post-9/11 veterans, who are already transitioned and one million about to transition over the next five years, we have incredible, national resource that we should empower, and take advantage of far good and their good. thanks. >> thanks very much. we'll be back. . .

[inaudible conversations] >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. thank you all for coming this morning. my name is kenneth feinberg, and i've been assigned the task of designing and administering the gm ignition compensation claims resolution protocol, the gm ignition switch compensation program. i want to spend a few minutes this morning, a, an overview of the program, how we got where we are. secondly, i want to summarize the eligibility criteria for claimants who can file a claim. there are and third, i want to explain a bit the dollars and the compensation that is

available under the ram. under the program. we started drafting this protocol about two months ago at, initially, gm's request. we have reached out to a wide variety of individuals and institutions to get as much information as we could about what ought to be in this ram. in this program. i thank general motors for their total cooperation in establishing this program. they're funding it, and they're funding it without any cap on the ago regate amount of -- aggregate amount of money that's going to be available. gm basically has said whatever it costs to pay all the eligible claims under the protocol, they will pay it. there is no ceiling on the aggregate dollars.

also, gm has said under this program anybody who already settled their claim with general motors before they knew about this cover-up or this ignition switch problem may rip up the release they signed and come back into this program to get additional compensation. so i've read that there are some individuals who already settled and gave up their right to sue in return for compensation. they may now ignore that release and come into this program. and receive additional compensation. the program will begin to receive claims on august 1st of this year, a month from now. and i want to thank the deputy administrator, my colleague for over 35 years, camille byros,

who's right here in the front row. camille has worked with me on virtually every one of these compensation programs over the years, and she'll be here after the press conference to answer questions that individual media may have. the program will commence on august 1. it will begin to receive claims between now and august 1. we'll have the claim forms, the frequently-asked questions, the web site. we're translating the claim forms into french-canadian and spanish. but it'll be august 1 when we begin to accept claims. all claims must be postmarked no later than december 31st the end of this year. for accidents that occurred anytime up to december 31st, the

gm bankruptcy is no bar to filing a claim under this program. it is no bar. if an individual was injured or killed, unfortunate, in one of these accidents before or after the bankruptcy, it doesn't matter, the date of the accident. the bankruptcy will not be a barrier of any type to the filing of a claim. now, we'll obviously have to stick around into 2015 because people will file claims, some of them late in the year, and we'll need time to process the claims during 2015. but if you file a claim with the fund, a few points should be head about the overall program. first, the program is entirely voluntary. nobody is required to file a claim. this is a voluntary program.

second, once your claim is submitted and we deem it substantially complete; that is, it has the documents necessary, we will process that claim. either -- if it's a simple claim, we will process it within 90 days to payment. if it's a more complicated claim, which i'll explain in a bit, we'll process that claim within 180 days from the time it is substantially complete. we will work as fast as we can to get compensation, voluntarily-submitted claims, out the door to eligible claimants. a few other points about the ram. about the program. any contributory negligence of

the driver -- intoxication, speeding, texting on a cell phone, etc. -- irrelevant under this program. irrelevant. contributory -- this program is about general motors and ignition switches. we have no interest in evaluating any alleged contributory negligence on the part of the driver. it is totally irrelevant. we have no interest. this program is aimed at compensation for defective switches, not anything about the driver. who's eligible under this program? let's discuss eligibility. the following individuals can file under this program: the driver, any passengers in the automobile, any pedestrian, any

occupant of a second vehicle involved this in the accident. all eligible to file a claim. we are not limiting this ram to just drivers -- this program to just drivers of a particular vehicle. and as i said, contributory negligence not a factor here at all. now, eligibility. there are a couple of prerequisites to filing a claim. first, as the protocol spells out on pages 2 and 3, for a claim to be eligible, it must involve one of the model, make and year automobiles listed in the protocol. if the automobile that was

driven and is was involved in an accident is not listed in the protocol that you have, the claim is ineligible. don't bother filing it. i am confident i will get many claims involving automobiles that aren't listed. i'll get claims, based on experience, mercedes, jaguars, cadillacs. build it, and they come. you will get a great many claims. but the only automobiles that are eligible to be considered are the automobiles listed in this protocol. and if that automobile, that model, that year is an automobile involved in an accident, that automobile is eligible to be considered for compensation. if the airbag deployed in the accident, you're ineligible. airbag deployment, seat belt

retention employment means the power is on in the automobile. ineligible. it couldn't have been the ignition switch. now, i haven't seen a claim yet eligible in trying to work my way through potential claims. i've seen many claims where the airbag did not deploy or we don't know whether the airbag deployed. fine be, -- fine, eligible. if we know the airbag deployed, the power's on. there may have been a horrible accident, but it's not the ignition switch. so it must be an eligible vehicle with non-airbag deployment or uncertainty as to whether the air pga deployed -- airbag deployed, and those are the major eligibility prerequisites to filing a claim. but again, nondeployment,

eligible vehicle, driver, passengers, pedestrians, occupants of other vehicles, file the claim. we will evaluate claim. and we will evaluate it quickly. individuals have suffered terribly in this whole experience deserve prompt treatment of their claim, and we will do that. think individual claimant who lost a loved one or any individual claimant who suffered a catastrophic injury defined in the protocol, i'll be glad to meet them privately, confidentially and chat with them privately about any item or anything they'd like to talk about. honored to do so, glad to do so. now, if you file a claim, the test for eligibility will be was

the ignition switch defect a proximate cause of the accident? that's right this the prose kohl. -- in the protocol. that's right out of the first year of law school. was the ignition switch defect in an eligible vehicle where the airbag did not deploy a proximate cause, also known as a substantial cause of the accident. now, here's the challenge, here's the challenge. unlike the 9/11 fund or the bp oil spill fund, many of these accidents occurred years ago, decade ago. what evidence, what circumstantial evidence can be produced that will demonstrate an ignition switch failure as

the cause of the accident? well, we have done quite a bit of homework on this, and there are six, seven, eight different examples of very valuable evidence that will help demonstrate a link between ignition switch failure and the accident. here they are. one, the car. now, it would -- it is very useful, obviously, if the automobile is still available. unfortunately, some of these automobiles, the accident took place so long ago the automobile's not around anymore. but if the automobile is available, that is the best evidence, of course. we'll look at the automobile, and the lawyers of the claimants can show that it was the ignition switch, that's wonderful information. but the automobile in many of these cases, maybe most of the cases, won't be available.

second, do we have the edr black box data from the car? very, very useful. that edr black box data that's in the automobile, if the data is available, if it was captured at the time of the accident by the police, by the insurance company, by the claimant's lawyers, by whoever, that edr data goes a long way in demonstrating ignition switch failure. so even if you don't have the car, do you have the black box data? very helpful. three, what does the police report say at the time of the accident? some of these police reports are extremely valuable as circumstantial evidence -- airbag didn't deploy, contemporary witness statements about the steering wheel locking or the antilock brakes not

working, witnesses that were interviewed at the time by the police reflected in the police report, very helpful bit of information. four, the photographs of the accident. we've already learned that photographs of the accident are enormously helpful to us this demonstrating -- in demonstrating ignition switch failure based on the impact, the way the car was hit or what it hit. very, very useful. contemporary photographs of the accident scene, very useful. next, the insurance company. what did the insurance company say in its file about that accident? what is in the insurance files that -- insurance companies can be rather thorough in their examination of accidents, this their own expertise. what does the insurance file show? what does medical record show

from the hospital? not just about the condition of the innocent victim, but what do the witnesses tell the doctors this the hospital, in the emergency room about what happened? my car suddenly lost power. my steering wheel locked. hi brakes didn't work -- my brakes didn't work. what do the hospital records tell us not only about the injury, but about the cause of the injury? very useful. next, warranty and maintenance records. we have found that some people weeks, months before the accident took their automobile to the dealer or to an independent dealer complaining my car is stalling, when my key hits the ignition switch, it fails, my car stalls, i'm having trouble steering, i'm having trouble with the brakes, the antilock brakes. we would like to see as part of

a submission of a claim any warranty and maintenance records that will help us in this regard. then there are some claimants, some individuals who filed lawsuits that are pending where there were pretrial depositions taken, where there were written interrogatories filled out, where we had expert auto reconstruction experts filing reports. we'd like to see those depgs and that information -- those depositions and that information. all of these examples, and there may be others, there may be others. i heene, we've talked to gm -- i mean, we've talked to gm, we've talked to plaintiff lawyers, bob hilliard, lance cooper, elizabeth -- [inaudible] other plaintiff lawyers, we've talked to the center for automotive safety, joan claybrook, clarence diplow. these are people we've been

