking forward to the next development when we do get to a crew and american vehicle which will change our dynamic quite a bit. right now it is just cargo coming up. it matter of fact we will have one here in less than a month to

give us new food and science to work on. >> host: as far as -- you said that next step what is involved in the next step and how did things change? >> guest: yes that next step is actually proving that the vehicle is safe for humans. we have a few companies who are bidding for that opportunity right now. once they start into that project the end of that project by 2017, we will have a man to test of an american vehicle at that time and they will probably do one test flight may be to station, maybe not. from then we will be rotating crewmembers on the american vehicle. >> host: how much input do you and the other crew members have to these private companies? how is it received? >> guest: i personally do not

have employed. nasa does have input. i believe it is received quite well from talking to folks to do that work. because these companies want to of succeed. they want the contracts and want to build a good vehicle they really do. they do listen and try to make the best vehicle they can. of course it is a cost analysis going on at the same time. they can't build, you know the most luxurious cadillac out there. however they build a good vehicle. >> host: commander, you talked about moving forward 2017 you talked about. as far as the station itself how long is it going to remain functional? >> guest: that is a good question. right now i believe it is on paper and tell 2024, and that is just more to certify the life of certain components and also for the resupply missions for certain things. so it could go wonder if we

wanted. it all depends upon where we want to spend our money. >> host: what do you mean by that? >> guest: well, if we want to go -- nasa budget is limited and a portion of it goes to space station and keeping it running. so a different task we want to take on signaling to the moon or mars or an asteroid or whenever it happens to be we might not be able to do both at the same time given how big each plan is. >> host: what is the role of the station in future manned space flight pass and then? >> guest: right now future of space flight, the station is a test bed. we test all sorts of things up here. right now we have a recycling system for water. we recycle our water everything , and we need that if we're going to go other places.

and that is just one example. we are testing out new technologies that will enable us to go farther. >> host: you would say the station is needed past 2024? >> guest: that is a good question. i am not sure. it would definitely be a good test bed for all sorts of things. we can easily get things up and down from here more than you could from a longer mission. that is why you want to make an update to your product or equipment. you can do that more quickly. it is a great test bed. however, again a limited amount of money. >> host: say by 2024 nothing is decided what happens? does it fall to earth? >> guest: well that will be a decision for management. consider the politicians and the

nasa administration. however if it is decided it is no longer needed, it will deorbit and burn up on entry. >> host: commander steven swanson, we every day go through our normal lives here in a gravity atmosphere. what is it like on a day-to-day level, in a weightless atmosphere? tell our viewers some of the things you may not expect about living in space and the things you may have to overcome because of the environment you are in. >> guest: year out. it is really the simple things that are much more difficult up here. getting up in the morning shaving and getting yourself ready. about 20 feet behind me. i do not have to go for, but things like that in the morning. you do not have a sink to wash up and. brush your teeth differently.

eating is a chore because everything floats, again. it comes in packages and wants to go everywhere. all of these little things, and even tying your shoe ends up being differently. you don't have gravity, so you have to be more flexible. all of these little things you did not think about make it a little less efficient to be up here. however there are benefits. we love it up here. it is a fun thing to do. looking out the window is fantastic. it cannot be beat. >> host: commander steven swanson, though, once you return to earth what happens? how does your body just? >> guest: that is the good question. we work out two hours every day year to help in that return. the idea is our muscles will be strong and our bones will not lose bone density. that way when we get back we

have to worry about our new vestibular system. once that gets back under control which varies a lot between people. once that gets back under control you are still strong in your bones are good. it takes about six weeks' worth of rehab and you are back up into the 95 percentile maybe higher than that on how you are feeling and what you can do. >> host: when you return -- how long have you been on board the space station? >> guest: i have been on board about two and a half months and i return in three months. >> host: your background is in computer science. how do you end up an astronaut on a space station? >> guest: a good question. i did go to work for nasa, which was a big help for me and i decided being an astronaut was a goal. it really what i worked on was

aircraft control systems. that is what my main work at nasa was on. that played into working on the shuttle and helping out. then i just got lucky on the selection process. there are some many qualified people to try to be astronauts. it takes a little bit of luck to get in, and i happened to get a little bit lucky. i had all of the requirements needed and a little bit of luck and i made it. >> host: in about 30 seconds tell us about the best experience you have had on board the station itself. >> guest: well the best experiences always looking out the window, and the best way to look out the window is not have a window in front of you. and that is going on a space walk. it is a good time a fantastic feeling. a little pressure on you at the same time but boy it is quite an experience and something am looking forward to doing again. >> host: commander steven swanson, who is on board the international space station

talking to us about experiences there. commander thank you for talking with c-span.

