and then in some cases you will have communities such as the ferguson where i had the opportunity to spend some time with the chiefs there on a number of occasions and we talked about diversification in his department, and we will use the ferguson as an example. that's a community where the demographics in that city change from white to black over about a 20 year span. i mean, change hugely. and that the transition the department, the police department itself did not transition to look more like that community. now, in all fairness to chief jackson, he made attempts as he stated to me to diversify that department, one of the biggest challenges that he had is inasmuch as he wanted to make the department more representative of the community, he struggled with the fact that the same population that he was trying to recruit, every of the police department in this area

was trying to recruit as well. for an example, st. louis pd, police department, st. louis county police department. a lot of these officers of color tend to go to larger agencies which pay more money and more opportunity for advancement. and then he also had himself and others competing for the same population as well, even in private industry. but one thing that i concluded and i made very clear to him, and i talked to a number of my chiefs of police administrator colleagues across this country, regardless of what the challenge may be to you, we can no longer accept the fact we can't find any. that is no longer acceptable. what it means, senator, is that departments that struggle with recruitment are people of color. they will have to work harder. they will have to put money in the budget, go outside their communities to recruit, and they may even have to develop within their communities, within their local public schools pipelines

were children and young people can become police explorers. and you begin to groom is young people very early on in their educational process so that maybe at some point they become a pipeline into your police agency. it is a challenge in some parts of the country. where i come from in dekalb county, georgia, metro atlanta, i don't have a problem recruiting people of color. i don't have that issue but here again it depends on where you or. one thing i will not accept is the fact i can't find people of color. it just means we have to become more creative and we have to become more determined and went to look around this well into other departments or other industries are recruiting. because we may not have to re-create that we'll. but accepting the fact that we cannot find people of color is not acceptable. because a community deserves to look like the government that serves it.

whatever that is, there should do some similar did there as well. but i can say this is that there a number of departments out there across this country, police departments across this country who really make dedicated efforts to who really work hard to diversify their agency. not only of the lower ranks that although it up to the top. we have to applaud those, but there are agencies out there that struggle. some struggle because they don't have any control over that, and others struggled me because they don't see the benefits in it. we have to hold those agencies, whoever they are out there, we have to hold them accountable. >> i would ask that the senators and members of congress be creative in attaching conditions to federal funds to local police departments. we had the hide and in many years ago which is still in

force which said no federal funds shall be used for abortion. why are federal funds being used for racial profiling. that is, in fact, what is happening now. we believe the president has the authority under title six of the civil rights act to require local police departments receiving federal funds not to discriminate. there's a debate in the justice department. so may people in the justice department said, oh, we can't have any jurisdiction over local police. that millions of dollars flow into over 85% of local police departments, and i think they should be and an amendment strategy or a conversation with the president, but it is important for congress to act. because what's going on in communities of color is just so

horrible when it comes to community and police relations. something has to be done. and i just want to say that attorney general eric holder i think against this, and his staff is working on grants. that flows a lot of money into police department's. they say that congress has a great deal of authority over those programs. so i would ask mentors of this committee to look at the c.o.p.s. program, to look at berne jager grants and to see what restrictions can be enacted so that federal funds are not used in a discriminatory fashion. >> senator franken, cannot just add one point to your last question which i'm touched on -- >> sure. >> thank you. you touched on the

non-indictment of eric garner in new york. and to talk about the police department be more representative of the committee, indeed it is. but yesterday attorney general eric schneiderman of new york issued a request to governor cuomo, which we support, i'm asking in instances workplace shootings involving civilians occurred that a special prosecutor be appointed to conduct the inquiry and to handle the indictment process. we believe that's necessary. police departments have an inherent conference of interest with local prosecutors. that is not to say that they have teamed up to avoid indictment of police officers. it is to say that the special relationship that prosecutors enjoy with the police, after all, they depend upon pleased to provide information and often testimony cases that they handle who can't handle a police shooting of his wife and and