talking with over the past few months to try and get a better understanding on the key issue who is eligible to even file a claim. before you get to compensation, you have to be eligible. and this is all part of the eligibility determination. now, you'll see in the protocol that if a claimant files a claim and the claim is deficient, we will not deny that claim. we will work with the claimant to try and help the claimant get other information that will cure the deficiency and make the claim eligible. that is sort of a summary, discussed on the first few pages of the protocol, that is sort of a summary of the eligibility requirements. and we will work with claimants

in an effort to find claims eligible in meeting the proximate cause standard that the ignition switch caused the accident. it is a real challenge because of the age of the claims, some of them. but we will work with claimants and their lawyers who have been very, very helpful here in trying to do the right thing. compensation. there are three -- in the rote kohl there are, i'll summarize. there are three categories of compensation. one, we will compensate eligible death claims. unfortunate, innocent victims who died. remember, contributory negligence not a factor, we're not even looking at it. we will compensate individual

victims of the accident who are eligible. second, a second category, a special second category. we will compensate eligible catastrophic injuries defined in the protocol. quadriplegics, paraplegics, permanent brain injuries requiring continuous care, double amputees, pervasive burn victims with burns over their entire body. these are the type of catastrophic injuries that are a special category as defined in the protocol. the third category of compensation, less serious, more moderate physical injuries. requiring either hospitalization

within 48 hours of the accident or, for those moderate injuries where the victim of the accident did not even go to the hospital or didn't stay overnight, outpatient medical treatment within 48 hours of the accident. that is a third category of compensation. now, the two priority categories for this program, clearly a priority, are the individual death claims and the catastrophic injury claims. these are the individuals and their families most in need where we want to try and get the compensation out within 90 or 180 days as fast as we can. just as with the 9/11 victim compensation fund which is really the precedent we used in coming up with the compensation

model, every single individual filing a death claim or a catastrophic injury claim may choose one of two paths to pep sayings in the -- compensation in the protocol. track a. all we need under track a is the age of the victim, how much she or he was earning at the time of the death or catastrophic injury or the if he or she was going to school, we go to the bureau of labor statistics and come up with a number, annual wage number as if they were working at the age of 25. so if somebody died who was 5 or 10 or 17 or going to school, we have the formula included in this program. and whether or not they had any dependents. that's all we need to know on track a. that's all we need to know.

now, we can meet privately with individual family members if they want to talk about other things. that's find. that is fine. that's fine. welcomed. but under track a if somebody will just provide us the age of the victim, how much that victim was earning at the time of the accident and whether they have any dependents, that's all we need to calculate a track a award based on national statistics about what that person would have earned over a lifetime. the claimant doesn't have to file track a. it's up to the claimant. but if the claimant wants a quick, prompt processing of his or her claim under track a for death or catastrophic injury, they can do so. we will add to that claim, in addition to whatever economic loss is calculated by the bureau of labor statistics, we'll add

$1 million in pain and suffering under track a for the victim, and in addition $300,000 for any surviving spouse or dependent. that'll be added to the calculation. same, that's for death claims. examples, now, these are presumptive examples without regard to any individual claimant, but i want to give you some idea of the scope of the compensation under track a for death or catastrophic injury. a 17-year-old driver, single, unemployed going to school, living at home, no dependents, $2.2 million. track a. $2.2 million. economic and non-economic be

loss. a 25-year-old, married, two children, earning $46,400 a year, $4 million under track a. a 25-year-old, 'em low -- employed earning $75,000 a year, married, two children, died, $5.1 million. examples under track a. any individual family member who doesn't want to use track a but wants to come in you should track b -- under track b and explain in their claim form other extraordinary circumstances that should be brought to my attention, those numbers don't apply, we will look at the individual claim

submitted under track b, see what other extraordinary circumstances exist in that claim just like we did in 9/11. and these numbers will not apply. we'll be considering track b. catastrophic or track a. some two examples if you go track a for catastrophic injury, just two examples, a 10-year-old individual, young person, no earnings, of course. paraplegic. track a, $7.8 million. if you go track a. a 40-year-old paraplegic earning $70,000 a year, haired, no children -- married, no children, paralegion irk --

paraplegic, $6.6 million under the fund. again, the reason i can just project these numbers is it's based simply on national averaging. it is not -- just like 9/11, it is the bureau of labor statistics providing us the data. any individual family member or victim who doesn't like this track a presumptive model and would rather have a tailored track b consideration of extraordinary circumstances, glad to do it. in 9/11 we had a series of track b extraordinary circumstance cases. mr. feinberg, my daughter was going to be married next week. she was our only daughter, and she died in the world trade center. we recognize that as track b. mr. feinberg, we lost both our

children in the world trade center or on the airplanes. we recognize that as track b. mr. feinberg, in the general motors matter i represent a client who ten years ago was driving when her boyfriend was killed, and for ten years she's thought she was the reckless driver. it destroyed her life. we want to go track b, of course. of course. track b. we will work with individual family members to try and develop track a or track b for death or physical injury. catastrophic physical injury. then there is the third category

, less serious physical injury. all we want to know under this fund, under less serious physical injury, we do not want to be flooded with less serious physical injuries and medical records and doctors' reports. so the protocol builds on the virginia tech program that we established and one fund boston marathon that we established. we just ask a couple of questions. one, assuming you're eligible, how long were you in the hospital? hospitalization is a pretty good surrogate for seriousness of injury. how long? overnight observation? $20,000. over a month, $500,000.

in between, a sliding scale. mr. feinberg, i didn't go to the the hospital, or i went to the emergency room, and then i went home. now, originally we weren't planning on including that as eligible. we got such pushback from so many people, plaintiff lawyers, center for auto safety, others, the protocol does permit eligibility for outpatient medical treatment, $20,000. capped at $20,000. now, on these less serious injuries, there's a prerequisite. all we want is the claim form filled out with a simple letter from the hospital or your doctor

confirming medical treatment, hospitalization within 48 hours of the accident. why not a week? why not a month as some suggested? the priority here of the death and the catastrophic claims. these less serious physical injury claims we want some contemporary documentation that people received immediate treatment. so it's 48 hours. now, if you received outpatient medical treatment within 48 hours and three weeks later you went in the hospital, that's fine be as long as there's an initial hospitalization or medical treatment within 48 hours. and then the sliding scale in the protocol kicks in. a flat amount, no calculations. those are the amounts that will be paid. i will agree, as i did with

9/11, as we did with boston marathon, as we did with virginia tech, as we did with aurora, colorado, and newtown, connecticut, i will meet privately with any family member or their lawyer privately who wants to chat with me about their claim, about their lost loved one, about their needs, about life's unfairness. whatever they would like to chat about, my door is open. i will meet with them. it is easily, without a doubt, the most difficult part of this assignment. meeting privately with family members. it is very stressful. but it's essential, because there are family members who want to be heard and want to have their voice heard, and i'm the fellow that's the administrator, and i'm willing to meet with them and chat with them about anything they want to tell me.

this program is designed to help claimants. this program is not designed to punish general motors. if people want punitive damages, if they want to use litigation to go after general hotters, then -- general motors, then voluntarily they should not submit a claim to me. because if you submit a claim to this program and your, with award a certain amount of money, you have to eventually sign a release that you will not sue general motors. don't sign the release if you want to seek satisfaction or you want to sue general motors. but remember, the program is voluntary, and you don't have to decide whether or not you want to participate in this program

until we offer a resolution, here is what we're prepared to a, you're eligible, here's the amount, track a or track b or hospitalization or outpatient medical treatment. only then if you are satisfied with the program will you participate and sign a release. and there will be many family members who will want to see me personally before they agree whether or not they want to sign that release, and i welcome those meetings. i welcome those meetings. that's the program. now, two final points, then questions. the 9/11 fund, 97% of all the eligible families that lost a family came into the fund. 97%.