>> this is true because of the incredible success the broadband program has had across the country here and at the brooklyn library amazing things. making great strides and addressing the digital skill divide. many of us are wondering where the additional funding is going to come from? i should take a moment on the digital literacy spectrum to talk about the room we are sitting. this is a digital commons.

it provides us through an increasingly sophisticated set of tools, faster connectivity. it cost around 3-4 million and how can we build more because we know the need is there. i am hoping the panel will talk about this. it is my pleasure to introduce the director of library services. susan has done so much in her tenure to elevate libraries in the consciousness and we owe her gratitude and will be sorry to see her go. susan, please, thank you. [ applause ]

>> i would ask our gentlemen the two toms if you don't mind joining me on the stage. good morning, everyone. well it is so wonderful to be here. i am okay. i am all right. i have to talk quite a bit and i will be drinking in between. it is just water. so first of all, welcome, everyone. this event is being recorded and will be made available to the public. so everybody keep that in mind as we have our exciting dialogue dialogue. it is my pleasure to con vene the institute hearing on libraries and broadband. and we are having this event during library week. i want to thank the washington, d.c. public library.

we could not have a better arena for the event. just take a look over there. this building just opened up. this is what it is all about. the issue we are discussing today is of great importance to the millions of americans who use broadband at the nation's 1700 public libraries as well as those who use broadband as home to access library resources. every day children teens and adults use broadband at their local library to further their education, find workforce and health information, seek digital literacy training and much more. i am proud to be joined by members of the national museum and library service board and they are with me here. charles benson christy of ohio and carl of maryland and winston tab from maryland. we are lucky to have another

board member in the audience who comes from the museum house. and where see museum faces out there. we are honored to have the ark ist of the united states and we are excited to have the past president of the library association here today. thank you for being with us. this is the first time we are used our authority to advice vise congress on library issues. this was from the library services act that incorporated into the imls law. responsibilities that were held by the national commission on library and information science.

we chose this moment because it is full of potential. we are encouraged that tom wheeler, the federal communication chairman is working to modernize the e-rate. and considering the analysis of fcc data that imls just released yesterday, this moment is perhaps of even greater importance than any of us realized. our analysis shows 15 551 libraries used the discount provided by the e-rate. this number varies from year to year about we found the annual participate rate was 67% of the libraries in the united states. e-rate was created 17 years ago when the first overhaul of the

communication act was passed in '96. this was the same year the museum act was enacted and created imls. we moved on to the technology act. and through that imls supports initiative initiatives help school libraries serve the public. we help diverse people. to individuals with disabilities, limited functional literacy or informational skills and from its creation, imls recognized the importance of a connected society and a

leadership role as a hub for the world. we are delivering broadbrand services and the needs of library pofessionals are meeting. i would like to know the national broadband plan recommended affordable action to one giga pit per second to anchor institutions including library. a very good goal. the fcc, the president's own connect ed initiative and the broadband opportunities demonstrate a commitment and sense of urgency around high-speed internet. public access to technology and content is dependent on my speed

internet. we know there are people that haven't adopted it at home and 19 million don't have access at all. this has a dramatic impact on the catasuapaccapacity of public libraries to leave those left out of the benefits. and the economic recession is bearing this out as the millions of americans went to libraries, our libraries continued their established role as community anchors. we know america's job seekers headed to their trusted institutions often relying on the internet's connection to sharpen their skills or look for jobs. to realistically survive in

society you need the internet. there is no doubt they deliver information the communities need. imls has a unique advantage point. we are here to better under how to best serve the public interest. we are not here to support one path forward but instead provide an opportunity for a public hearing to examine a variety of point of view. we will examine the broad public benefits of library broadband, analyze analyze data and hear about solutions that will bring high-speed access to libraries. we will now begin with a wonderful welcome by fcc chairman tom wheeler. it gives me pleasure to introduce thomas wheeler who has