impartially without bringing in a prosecutor from the outset. so when we look at the situation in staten island will look at the situation in ferguson, in the ferguson circumstance the outcome was virtually foretold at the moment that the prosecutor elected not to recuse himself over the requests of local individuals, and his record suggested that this outcome was predictable. it's not that way in every circumstance, but certainly it is enough of a concern that the approach that attorney general schneiderman took is one that we would recommend broadly. >> thank you. thank you all. >> senator blumenthal. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you for convening this hearing. ntg each of you for being here and for your extraordinary work over any many years. i want to just go from the last remark that you made, mr. henderson, because i think

that a lack of an indictment in the corner case certainly shocked and appalled callous people and led to the kind of the suggestions that state attorney general schneiderman made. i'm not sure the developer would have authority to require a special state prosecutor to prosecute a local or state policeman. but i think the suggestion certainly is one that has attracted a lot of support and understanding and rightly so. i appreciate all of you raising the sensitive issue. i'm a cosponsor of the smarter sensing act which was instituted by our chairman senator durbin and senator lee and i know as a former prosecutor tom ford discretion is and that restricting discretion, most particularly and sentencing, can impede justice and fairness. and also against the interests of society.

and i also have called for stronger oversight as abuse of military equipment. right now as you probably know the really is no in effect collection of data as to what is dispensed by the department of justice, where it goes, what it is used for. there's no accountability by the department of defense or justice. i pick one or the other has to impose some accountability. and i want to say in preface to the question i'm going to ask that have great respect for police and prosecutors around the country. i have worked in law enforcement for the better part of 40 years, beginning in 1977 as the u.s. attorney in connecticut and state attorney general. i think there's been tremendous progress in the quality of our policing community at state, local, and federal levels, in the cold and training, quality of people.

the quality of training. and diversity over the years which in no way minimizes the progress we still have me. i respect the jobs they have to do day in and day out facing extraordinary danger and life-and-death decisions that have to be made sometimes instantaneously. but i do think that we all benefit by better information. and right now i think a lot of folks have come to realize that there is essentially no information about the deaths that occur while individuals are in custody or under arrest. i have introduced legislation that i called the death in custody reporting act. it's a companion bill to bobby scott bill which passed the house by voice vote come voice vote, and passed this committee

earlier this year. it's a pretty simple piece of legislation but it requires states to report how many individuals daiichi while they're in custody or during the course of an arrest. the stark come staggering fact is we don't know. and i'm going to ask that two recent articles be entered into record. one is from the post, the "washington post," september 8 and it's entitled how many police shootings a year. no one knows. the second is from "the wall street journal," december 3. it's entitled hundreds of police killings are uncounted in federal stats. the "washington post" article essentially says that we know that there are a lot of police shootings, but they are all self-reported. there's no requirement that they be reported. and again, that is in no way to indicate disrespect for the decisions that are made in those individual instances, i 17,000

law enforcement agencies, but the fact is only 750 of them report shootings. we know the number of police who were shot. we note a bright, a vast variety of statistics about what is happening on farms, in cities, but we don't know the number of people, including justifiable homicide as they are called, that happen on our streets and in our police departments. so i hope that, and by the way, mr. chairman, i'd like for these be entered into record if there's no objection. >> so ordered. >> i hope that you indicate your support for this legislation but i think it would be meaningful to have your opinion, and would ask you simply whether you feel this kind of legislation would make sense? >> do you mind if i start? >> mr. alexander, i'm happy to have you start. i would ask, mr. chairman, each of the other witnesses be given

an opportunity to respond as well. >> i am in total support of that. you know, part of, part of what we are experiencing across this country right now is a failure by many americans, not just african-americans, but of americans across this country, feel a total disconnect from the criminal justice system. in light of the michael brown shooting, eric gardner case, it has become more pronounced. i think people who are not african-american, people who do not have the experience being african-american or of color of this country are beginning to see clearly that something is wrong in our criminal justice system, not just police what our entire criminal justice system across the board, 360 degrees. and in regards to what you're speaking to, sir, i find it unfortunate, embarrassing as a