$7.1 billion. taxpayer money, the 9/11 fund. bp, 92% of all eligible claimants came into the fund. these are tough statistics to match with this program. one fund boston, 100%. virginia tech, 900%. -- 100%. newtown, connecticut, 100%. these are tough statistics to hatch. to match. we will work with the lawyers, with the families the try and do this. i must say in a way it's a pretty poor substitute. i say this all the time in the these programs. money is a pretty poor substitute for loss. you could give people $20, $30, $50 million. it's a pretty poor substitute. it's the limits of what we can

do, unfortunately. we can't bring people back, we can't restore limbs. it's the best we can do, and it is a pretty poor substitute. hopefully, the program will work. the only test, how many people participated. this summary, all the words in the world don't matter at the end of the day. the only thing that hearts at the end of the day, how quickly did you get money out the door to eligible claimants. that's the only test. so when people say to he, well, it sounds like this way or that way, i've hard from some lawyers we'll see, we'll see. it sounds maybe this can work. we'll see. i agree with that, we'll see. but we're ready to start the process. august 1 we will be ready, and i'm ready to take questions from you. yes, sir. >> quick question.

based on your conversations with general motors, with attorneys, victims' families, do you have any sense of how many victims -- general motors keeps saying 13. do you have a sense the it's going to be over 50, close to 100? >> i will not speculate about this. i've been asked over and over again even before announcing how many death cans, how many serious injuries? what will the cost to the program -- i haven't got any idea. it would be pure speculation at this time. seem have to file their claims -- people have to file their claims. we've got to look and see what they're submitting. we'll do it as fast as we can, but i will not speculate op numbers. >> and one quick follow-up, have you talked to any victims' families as you've been putting this program together? >> no. i've talked to many of the lawyers representing victims' families. i have not imposed myself. i didn't think it was appropriate. families grieve in private. it's not my place. if victims' families as a result of this conference today want to

meet with me on the phone or in person, wonderful. i'm glad to do it. can you just tell me when you ask a question who you represent? >> thank you, mr. feinberg, poppy -- with cnn. we've heard this number, 13 deaths over and over again from general motors, they have acknowledged that may rise once you go through these claims. a key question throughout all of this is we have talked to victims' families. will deaths be counted that occurred in a pack seat of a car? >> yes. >> they will? >> absolutely. >> even if they didn't die as a result of an airbag deploying -- >> doesn't matter. >> what about side impact? >> doesn't matter. irrelevant. if the person, if it's an eligible vehicle, the airbag did not deploy, driver, passenger, pedestrian, occupant of another vehicle where the airbag might have deployed, doesn't matter. eligible. >> side impact crashes? >> eligible. >> thank you. >> yes, ma'am. julia.

from reuters, right? >> yes, thank you. thank you, mr. feinberg. some of these families have said they want to go to court to seek punitive damages against gm because they feel that will bring gm further to justice for covering this up, for lingering this problem for so long. why should they take what you're offering rather than -- >> they shouldn't. they shouldn't. if an individual family member wants to seek to bring general hotters to justice -- general motors to justice in their mind by seeking punitive damages, they should not come into this program. they should sue. now, i would say this about litigating against general motors: it's one thing if somebody wants to litigate to get additional monetary punishment of general motors. i'm here to compensate victims, not punish general motors. i'm here to compensate victims,

innocent victims. sometimes i hear victims tell me or their family we want to litigate because it's the only way we can find out what really happened. i'd be careful about that argument. there are other, more efficient available mechanisms and avenues to pursue to find out the facts about what really happened. the congress is very interested in finding out what really happened. i read in the newspaper the u.s. attorneys and the department of justice are very interested in finding out what really happened. there are other avenues to pursue to do that. if it's the money that drives the punitive damage avenue, then this program is not for you. but if compensatory damages -- hopefully, very generous -- are what you seek and you'll use

other avenues to find out what really happened, that, to me, is the optimum way to go. yes, sir. affiliation? >> [inaudible] "usa today." just to be clear on something, although i think i already know, is the money that you pay in addition to actual expenses the person might have incurred, or is it designed to be total? >> total. >> okay. >> total. we're not netting out other expenses or what have you. we are calculating a damage on a blank slate and paying the total award to the claimant. we're not factoring in attorneys' fees, we're not factoring in other costs. we're paying the lump sum payment, all in. >> so whatever you might have spent already is out of your pocket or out of this settlement? >> well, that's an interesting question. if what you have already spent is litigation costs or expert

investigative reports, yes. if what you have spent are medical expenses, well, we'll see about that. we'll -- we in the protocol look at the very last paragraph of the protocol. we will work with the claimant to make sure the claimant gets a lump sum payment, and we'll work with them on the medical expense problem which is implicit in your question. note the last paragraph of the entire protocol in that regard. >> thank you. >> i'm sorry? >> my name is laura christian, and i'm the birth mother of amber marie rose. i have another family with me here today. i have personally found 165 deaths. i have this information in my hand. would you like it? >> i would, indeed. >> thank you. >> i would like not only that information, ms. christian, i would be glad to meet with you

or your family members privately, and i would like to know anything you have or anything you think would be helpful in this program. i would love to sit and chat with you at your convenience to learn more about what you think and how this program can be made the most effective way. >> thank you. i welcome that very much so. now, as far as the non-airbag deployment, we have evidence in a few cases it looks like, and the black box shows, it looks like the driver actually managed to get the vehicle on a second or two before impact. thus, the airbag deployed. would you consider those? >> let's see what you have to offer. i'll be glad to consider anything you have. i haven't heard about this. if you have some, you know, relatively rare example like that, at least i would like to hear a what you have to say. absolutely. >> thank you. appreciate that. >> anybody else, anybody who hasn't had a question yet? yes, sir, up back. david? >> dave shepherds, detroit news. two questions.

one, in terms of the protocol on the newer vehicles, can you explain why it only applies to vehicles that had the part replaced? >> gm tells me -- and you should direct that question to general motors -- but gm has told me it's not just the ignition switch problem, it's the whole context in which the recall occurred on the 2.6 million vehicles, this inability to disclose it, the fact that gm should have disclosessed it, information in the lucas report. gm -- i'm not an automotive engineer, but gm tells us over and over again that this is a unique problem at gm that arose. it's not simply the defect itself, it's the context in which it arose and the failure of gm to respond. so they have decided, they have decided this is the limitation of the authority i have under this program. >> and will you make a public accounting of your findings on an aggregate basis, how many claims approved, denied and

payouts? >> absolutely. now, it gets tricky. i will at the end of the ram, camille and i, we -- as we always do, we will have an audit, an executive summary; how many claims, how many were eligible, how many ineligible, aggregate dollars, etc. we have to be very, very careful here that we don't discloses at any time -- disclose at any time the confidential submissions of individual families. they don't want people to know that they filed or that how much money they received. we found out in all of these programs, 9/11 and other programs, that in order to maximize participation, confidentiality is critical. and that, many, many people just don't want any of that information disclosed. but we will come up with, as you say, some summary information that will be useful. let me just say one other thing before i forget that i neglected

to say, a tip of the hat to the center for auto safety. joan claybrook and clarence diplow. their number one issue with us was notice. how do you reach people and tell them about the program? how do you though that people around the country and elsewhere, canada, will know about this program? we are notifying by letter 2.6 million people who are the subject of the recall. we are notifying be by letter hundreds and hundreds of people who have already notified gm that they this think that they were involved -- that they think they were involved in an injury or death claim involving the ignition switch. we'll send a letter to them. we also at the center for auto safety's personal usualing, we

will notify -- urging, we will notify all former owners of these vehicles so that the former owners who no longer -- who sold their vehicle or traded it in or whatever, if they were subject to death can or physical injury, they can file a claim. it is going to be about as -- [inaudible] a notice program as we can come up with. and this was a big issue with ms. claybrook. and we plan to have as expansive a notice program as we can on this. but remember this also: this program is limited to physical injury or death. i read in the newspaper that there are all sorts of lawsuits pending involving damage to automobiles, diminished value of the automobiles involved. that has nothing to do with this program. that is off on the side. we are not in any way involved

with any economic property damage claims. this is strictly physical injury and death claims. julia. >> these numbers, i know that you -- thank you. when calculating the money that would two to these victims, i know you're looking at bureau of labor statistics, but just when you're starting with that baseline of one million or for the hospital stays, who came up with those numbers? did gm give you those numbers? >> no. >> how did you reach them? and then i have a follow-up question. will these families be told to keep silent if they do sign and take the claim? >> entirely up to them. these families, if they decide that they want to call a press conference in taking this money is entire my up to the families -- is entirely up to the families. i wouldn't begin to impose any conditions on families.