taken time to start it off. chairman wheeler has been involved with nes networks and experiences. he is an advocate and business man. he helped start multiple companies offering innovative cable, wireless and video communication. chairman wheeler has made it clear he understands the importance of libraries. with this background on telecommunication. we are lucky too him here with us. please welcome, tom wheeler. [ applause ] >> thank you very much susan and to the members of the board, nice to see you here. this is something very important. and congrats to the institute of

library and museum services for convening and having this idea to help get this message out. susan and everybody there, i am privileged to share the podium with tom power from the whitehouse who has been a leading pusher advocate for the kinds of changes that we have to be making to mare sure we are bringing the e-rate program into the 21st century. i am joined by a couple colleagues who are volved in this. jonathan chambers and daniel alverez and when you look at finger prints on what the fcc is doing in terms of e-rate reform you will find john and dan's finger prints all over it.

but there are two other important people in this audience and i think their presence here today creates a construct for how we can discuss things. chairman reed hunt i have the august responsibility of following in reed's foot steps as chairman of the fcc. and while there are many names that get attached to the e-rate program, the present at the creation seminole name associated with that is reed hunt. there would be no e-rate program without read hunt and that is a

factual statement. and the person with more goodies in his house on pennsylvania avenueav avenue than any place other else. i have been probe privileged to hang around david. he is a library folks and what he has done at the national archive is to open up the national archives and so much of that concept of opening up means digitalization.

the movie was fabulous but they got the telegraph scene wrong in the lincoln movie. he wrote them out and thank god he did and they are saved at the national archives. when you hold in your white gloved hand the piece of paper that lincoln wrote on there is one degree of separation that

you feel from lincoln. and that is a privilege a few researchers like i was privileged to have get. but what david has done is to digitize all of those documents. not only the telegrams thought the other great holdings of the national archives so there is one click between someone who wants to explore and lincoln. it used to be -- when i started by research online -- on lincoln's telegraph -- susan is saying we know that. get this canister and he would sit down and you would go

through each microfilm picture one by one and now thanks to david you can click and it is there. so because of people like david digitized the product, the information, and because people like reed hunt made that digitized information available, that is why the work that we are talking about here today in terms of the importance of libraries is so incredible and key to what gets done. as we are seeing in this room we are moving from stacks of books to online centers. the library has always been the on-ramp to the world of information and ideas.

and now that onramp is a giga bet. libraries are playing more and more important roles in the community. as was pointed out earlier, it is where americans without computers go to get online. it is where students after school go to get online. ...

and one of the things the everyone always thinks andrew carnegie, steel. andrew carnegie was first a network guy. he started as a telegraph operator for the pennsylvania railroad. as a matter of fact, he was brought here during the civil war and was responsible for stringing the telegraph line that went out toward manassas. he did not make it before the battle. what we know and what abraham lincoln knew about what went on was as a result of andrew carnegie's work.

it is appropriate that we are talking about libraries caught about his contribution in making libraries what they were in the 19th century and we come back to networks. that is why modernization is so important. the program that we have is called the schools and libraries program. we need to also start calling it the libraries and schools program to make sure that we recognize and emphasize the important contribution of each of those institutions. what are we doing? we are moving from supporting 20th-century technology to 21st century high-speed broadband technology.

it is a reallocation of resources, reallocations of resources are never easy and never pleasant but they are essential if we are to keep pushing forward. we are moving to broadband. it is not just the external connection but how you get using wi-fi to the individual. where bringing the application into the administrative process as well by using the same kind of broadband tools. we're focusing on fiscal responsibility. the key is not just more money although it is if more money is warranted we will deal with it but the key is money well spent by encouraging longer support

time frames so that you can have longer contracts with lower rates and by establishing a system of reference pricing so that people know what is a fair price is we don't expect librarians to the telecom experts and to be able to go up there and handle with telecom companies. how do we help in that regard. them limited what brought. releasing our plan for 2015. there's an incredible distinguished list of participants the of wind up today.