law enforcement official that there is not legislation that requires that cities, states, tribal communities, villages all across this great nation are not reporting those types of shootings and deaths to a federal authority. because they need to be recorded. they need to be investigated. they need to be studied, studied scientifically and develop some evidence-based material that might be helpful in identifying a trend in which right now we're just all kind of anecdotal but looking at. so i certainly support that. as the president of noble, and i would hope that the rest of this country would support it as well, too. because as a sophisticated country as we are, and the leaders of the world, we have a responsibility in this nation where we have the people who are

now protesting in the streets from berkeley to maine, from south florida to detroit, all across this nation and around the world, we need to take more accountability. we need to begin to close some of those gaps. and expose ourselves and become much more transparent to the american people in terms of criminal justice system and that we do business. because that is the biggest piece that angers people in ferguson come in staten island, and the rest of this nation. there is no sense of transparency. there is a loss of trust and commitment, not just from police but from the entire criminal justice community. and we are a better nation than that and we have to move towards some real reform, sir. >> very well said. >> thank you. >> we support the death in

custody act, we hope that the senate can take it up before the end of the lame-duck session. but, you know, data collection is key. we were making momentum after the rodney king shooting in congress. first the acu helped write a traffic stop statistics act because we document in the report that we call driving while black how many times black motorist were pulled over by state and federal police. there was no data there. but then the problem expanded to stop and frisk and street interactions, and we didn't have data there. so we worked on the end racial profiling act which would require data collection as a key element, and we think without

the data, it's hard to make real reform. because we need to know where the problem is, how long it's been going on, who's doing, you know, which department you having the most difficult encounters. and the fact that this information is not collected by the federal government, it's just a travesty. so data collection is crucial to any kind of criminal justice reform, especially getting to the issue of racial profiling. >> senator, my colleagues have elaborated quite clearly on the value of the death in custody act. the leadership conference is a big supporter of the bill. and the like ms. murphy, we are hopeful that the senate will act on this initiative before it adjourns. that gives us just a few days, but it's such a basic fundamental piece of legislati

legislation. data collection is essential, and that's all the bill would do. so for that reason we hope that they can get the kind of bipartisan support here that is able to obtain in the house, and we hope the bill becomes law. >> thank you. thank you all. >> senator coons. >> thank you. thank you, chairman durbin for convening this tragedy. i would like to thank the panel for your testimony and for your answers to the many questions posed here, like my colleagues and certainly those leadership of senator durbin, outstanding on the i'm a cosponsor and a supporter of the smarter sensing act, death in custody bill that was just disgusted by senator blumenthal. so let me rather than repeat a lot of topics have already been covered, simply ask you to different questions that are really. i find it shocking we don't have reliable statistics. i like me of my college work

close with and respect law enforcement and the difficult and dangerous jobs that they do. but for us to send have no data, no meaningful data on deaths in law enforcement incidents, to me is deeply puzzling, frustrating, concerning and something we need to step forward and see some responsibly for an active address. why do so many departments refused to collect and report reliable statistics? why can't we get stronger bipartisan action on that? first. second, we have undeniably unequal impact on communities of color in this country from our criminal justice system. just in my home state of delaware which is roughly 22% african-american, 42% of arrests, 64% of the prison population, 86% of those who are arrested for drug use. there's an undeniably disparate impact on communities of color and are so whatever ways we can also broken that out. the cost impose a lifetime cost of the moral cause, fiscal cost