i've learned over the years that's none of my business, and they can do whatever they want. that is not my business. now, where do we get the numbers? these numbers aren't gm's numbers. these are numbers that camille byros and our team of modelers, economic modeling, we came up with these numbers. non-economic loss, $1 million for a death claim under track a. where did that come from? well, 9/11, which was a long time ago, that number was $250,000 as an average settlement number for than economic loss. that number today is $750,000 average. we decided the number should be higher, and we went to $1 million. bob hilliard, bob hilliard, a lawyer in detroit and in texas and other lawyers as well, ms. cabresa and her colleagues, mark landier in texas all said

even on a presumptive award -- we don't have to take it, but presumptively -- it ought to be more than that. $1 million. and the $300,000 is much more than 9/11 in the average as well. now, you also asked -- oh, the second question about silence or a condition. no such condition imposed on families at all. yes, ma'am. cnn? >> yeah, poppy harlow with cnn again. in looking at what you have done in the past in terms of the bp oil spill and 9/11, they're different in that it was very clear who died as a result of the deepwater horizon rig explosion or who died as a result of 9/11. here can you talk to us about the process? i mean, are these victims and their families and their attorneys basically going to be holding court in front of you with you as is sole arbiter to decide? and also you talk about having to be expeditious in getting the money out. at the same time, in some of these cases there's a lot to

pore through. how do you make that determination that the proximate cause was the ignition switch and also do it in the time frame you'd like? >> it's very, very difficult, it's a challenge. but now, don't, don't be misled into thinking that we didn't have the same problems in 9/11 and bp. we did. in 9/11 you'll recall the statute creating the program said that physical injuries had to occur in the, quote, immediate vicinity, unquote, of the world trade center or the pentagon. and and that medical treatment had to be immediately thereafter. well, we ran into a storm of problems with first responders delaying their medical treatment -- >> [inaudible] in terms of deaths. >> well, the deaths, you're right. they were traumatic deaths, it was easier in 9/11. now, in bp, of course, we had a huge problem not with deaths, but with whether or not the economic damages were caused by

the oil spill. this is a challenge. it is a challenge. the main problem we're going to have here and we'll work as we say right in the protocol to cure deficiencies is that so many of these accidents occurred long ago. the car is gone. and we've got to come up with circumstantial evidence that satisfies proximate cause. now, all of the menu of ways you do that we've laid out, but you're right. speed is going to be challenged here while people collect information. and we'll work with them to try and do that as fast as we can. it is going to be a challenge, no question. >> [inaudible] with the "wall street journal." i just wanted a little bit more on the interaction with gm. you come up with a claim. i know that they'll be able to also give you information, but are you going to meet with them and sit down and talk about your methodology to coming up to it, or are you just sending them the claim and say pay it?

>> read the section -- good question. the section in the protocol that gives the claimant and gm the opportunity to be heard. the claimant files a claim, that claim information doesn't go to gm. that stays with us. but we'll notify gm of the basic nature of the claims this week or whatever, a spread sheet that just says these are the claims. if they have any information that they want to present to us, if gm has any information that they think would be helpful to us in making our decision, fine. i welcome either side providing me information as long as i'm not exchanging anything confidential. i'll give either side the opportunity to be heard. but here's the key in this protocol: once we make a decision, eligible x dollars, the protocol gives us sole,

final discretion to do that. gm may not challenge it in court, gm may not reject it, gm may say that they think we made a mistake. that's fine, but they have to honor it. and they have to pay the claim. and they cannot refuse under the protocol to pay any final determination that we make on the grounds that it's a mistake. we heard you, gm, we respect your right to disagree. we've decided it, and that's the end of it. yes, yes, sir. you're with to who? >> [inaudible] several of the members of congress investigating gm have sort of taken an interest in the victim compensation fund. did you meet with any members of congress or did you brief any of them sort of on the final protocol? is. >> i met and briefed the most visible, i think, one of the most visible members of congress, senator blumenthal of

connecticut. extraordinarily helpful. i met him personally with his staff. he had written a letter to the justice department urging compensation. i met with him. he expressed certain views about helping claimants and some suggestions that he hoped i would follow up on which i have, and i welcome any input or think suggestions from members of congress other than senator blumenthal, and i'm glad to meet with them as well. >> ken, phil lebeau with cnbc. quick question on your interaction with mary barra from general motors. how often did you talk with her in setting this up? can you characterize the nature of those conversations? >> i met with mary or spoke with her two or three times. almost all of my conversations involved other people at general motors, but i did meet with mary two or three times. absolutely 100 cooperative.

ken, we want to do the right thing. general motors is a great company, we want to do right by those who are innocent victims, and general motors has been extremely helpful. i thought it very important not to limit our input from just general motors. i went to various plaintiff lawyers around the country and asked them what they thought about some of the features of this protocol, and, of course, the center for auto safety here this washington. but i must say general motors at no time -- now, they don't agree with everything in this protocol. they signed on to it, and you'll have to ask them what they like and don't like about it, but they did sign off and approve it. they're paying the freight on this. but healthy debate, very open, transparent discussion, and i give general motors a lot of credit for participating in this program. no cap on the ago e are gate -- aggregate amount of money. that is so important.

i've found that when there's an aggregate cap, inevitably a claimant will say you're giving me less because you have to save more to pay somebody else. it's human nature. with no aggregate cap, i can tell every claimant you don't have to worry about what somebody else is getting. there's no cap on this program, and you will get whatever you're entitled to. so, again, that's -- general motors waiving contribute, agreeing no contributory negligence. general motors reopening old, settled claims and allowing people to to come into the program. general motors not using the bankruptcy bar as a, to undercut what would otherwise be meritorious claims. i can't speak to the history of this problem, but i can certainly speak to the last three months, and i must say mary barra and her colleagues at general motors, absolutely 100 percent cooperative. >> just a quick follow up.

there's a section in the data there that you provided talking about the -- [inaudible] seat belt, so does that mean that if an airbag didn't deploy and someone was wearing their seat belt, they would be be ineligible? >> it is an and/or. all i've seen so far, airbag doesn't deploy, seat belts don't work either. but that's ap engineering issue, i'd have to see. i don't think it's likely that airbag didn't deploy, but seat belts work so you're ineligible. we'll have to see based on the individual claim. i don't know, i think that's right. yes, sir, with who? >> [inaudible] >> wait for a microphone. >> i'll be asking the question, sir. >> i'm sorry. you're next. you're next. >> jim healey, "usa today." will all the awards be lump sum,

or will some be structured settlements? >> that's up to the individual claimant and their lawyers and their accountants and their advisers. i wouldn't begin to require any conditions on how individual claim malts want to receive this money -- claimants want to receive this money. we'll do whatever they want, that is entirely up to them and their adviser. lou? >> thank you. you consulted data from federal agencies. now, granted that no amount of money is going to compensate really for death. but d.o.t. has a policy, has a policy of $9.1 million for each, for the value of a statistical life. okay? and i'd like to know did you consider that when you arrived at your protocol, which i have not read yet? >> you haven't read the protocol

yet? no, i don't believe we did. our experts may have, i don't know the answer to that. but i have an overall policy answer to that which is very important and something that the plaintiff lawyers around the country constantly remind me about. whatever that presumptive number might be in an individual case, if the claimant or her or his lawyer aren't comfortable with that number, they have the option under the protocol of going track b, presenting information like that that will result, in their mind, in raising the overall value of the award. we will look at it, we will examine it, we will meet with the claim planted or her or his -- claimant or her or his lawyer, and we will try and work that out. if the track a number is deemed

by any claim planted in a particular -- claimant in a particular case to be insufficient. .. no evidence yet it is a gm car or and ignition switch freely come anything like that. they are just combining these. we will take a look at those.