andrew -- over a century. we stand on the president's of being able to have the same kind of seminal him back on the flow of affirmation and ideas in the 21st. as for the work that you are doing is so important. the reform and modernization for the program is essential and

that is why today's hearing the kinds of things that he will explore are so helpful to those of those who are trying to work on just how we seize on this incredible moment of historic significance. thank you for all of your doing. [applause] >> thank you so much. i was inspiring. just to get the record straight. were excited to have chris coming this be sent from the gate foundation, and i have to say when i talk about andrew carnegie when i speak we also

characterized bill and melinda gates as our 21st century. at the white house as deputy chief technology officer for telecommunications. managerial and policy support for a wide range of agency activities including internet policy-making spectrum and representative -- recovery act grant program and was one of the first individuals to encourage us to have this hearing and make it happen. welcome. [applause]

>> thank you. good morning. thank you for having this hearing. it is a thrill to show -- share the day as with chairman willard one of my favorite policy person's. he is doing such a great job. second favorite. i do work in the white house. you never know who is watching. so we are really trying to help your. the chairman has identified some of the ways forward, but we really recognize that the real work happens a local level. my main message of this morning is to thank you for the work the you do. for some of us this is personal. my mother was an elementary school teacher and librarian. when she retired the local

newspaper came and did an article about her. one thing that has changed his parents seem to have lost some focus on the idea that kids need to come to school prepared to learn. school is not just the island where education can happen and when they leave education stops. all community has to be focused. that is why the work of the libraries is so important. i don't have to tell you that. we learned this the finding that the strongest applications or the ones that have the support of the community. the ones where we saw the community coming together to support the applications were

the ones that have the best chance of succeeding. we are proud of the work done. if you get a chance shake her hand. she and the team did such a great job. with the libraries in particular connecting over 1300 libraries greatly increasing bandwidth said meet the increasing demands of their patrons. over 2000 library locations across the country. i am pleased to announce that today in cia will be releasing three case studies published by an independent contractor on the positive improvements and effects that the program is having. as you will see, you can go on the website to pull this down. in delaware 420 previously

unemployed people receive job offers fast after using the new job centers at four public libraries. in michigan new public computer center facilities are estimated to have save users more than 160,000 hours per year. in texas' public computer centers including over 120 library locations have provided nearly 850,000 training hours to support this to my enabling people to search for jobs and housing connect with families and other countries and other important uses that were referred to. we will be putting that out today. we know there is more to be done and the needs of the library's -- are read aces to -- statistics that 50 percent of libraries report they are the only source of free internet in their communities. people out in the car trying to

connect. at -- you can look at that has kind of discouraging. you know i'd try to be encouraged because we are stimulating demand. we have children and adults which is a good sign. as you will hear today millions of americans are using the internet to study for degrees or certificates cannot apply for jobs develop a professional skills and participate in civic affairs. libraries are truly centers of lifelong learning and are available to all regardless of age, income, or disability. for folks who do not have computers at home they are essential, but even for folks who do have computers of home if you are trying to study or do certain tasks the whole environment may not always be the best place to do it. the librarians are good at keeping things on the cutie and quiet. thank you for maintaining the

stability. [laughter] >> i started by telling you about my mother, so i will finish by telling you about her mother, my grandmother. she was a teacher and head mistress and then she retired and got bored. went back to teaching retired again, became a tutor and give her last lesson on her 90th birthday. decided that that was enough. she never took a dime for triggering. she just wanted to teach. a few weeks ago i was visiting with a cousin of mine. one thing and remember was people would come to your grandmother's house. she had books all over the place a child was with the visitors. the child would always leave with the present, and the present was always a book. my grandmother would presented in a way some kids christmastime birthdays they

get a book, they are not so thrilled. my grandmother had a way of doing it so that the child ought to have gone to disneyland. she had this enthusiasm. she had a lot of bucks. she gave them away. she loved sharing them with kids because she knew what my mom observed. we need to all be in it together. education is at the home at the library. so the chairman and i all started this. we will keep doing what we can but we are depending upon you. we know how hard you're working to make things happen at the local level. we will support you because we know it takes all of us make this a success. thank you for having me and every day. >> thank you. [applause] >> okay. thank you gentlemen. that was a great way to start.

i will ask our panel to join me here on the podium. a first of all i would like to say thank you very much. we are honored. are moving to the panel discussion portion of our program. this hearing is being live cast, and viewers are encouraged to submit questions via twitter we have cards or paper are in your chair. after each panel presentation our board members have questions there will be opposing. we love a chance for members of the audience and