on african-american in particular as my colleague, senator booker, i think detailed earlier is overwhelming. i choose to be encouraged that there are bipartisan bills, that hope this congress will consider and take up now and in the next congress, but what can we do to reduce and eliminate the unfair tolls that our criminal justice system takes on minority committees? i would be grateful if the panel would answer each of those two questions to the extent you feel inclined with the time we have remaining. thanks. >> i will start and i will be brief. first again i want to reiterate a point that both i and laura murphy have made about using title vi of the civil rights act to condition the receipt of federal funds on a commitment of nondiscrimination and providing the from and training necessary to ensure that that commitment can be carried out. i believe, i think many of us

believe, that the departments that receive federal funds, over 85% of the police departments in the country today, do not begin with an affirmative decision to discriminate against their citizens. these are police departments with officers that are committed to fair treatment for all. having said that, however, there are certain systemic factors that enter into the equation that make the kind of biased policing that we have seen almost inevitable. stereotypes, misperceptions about activity, the assumption that no one the community is more dependent on drug use and another when, in fact, the statistics would suggest that almost equal in which the way drugs are used, all of those are factors. so data collection is important. training is important, and encouraging affirmative behavior by using a statute that is over 50 years old, in our view makes

common sense, and would hope that can be encouraged. i guess i would make one other point. the smarter sensing act is an incredibly valuable tool and is often framed in moral terms as a way of addressing this disparity that exists, and, indeed, it is a moral issue. but there is another very practical factor that makes this such an important initiative. the department of justice will tell you that the bureau of prisons which it administers is currently eating up about 40% of the department's budget with that number growing annually because of the mass incarceration that our government supports. the growth of the federal budget, the department of justice budget and being consumed by the bureau of prisons means that other discretionary programs that are so important to the communities in which our federal officers are deployed can't be administered effectively with

that rate of growth in the bureau of prisons. and we are hoping that those statistics will help encourage members to look at this. and then lastly, the president has initiated as unit a program called my brother's keeper. it has spawned a private initiative called the boys and men of color pigments proposed there was some who seemed skeptical about the value of that program. however, looking at events of recent weeks and months with the killing of young boys and men by police officers and the economic circumstances that feed into that problem, one would hope that the president's initiative would get a second look at a measure of support. and that goes beyond enforcement of existing federal laws in using the good officers, the president and members of congress to encourage private engaged in these activities as

well. >> thank you, mr. anderson. dr. alexander? >> i think it becomes important to note unfortunate sometimes cities and states are not going to take the responsibility to collect data. and it becomes, for me, i think at that point a federal issue where legislation needs to be imposed so that we can begin to direct communities to impart with all of us, publicly and privately, in the information particularly around in custody deaths. i would even go beyond that and say severe injuries as well, too. because if there are reoccurrence is or if there's a threshold that is met, that brings by certain amount of applause, i think it gives an opportunity for all of us to begin to look at those agencies. sometimes it may not be without ill intent. images be because of poor training or a lack of internal policies that dictates there are certain procedures that need to

take place. oftentimes what i found over the years, and i've been in this business a very long time now, is that many of our police officers out there who are doing this job every day across this country are doing a great job. that's the greatest majority of them. and sometimes along the way, being that policing is not an exact science, sometimes they get it wrong. not intentionally but sometimes they do. but the difference is this bill. it's life-and-death. and when death is experienced, and it comes to light in a people start asking questions across this country in those communities and oftentimes there are no answers. that is one of the biggest problems that's happening today. there is no answers. there's a feeling of no transparency whatsoever. and where truth is not seen or experienced or felt by people emotionally, what we end up with is just what we're experiencing today. because the question you are asking, senator, is really

age-old questions. and questions we've talked about and danced around before, but we've never gone any conclusion do. we are at a place now in this nation's history that we're going to have to begin to answer these questions. we are going to have to explore, mr. chairman, reasons and ways in which we are going to change and look at the criminal justice system in a very different kind of way. because it is not the same for all people. sometimes it's based on race. sometimes it's based on gender. sometimes it's based on what your economic class may happen to be in all the above plus samore. but we got to changes because this is just not sure what we're expensing every night in this country have is no longer just a fashionable thing, if you will. it's not just a reaction. we are seeing what is evolving into a movement.