[inaudible] >> names of people? >> what. [inaudible] any of the questions here? yes, sir. with who? [inaudible] >> a question about the second category of injuries -- >> catastrophic? >> no, described them as more moderate injuries. it looks like the death claims and the more catastrophic injuries, associate with them come is that the case for the lower category of entries? if you lost an arm or an eye and you couldn't go to work? >> well, no, no. if you lost an arm or and i and you couldn't go to work, these less serious injuries are limited to how long you are in the hospital and that is all. if you lost and i are -- lost an arm and you don't think you can go to work for three months or

six months and you're in the hospital for 30 days, you'll get a flat amount of $500,000, and that is it. that is all in and that is for the hospital session over the last arm. >> so if the injury did prevent you from going back to work at all in that profession -- >> you may opt out of this program if you think it's too little, indicate that plan. any other questions? i want to -- okay. i want to thank everybody. i appreciate this. it's a complex program but i think it's easy to apply, and after this press conference if anybody has any other questions about the mechanics of how you will file online, by mail, what is expected, where to go to get 1-800 information. my colleague will be here until we get the edge those questions

as well. thank you all very much. [inaudible conversations] >> [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> white house press secretary josh earnest will brief reporters at 11:30 a.m. and see thank you we'll have that live for you. is he is expected to talk about the presence fix -- picked to be the new veterans secretary. >> in february for george w. bush institute hosted an event

with leaders from the public and private sectors examining ways to empower veterans transition from military to civilian life. in this segment a panel of advocates discusses how to help post-9/11 veterans. jean case and joe depinto, ceo of 7-eleven who served in the army for five years talk about the challenges of getting resources for programs and measuring the success of those programs. >> thank you. i just want to start out by saying thank you to each and everyone of you that are in this room. our business professionals, our ceos, our men and women who have won the uniform. if it wasn't for individuals like yourself, i wouldn't be able to stand up here today. on august 3, 2008, i was running a convoy in kabul, afghanistan.

on that particular day there were two taliban individuals that decided to detonate a roadside bomb, a 20-pound antitank mine that detonated right underneath the gearshift of my truck. through the blast it crush every bone in my face, every bone in my right arm, my right hand, my left hand, my hip, my right knee, my shin and my right foot were all crushed. i went to walter reed, spent a little bit of time there. i met some wonderful people that wanted to help out through nonprofit organizations, snga did one of those organizations. they help me discover the game of golf. it's a frustrating game, it is. many of you may know. but i love it. i love the challenge. i love the fact that it motivated me to aspire to want to do something, do something great, that it wasn't up for me yet. it gave me the motivation i

needed. and through the help of other nonprofit organizations i've been able to continue that success. with bush warrior open, i was selected to play in the first warrior open back in 2011 i believe. justine sterling gave me a call one day at work and i was so excited i literally knocked my computer off my desk. after can be in the first warrior open, i made the decision i had to move to texas. and four short months later i did. because of the warrior open i met the woman of my dreams who, ma she still putting up with me today, believe it or not, and i'm a full-time student at the university of north texas. i am a senior. i am working full-time at a company in fort worth.

they do a lot of military contracts, a lot of work with the government so i get to stay with my brothers and sisters, which is awesome for me. so is truly a blessing to have the help that i needed to really be successful in this transition for me, it's my pleasure to introduce to you the second panel that will be coming up now. kent hance, and if i butchered any names, i'm sorry. i'm from arkansas and it's my fault. [laughter] [applause] jake wood. [applause] joe depinto. [applause]

mayor alvin brown. [applause] jean case. [applause] >> thank you so much. let's have another woman of your, okay? [applause] we will be the bookends here we have talked a bit about, quite a bit about nonprofit sector and the private sector, but we have representatives here from business, education, philanthropy, community, mayor, and the nonprofits. and we really want to take a deeper dive here on all of this. and, joe, i want to start with you. you are the ceo of 7-eleven. you certainly have been hiring veterans. you know the valley of veterans, but i want you to talk about the

challenges you might have had in hiring those veterans. there are fantastic successors and we hav have heard it, it jut had fantastic success stories. but what about integrating those in your work, the veterans in your workforce? >> okay, so the challenge, first and foremost i agree with everything that was said earlier, particularly the gentleman from disney. i think we all have to take a look and i know we all appreciate the military and with the men and women in the military do for us but we all need to take a look at how we're impacting. i have the opportunity in my roll to set the tone for the organization. and that tone for us is that we will hire military. because we appreciate what the military has done. we've got a lot of recognition from that -- >> where does that come from by the way? >> it comes from the but we have many folks throughout our system

that believe in that. and so the challenges that we have can we are bringing folks and not only into the corporate side of our business, think about five and a quarter -- 5.45% of our employees are military but we are now bringing them into the franchise side because what we are recognizing is that military veterans have a real entrepreneurial spirit. the challenge on that side is financing. we currently offer a 10% discount to military folks. we are looking to go to 20%, and we offer about 75%, up to 75% to join 7-eleven as an owner operator. but we can't get financing. they can't get financing. they don't have the dollars to make up that 25%. so that to me is the biggest obstacle. we've all talked about the values, the leadership, the

can-do attitude, the mission orientation that they bring. it really comes down to in our business, dollars. >> jean case, you are ceo of the case foundation, philanthropist. what worries me when i look around at the atmosphere in the country, a war weary, a little bit tired of hearing about veterans. how do you keep this up with the waning public interest because it's something we all have to admit there is waning public interest. and i fear by the end of this year it's going to get even worse. >> so i'm glad you asked that question. for those of you who don't know, the case foundation, would like to say we invest in people and ideas that can change the world and we're a little bit different than a lot of foundations because we literally are six blocks from the white house. sometimes where you sit determines a lot about the role you're going to play and literally in this case we just

found it to be a tremendous benefit to have the opportunity to lead initiatives. so your question is one of is their pessimism out there, is there an opportunity? and as i said to this morning and listen to this remarkable group of folks and then moved around during conversation time, i am super optimistic because i actually think the private sector hasn't been fully tapped for what the private sector is really good at. if you want a marketing campaign, if you want to get in the ether of pop culture, if you want to use technology to help drive a solution, you are usually not looking to government to do that. and while there have been remarkable leadership efforts already to take these issues forward, there really hasn't yet been a clarion call. and when ken fischer talked about people raising their right hand, i'm a believer that my colleagues in philanthropy, my

colleagues in business, my fellow citizens want to help. what's really honestly lacking is a clarion call, where do i get started? this should be the most inside baseball group we have on this issue. so we heard questions even from this audience about where do i get started. so i'm optimistic because i think 2.5 million is a very solvable number. we had the benefit of building a little company called america online. when we started our 3% of the people were online at all and they were online an hour a week. if you fast forward, it wasn't long before society had changed. we are big believers in the power to leverage the private sector to do really big things. we have seen this happen in other things the nation should care about, when we have seen literally billions of dollars and millions of people come out to be part of the. the president talked this

morning about the goal of the center. not just dialogue and ideas, but taking those ideas to action. and i guess i'm encouraged by the fact that it don't really believe it's been fully taken to action yet and am looking forward to what might come out a day like today. >> one of the things you've done, mayor brown, is really focused jacksonville, florida, on this issue. you have the largest municipal population of veterans in florida, so there's a good reason you're doing that, but how have you really involve your community, your cities because sure. i think first of all as mayor of the city of jacksonville i think once you have surgery country with distinction you should be able to get out and get a job and take care of your family. i'm very humbled by our military population. my two boys and my wife did you enjoy our freedom every day for the men and women who served and who have served. so i thank god for the. in jacksonville i made it a top

really not only because we have a large presence but it has a $14.1 billion economic impact on our city. i made it a top priority by first appointing an admiral, a two star recent retired admiral, made a cabinet position to he reports directly to the been there. stand up, raise your hand. thank you. [applause] >> that's the first thing that i did. invest in infrastructure so i have a full, full team of people. and they are veterans. not only director of military affairs, my director of public works is a better. my director of federal affairs is a veteran. so i brought them on. i think start from the top. secondly, i made sure that we forged this public-private partnership, and i launched a partnership with the jacksonville military coalition,

and my goal was to put veterans act to work. those who are seeking jobs, so i partnered, and the young men who heads that up, mike fleming with deutsche bank it was a veteran, when i came in office we had zero companies are doing with the city. the day we have over 200 countries working with the city, putting veterans back to work. i think the private sector is the engine of our community and i think are some great opportunities that you can really leverage to get a return on investment for your community. the other thing is i launched what i call a week of valor, honoring the veterans not just on veterans day but having a job fair for veterans. you catch up to the job fair not unless you a job for veterans that i think it's important, having activities during that week was also informed. and then an annual summit on

national issues and local issues, particularly local issues as it relates to veterans. and the concerns of the military veterans in my city. so, for example, last year it was on suicide prevention. we worked with a local colleges and universities reach all the stakeholders together to address that issue. i brought all the ceos together to run the hospitals like male and baptist, to do with those issues and come up with best practices to make spiritual your community has not only involve the veterans, they see veterans work he and that it is successful. >> absolutely. >> that's the advantage of being mayor. you can bring attention to whatever you want. jake wood who is the cofounder and ceo of team rubicon, and you can read about that in the program but team rubicon is just a terrific organization that helps with disaster relief, a group of veterans. i've met several of them in afghanistan who are just

incredible people. welcome, jake. when you hear this and you here trying to focus on veterans and you don't come jean case says she sees this as an opportunity, that there's not really waning interest. are you saying the same thing? >> certainly i think most of my colleagues in this space fear kind of the 2018-2019 timeframe, the next five years post the afghanistan withdrawal and what that's going to mean for funding. i think that the cream of the crop, we've all heard the number 46,000 thrown around today as the number of nonprofit organizations with some charge in their mission to help veterans come home. i think that the best in class right now are trying to figure out ways to do better at measuring and showing progress. wayne robbins was a good talk about the work fda is doing to prove the efficacy of education,

the return on investment. >> veterans of america. >> if you don't know that one by now, come on. and i think we need to do a better job of this but at the end of the day the veterans service organization space is a very very young space. it's not like cancer research, not like a lot of the other nonprofit organization space is in verticals out there that have hundreds of years of history that have sophisticated ways of measuring the progress. this is a post-9/11 vertical. we all know that there were only, you know, there were hundreds before 9/11, but there are thousands of organizations that are sprung up afterwards. and there is a new focus, an unprecedented focus on veterans issues now. so as a vertical in the nonprofit sector, we have to do a better job of measuring our impact. i think the best organizations, the ones that will survive and the ones though continue to grow

past this five year window will be the ones that can prove the efficacy of their work. that's troubling and it's very hard, particularly hard in the space within an organization that has resource constraints. it's very hard to set up the citizens of the programs and dedicate the man hours to measuring output, to measuring progress. and often people are ill advised on what outfits they are mission. they are measuring the wrong output. a lot of times we find organizations that are measuring inputs as opposed outputs. there needs to be a sophistication space in order to go to an organization like the case foundation and make a case, no pun intended, for why an investment should be given to that organization. so there's a lot of growing in the space to be done. i think team rubicon, we've done a good job over the last two years, we are four years old, we have done a good job recently of measuring out impact in disaster zone. we go out and deploy them we can

go back to our donors and show the economic output, the economic impact of our activities in disaster zones. for instance, and moore, oklahoma, that response causes on order for hundred thousand dollars to deploy about 500,000 veterans over the course of five years in response to the tornado there. we had an economic impact of three-point $75 million back in that committee because of the work we did. we can say we have a seven x. return on investment that we put into committee. we need to do a better job admittedly of doing, measuring the affect and indexed it would have on veterans coming home. we are trying to partner with organizations for veterans and military families and some other organizations that do data well. you know, we are a bunch of marine sergeant at team rubicon. we don't understand numbers and statistics that are really smart people out there who do. we want to continue to make a

case. >> i just want to say, i've been in the fortunate position not only is disney my parent company which has made what i call -- has made a real commitment to veterans, not only in hiring veterans, but as abc television has made a commitment to us covering veterans issues which for me is fantastic. but i'm also involved in the bob woodruff foundation. as many of you probably know or remember my colleague, bob woodruff was terribly injured in iraq in 2006, and he and his wife have devoted their lives to helping veterans, but one of the things the woodruff foundation does is exactly what you're talking about, we've worked with you as well, it's trying to find where first of august to raise the money, and anne-marie has helped us do that, but also to do due diligence on who to give it to you and who's getting results, and that is something we really do have to continue to

measure. i want to also turn now before we go again on each of these topics to kent hance was a chance to of texas tech university system. we heard a lot about education. we heard about how some of the veterans are using the money that they get from the g.i. bill. a lot of it seems to be going online. what can you do in the colleges? >> i think the first thing, you've got to put the resources and. >> you do have that accent. i love it. >> my voice and my heart is in west texas where the highway ends and the west begins. [laughter] need a little humor in here. one of the things that if you don't put the resources in, you're not going to get the rate of return. the late lee iacocca one time said that the vision and the ideas at the top will be throughout the organization.

i think the general refer to the earlier. that's so important. when i got to texas tech's we had one person. we have 12 now. the last three years we've had a national football game, wounded warriors. this last year we played kansas state and it was purple heart but. we have more people with purple heart awards that was on the field than it ever been assembled in the trendy. we had 326 on the field. our head coach, his dad was on the field. he was a purple heart winner in vietnam. tubby smith, basketball coach, he was there representing his dad who got the purple heart in world war ii. so we emphasize the. we've got 1600 veterans and dependents at texas tech. you've got one place you go that we don't care what your question is, we will be able to help you.

and the average student that comes to texas tech as a veteran, we allow the average is 26 hours that a transfer in. some of those they took, but a lot of them are things that they did when they were in the service. if someone, if a young person has been a medic, there's no sense in making them repeat courses if they're going to nursing school. >> i've heard of that problem. that's incredible. you can be a medic and you can come out and you can't actually get -- >> you have to start all over. we don't let them start all over. we let them have credit for what they've done. they been on the field doing this. is not that they been in a classroom. and so i think that's something else. and the word gets out. when we graduate someone in the military, they have a candle stove, and we introduced them and they get a standing ovation every you every year for seven years, i've never seen it fail. we introduce the people who have served. we appreciate their service.

we also have a program for faculty members, and they are certified as green zone and to have a doorknob hanger that goes on their door to let the students know that that someone that you can talk to about whatever problem that their military friendly. we have a bunch of them. and so you've got to attack in every way. >> how to get those colleges and universities who aren't attacking in every way? i'm thinking something personal in a way, a young woman who went to a college, not in texas, after graduation speech which was in 2007 they did not, which were the tears started college in 2003 when the iraq war started and she graduated 2007. no one mentioned the war in that entire commencement speech but was never mentioned which to me was pretty stunning. some friends of mine noticed that, that their daughters

commencement and were concerned about that. how do you get those colleges who aren't speedaisspeedais h one of the things i would say the amount of money that you're going to bring in, we've got 12 -- 12 full-time staff members working now. we brought more money and because more students, paying tuition, g.i. bill. it's been something that's positive for us. it's positive for the veterans. i think they are missing -- we talked about diversity. go to the military. bring veterans in. the experience -- i tell my students, i still teach one course, that diversity is so important, i want him to know foreign students. i want them to know veterans, people who can tell them what it was like in certain areas of the world for protecting the trendy. so i still come back to say that you've got to put the resources in. it got to be aggressive, and

you've got to let people know. with one of our 12 staff members told me a story, that he bumped into a young man, but i look like he was lost and asked if you need help. he said he was at texas tech and he wanted to apply for admissions, and he talked, and the reason was he had seen a football game where we honored the military veterans. you know, when we had the purple heart, we marked the trail come out. we had a flyover. it's a big deal. enemy, we put on a great show. they leave and they are proud. and i think that's attitude that you've got domestic we are proud of our students that are going into the military. also introduced them separately at graduation. we have for graduation ceremonies in may and december and there's a lot of people there, 12, 15,000 but they always give them a standing

ovation. it's a proud moment. >> i am sure it is. i see many of those proud moments. gene, i want to go back to you and something jake was talking about and i was talking about with the woodruff foundation. how do you measure the effectiveness of some of these programs that you're interested in, that the case foundation is arrested in? >> if you agree that it is still somewhat early days and hesitant to say that in this environment because i think if you're a veteran and you have a need, every day probably feels like a year. so we need to bring urgency to having that we do but i do believe if we were to step back, we are still army days and there's a lot of opportunity to do things. but really, really good news is some of the research we saw this morning. the worst thing for me is when you come together in an initiative, whether it's public-private are just private or whatever and you don't have the data. we saw a lot of really good

data. our foundation has funded other data, a lot of you out there've participate in other studies. we are starting to get clear data which is really, really great is because we know what we need to target. and as jake pointed out, and wayne earlier, if we get smarter about what the impacts are, the return on investment, we need to not have 46,000 organizations. we need a small number of really, really great organizations having a significant impact. and i do think each organization struggles with, and jake hit on it, it is an input, it is and how many you necessarily serve. it's what were the outcomes of those that you set out to serve and how do you measure that. i can tell you i am really impressed with what i'm already seeing in terms of a focus on return on investment for many of the organizations that we know and have worked with. i would say even that question

of how to we defined impact is a great way for the private sector to come along and play a role. because trust me, the private sector really has got it down about how do you look at return on investment. so getting a bonus support if you're a nonprofit out there and you're saying okay, here's our data but what do they really need to see to know we're having impact? i'm encouraged innocent i think it's early days but i think there's a huge opportunity for what i said earlier is about a clarion call and collaboration, but where we really will be seeing some big differences is when we know the things that are there that can be scaled. because i think that's with a private -- >> how do you scale? spin out to you an example. so we had someone we knew who was a mental health counselor, a psychologist. she had been seen families, again we're in the d.c. area so we have a lot of military families. she was hearing time and time again we can't get in, the

system is overloaded, there's clearly a problem, that more resources are needed that the resources -- the system has. so she said, i just can't handle this. every week i'm getting a call and want to do something about it but what can i as one person to? so she came to was really with a vision around what if we created a collaborative in the nation, starting with the pilot, what if we created a collaborative in the nation to ask each counselor out there to give us an hour a week? she called it a given hour. you heard the lieutenant general mentioned this money that he was a beneficiary of that. that was a great idea. we provided seed funding. we did some pilots. when it was clear that the outcomes were there, then we basically did sustainable funding now to large organizations that have not just 7000 that the health workers around the nation, but just did a deal with the google for help out which is virtual sessions to

talk about, go from 7000 literally its unlimited entrance of the connections that can take place between those who need it and those who are willing to provide the services. >> jake, joe? >> i think it's important with 46,000 organizations out there, we've brought in of experiments. we should be able to pick winners moving forward and invest heavily into. they've been diligent in building a foundation. they been diligent in putting together good core team, an instance of principles that we're going to make the for your or positioned a 100 your organization. huge jet systems were confined to those organizations are. it starts with measurement. but then we need to coalesce around of those and help them. we need to talk to fortune 500 companies that have 58,000 stores across the world. >> 58,000? >> 52000, sorry.

spent he's not into numbers. >> i do want to add to that. >> please, jump in. >> the point is a great one. four of us, we get in many different areas across many different nonprofits in the military sector. but it's a mile wide and an inch deep. if we can pull that together so that we know where we'r we are putting our dollars, is having an impact, i think that's, you, that's a big roadblock but if we move we would see a lot more money flow in. >> is not a scarcity of resources. there's a fragmentation. we need to be better and smarter about how we're investing the money that's already at the table. there could be an argument there needs to be more money but i think we need to be smarter and better about the money we already have spent how do you do the collaboration of all of what you do and what the government? it's somewhat easy to say we

need this, we need that. gene, that was a great explanation how you do that and scale that down. when you're talking about transitioning from government and bringing these warriors out and taking care of them. >> i think success of the, i'm sorry, go ahead. >> i just think leadership starts from the top. i think it's how you make the case our veterans. so in my case, in the city i sell it as it helps me with my workforce. i want jacksonville, michael as mayor is to make sure that jacksonville, florida, is the most military, veteran city in america. and i always say to all of military personnel and veterans come i go on all the bases, i meet with commanders every quarter. and i always say to them come when you get out i want you to

make jacksonville your home. so making the case so that we can compete globally in the marketplace, so i talk about, icy to all the compass if you want to expand your company and your the best workforce, come to jacksonville. we have the best skilled workforce but i'm doing something about it. i'm partnering with the private sector. we have some great companies, not just bank of america merrill lynch but csx is one of the best companies in america to hire veterans. florida blue is one of the great companies, and they invest back into the community. from the not-for-profit site, a good example is the jacksonville jaguars foundation. i think with one of the best, probably the best nfl owner in the country, committed $1 billion to the city for five years. in november 2013 i opened a resource, a second resource reintegration centers to help veterans. city hall is a point of entry for veterans.

we do every third thursday of the month resume writing, interviewing skills. we are hands on your they know they can come to city hall and we will make sure we leverage our resources. we get a return on investment. the private sector actually sees it. >> i want to ask you, that is a great example of what you can do and what you've done in your community for veterans, but is this a typical story? >> unfortunately, no. i think there's a lot of roaming people out there. i think what we need to identify people who are willing to say yes rather than no. and a lot of what i've heard today centered on, the reasons why we can do something, centered on the rules. i've come to know lieutenant general russel over the last year, he was commit a task force katrina, the ragin' cajun. he said an interesting thing. he said rules are made for

peacetime. when it's wartime rules are made to be broken. we are literally in wartime right now but this is a national emergency. this issue of veteran reintegration, veteran suicide, pds, this is a national emergency with national implications. it's time to break rules. the information sharing our the general, we were speaking backstage about how addition, people can take government money to do research and that research is their intellectual property and they are not mandated to share that with people. or you can't use link in. it's a private entity. i wrote my resume during my transition, i was a marine sergeant for four years. when i was a transition assistance i wrote my resume by hand on a piece of paper. i have somebody look at it for five minutes and i walked out. you know what happened to that resume? it was in the trashcan. >> that was your trading?

>> it went in the trash can. i never saw it again. i was lucky because i'd already been to college, i had already been through resume been dashed in resume writing workshops so i knew what i was doing. think of that veteran whose 21, 22. he entered the marine corps when he's 18, getting out the 20. he writes his resume down and -- >> and he is full of a dribbling. >> you can't wait to get out. what happens to that resume? they can put it on linked in. it's a ubiquitous platform that you can instantly applied jobs from. >> we talk about education to as vocational skills not just going to college at higher education. vocational skills are something that our veterans -- >> those mostly in the community colleges, and it's one of the benefits that i still go back to giving people credit for what they've been doing in the military.

that's very important. >> job? >> what i was going to say is go back to what president bush said. we hire folks are values and we teach them in our situation to be retailers. when i was in the military, and many folks here the way we train was through skills, qualifications test. when we bring folks into our organization come from the military and want to be entrepreneurs, owner operators, they go through seven weeks of training, self-pay. they can go longer than it. they have a test of 60 skills that they have to master before we turn the keys over to them. so we're not only offering an entrepreneurial opportunity, but we are training them in a career. and i think that's important. i know we've talked a lot about a lot of things today, from pds the integration of medical

issues to families and it's all very important. but from my lands, it's pretty simple. it's about providing opportunity. these folks, guys, and i'm from chicago so guys mean everybody, they want opportunity. they don't want handouts. they want a purpose and a mission. and if we provide jobs, the other stuff, it's going to take a lot of work but it will work itself out. i choose to believe that. so it's not only a call for me but for many other large organizations in the united states. this is something that should be coming from the top. we should have targets around and we should work to meet a. i think it's that simple. >> jean, you're trying to get in before. >> the only point i want to make is i wanted to debunk a little bit this idea that the government can't partner with companies and private sector.

i've been in my roll 17 years. we've led numerous public-private initiatives launched at the white house with the private sector on the same stage. jake, you're right. we do need to break rules but we need to be clear in the goals and our language set, and have a reason why it makes sense for certain members of the private sector to be at the table. we launched something in 2008 called startup america, in 2009. startup america. at the time we noticed the startups in the nation were declining and we were all very concerned about it knowing that starters are truly the secret sauce of america. and what should we do it together with the public sector and the private sector we linked arms with a bunch of partners. we partnered with the kauffman foundation in kansas city, and that the white house with a girl -- several federal agencies present we went forward with it. today it's providing a terrific

platform for veterans who we think are going to be unbelievable assets in the startup community. just last weekend, startup weekend happened in san diego. it was purely better and -- veterans focus. and by the way, at that launch we asked for $1 billion in corporate resources aimed at startup organizations, and we got there in less than a year. i just think these clarion calls we said here's what we are about, is what we are trying to achieve, join us, let's linked arms. we saw tremendous response from the private sector and a willingness from the public sector, mayors, governors, presidents to say it makes sense to of the private sector. >> i love the word that you spoke, opportunity. i just want the opportunity, and angle here and everyone here is helping provide that. and want to open up this panel for some questions from the audience. we have lots of questions for this panel. yes.

not that yours wasn't so great, and questions. >> this is more of a comment. >> stand up, and can you say your name? >> i'm valery, and i'm here with nick, the speaker, my friend. okay. i wanted to just kind expand a little bit on everything that's been talked about full-time. my brother is a for your marine. these out now but he had this issue we've been talking about. he applied for multiple jobs in the private sector and found every reason in the book not to hire him. he resorted to a lot of drinking and depression, and he's been diagnosed with ptsd, and he has it. he was in okinawa for three years -- >> were the employers aware that? >> oh, yeah. >> so you think that was the reason why -- >> that's the norm.

this is real. these are real issues that are happening and i understand that like what they're doing at this level, at the top, the executive level. so the question is how do you implement that from executive level down to that branch, that hiring manager? >> let's talk about that. >> so my example i would choose is, i had secretary shinseki come to jacksonville and we sat around the table, but all the ceos from the hospital. we talked about it. and then i bought the ceos from the private sector and we got together, and part of it is i think someone said it best earlier, that you really have to start from the top with the ceo. you have to that commitment but you've got to take the fear away. people, companies and h.r. director for the need to know they need to be educated. they need to be informed. >> it does start from the top but there are people at the

bottom who can talk about it, right? i know in my own organization i am a huge advocate for that. we've got to get stories on about veterans, we've got to do this, and people listen. >> they do. and the key is at least what's working in jacksonville is really bringing people together and talking about the issues. not running away from it. putting all issues on the table. is the key. making sure the ceo and a director of h.r. and the managers are working together and really locust on. so, for example, i mentioned earlier that we have a job there. i hosted -- the city hosted a job fair with the jacksonville veterans coalition, that job fair, you've got to have a job. but there was a lot of work that goes behind the scenes that they were working on making sure that we inform the h.r. directors come educating them. but it's about leadership. it's about that commitment to provide opportunity for those

veterans. it's hands-on. and i can tell you every company in jacksonville, we have over 200 companies right now signed up, large and small. we all need -- we all need. you've got to be engaged. one of the take away from the session is you can go on our website, www.cha.net/job for vets and little you don't have to be indexed bill to get a job. we've got people come from all around the country getting a job in jacksonville. we just basically i think military 101. we're taking a myth out of the transition to hire a veteran. they need training and education at the end of today like i said i'm selling it as an asset for my city to have a good, skilled workforce. they provide leadership. >> but it doesn't mean there aren't huge frustration at a long way to go on this, and i go back to the comment that we all liked it so much and happens to be from our disney rapid, but one veteran at a time.

>> one question of when -- or one point, it's about getting folks throughout the organization in the spot that understands the military. and they become a catalyst. it's leaders at all levels who understand the. examples at our company and, wee got several of our franchise sales managers, one is mr.. he's hired several folks that are military. they are out and they can communicate with these folks in their language and bring them in. they become our biggest advocate of selling our company to of the military. and so i think it's a tone at the top but you've got to have folks at all levels who understand it and are committed to get. >> i want to come back to that point. we're all talking about the marvelous veterans out there, and our incredible veterans who want opportunity and jobs come and some of them will have

challenges. those companies have to understand that, but sometimes someone you hire might have dts. that person might -- i'm sure you've seen that with some employers. >> absolutely. disabled veterans, i haven't come across pts but we've got employees with depression, with cancer. come on. so this is about what they bring, skills that they bring and why it's good for business. >> and that we as a nation have to help. if they do have challenges we have to find our way around that. another question, please. yes. >> thank you very much. my name is jane and i'm the proud wife of specialist christopher horton, an army sniper killed in afghanistan 20 levitt i just wanted to bring into this debate a little bit about all the families that are

left behind after these wars and especially i misrepresent the thousands of widows and widowers have lost their main source of income and we were married to warriors. we don't to sit at home and cry. we don't want to people look at us and feel sorry for us. we want to be empowered as well. we want to take the american dreams that are loved ones gave everything for and what to do what we can with a. such as when to bring that up as well, as mavens that they don't know what they will do now, if their stay at home moms and not have to find what kind of career they will have. and also i wanted to throw in your with all the ceos around one of the big problems as well but i certainly have come across that upsets me more than anything as well as other military families is once was is our loved ones in war or if they're killed in action in the line of duty, we still have a military ib. but at&t or other type of retailers or organizations of which military discounts drop us. we are no longer eligible for the military discount.

and it's not that $10 off that i get on my phone bill, it's that we're being pushed out of the committee and a little bit left we have with our loved ones or just something to think about. most people don't know what to do with us because they don't deal with us often. so if you can do policies for that as well. i don't necessarily think about me. i think about the mother with the child that goes to a theme park or to a museum and the teller we are sorry, we don't know what that ib means. you don't get a military discount. so thank you. >> those are excellent points. thank you. [applause] and they do want to throw that to the panel, particularly about empowering the spouses, family, those left behind. >> i was a marine sniper and i'm very, very sorry for your loss. i can't offer you a job.

i can't promise to offer military spouses are military widows jobs, but if you want to come and serve in your husband's honor, we would love to have you and we will -- [applause] and 7-11 spent i can offer a job. [laughter] you can come see us and we'll figure it out. we will work with you to figure it out. >> and the mayor will help spent absolutely, absolutely speaking jean case -- >> if you are willing to relocate. jacksonville right now. >> but thank you so much for bring that up. that's an important point and really ceos anyone should listen to your second point as well. that's an issue i hadn't heard of and was unaware of. another question. >> right there. i'm pretty good at pointing.

>> hi. i'm charlene, executive director of home of the brave and a former intern of congressman tim hands -- kent hance. i've seen the success at texas tech because the proper resources were invested. i also agree with comments that we have a sense of urgency. we've got a short window of opportunity to help these veterans make a successful transition. my question is for jean case. how can we engage your leadership in helping to educate other foundations and funders of the importance of focusing on this area during the next five to seven years so we can make a real difference now versus spending the next five to seven years trying to educate a 99% who haven't served? >> so, i'm in the 99%. i haven't served, but i feel

grateful to be on this stage because of the 1%. and where ever i go, and those that i talk to, i mentioned the support that we give and the strategic nature of of that investment that we give to many military and veterans organizations including iaea. ..

>> there really are some things out there already, and i actually would love to talk to the young woman who earlier, because there are some folks we can connect her with. maybe we can get something started there. so what are the big ideas, how can we get traction, and i think it's beyond any one of us just talking. it really is. is there something new here that needs to be put together, that clarion call, that sense of urgency with very clear onramps. if you're a citizen and you want a support, if you're a company and you want a support or you're a nonprofit or philanthropy, i think we just have to make it clear. it's what i said at the beginning, ready, willing and able. and the case foundation would be happy to engage in discussion with februaries here who -- folks here who might want to talk about that further. >> thanks, jean. great point. >> my name is jeff hensley, i'm

a leadership fellow with iraq and afghanistan veterans of america, iava, but i'm also a counselor out in wily, texas, and we have a veterans program, an equine program out there where we're changing lives every single day, but we don't have a big microphone. i mean, we do right now, but we don't typically. [laughter] >> go for it. >> i guess my question is, because i think the argument can be made that much of the heavy lifting when it comes to transitioning veterans successfully is at the local level with local nonprofits. so i wonder if you all would speak to that and how we can get our voices heard. >> so i -- >> i'm going to take kent on this, please. >> first thing, we have an equine program at texas tech, ask veterans sign up for that left and right. it's really a good program. the other thing on the prior question of our 12 people that are working full time, they give just as much attention to a

dependent as they do a veteran. equine program is great. and i appreciate your doing that. >> mayor? >> i was just going to say we bring all the not-for-profits together every quarter. they meet with the mayor, they meet with, you know, the rank and file, ask i work with them because it helps me to leverage my assets and our scarce resources. so we actually meet every quarter in the city, and it's powerful. we know what we're doing. for example, one of the goals i have as mayor is to eradicate homelessness among veterans. and so how do you do that? you've got to work with all the right stakeholders to make that happen. and so far we've got over 200 veterans off the street, stabilized, into jobs, in -- >> watch this event in its entirety at c-span.org. we leave the last couple minutes of it to take you life to the senate for a short, pro forma session.

of it to take you live to the senate will come to order. the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., june 30, 2014. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable carl levin, a senator from the state of michigan, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. >> the senate is out of legislative session this the week of july 7th for the independence day recess period. live senate