it's like we saw the silver rights movement in the '60s. is evolving into a movement, because all people across this nation, if you look at berkeley, california, you look at the demographics of the community both economically and race, thousands of people who are marching out there every night, and some would say that the group is also made up of an artists, and that maybe, but i can pretty much assure you as well, too, -- and artists, people march across this country covenant are just american citizens who are saying we want to see something different. we need our whole criminal justice system needs to be explored, and possibly revamped. now, that's a heavy lift. we understand that, but what we have to right now engendering the rest of this country is a sense of hope that someone is looking at this, someone is paying attention, someone is hearing them. and something different is going

to happen. because the american people, in my estimation, are just not going to accept this as just being another incident. because they have been too frequent, and they have been, i should say if you look at the overall incidence in each one of these cases, which you will constantly find is a young african-american confronting police officers were oftentimes very different from them in race and in economic status. there's a disconnect in this country, not just in policing but there's a disconnect across the whole criminal justice system. even the grand jury process needs to be explored. because when you have communities in this nation who no longer trust law enforcement, we have people in this nation who tell their children that they should be afraid of the

police and they are afraid for their children to go outside because they may be harmed by the police, that is a bad place that we are in in this country. we need to acknowledge it and we need to begin to do something about it. but i have to be perfectly honest with you. i am tired of people talking to me about it. we truly have to figure out some strategy, some new strategies. and maybe do some things in this country and never tried before, but we got to take some risk to do something very different than just the same rhetoric we constantly get back to people in this country because there is not a -- because they are not accepting any longer. back in my community michael ideas to help create some strategies, some change so that community and the police and the criminal justice system work well together, a safer committee, a safer america. ..

>> it's always interesting being the only woman at a hearing. we represent 50% of the population, but we have to be feisty in order to be heard. so i i appreciate my male colleagues, but i think there are a number of questions that i'd like to address. and if i'm not able to address them in the oral part of the hearing, i would like to be able to submit answers to you for the record. but i think your specific question about why we can't get

to data collection goes back to the fraternal order of police. they oppose the traffic stop statistics act, they oppose the end racial profiling act. and what we need is a convening of police unions and civil rights leaders maybe at the initiation of you, senator coons, or you, senator durbin. because they feel -- and they, members of the fop have told me that if data is collected, it will be used to punish them. and we're not out to punish the police. we're out to end discrimination. and i think that the police have to be brought into these discussions, and the unions have

to be brought into these discussions because they are the people who many members of congress rely on for political endorsements. and so they have a greater power in some cases than many of our organizations that do not have political action committees. and i still think that there's this lingering fear that many elected officials have of looking soft on crime. and so we have not policed the police as vigorously as we could or should. but i think now's a moment. we've got to use this moment. if it doesn't happen now, it's not going to happen. >> well, thank you, ms. murphy, and thank you, mr. chairman, for indulging a full answer by the whole committee to my questions, the whole panel of witnesses. it is, to summarize, my hope too

that in a period when a lack of answers, a lack of transparent city, a lack of accountability has led many to protest not just the perception, but the reality of a disconnection between our communities and those charged with the important duty of keeping us safe, but doing so within our constitutional order. it is my real hope that we will take action and that's that leads to change that leads to hope. but i am clear that without the sort of action you, mr. chairman, have led in leading this bipartisan bill, we won't make progress. so thank you for your leadership in convening this and for everything you're doing and we hope to do together ahead. thank you. >> thanks, senator coons. i'd like to do just maybe one or two follow-up questions. ms. murphy, when i first saw that armored personnel carrier in ferguson, missouri, i thought what in the world is going on here. i didn't know police departments had that kind of equipment. i assumed maybe the most elite, biggest city terrorist threat

type of situations, but ferguson, missouri? and it crossed my mind, several questions. what in the world are they doing parading that out at what appeared to be at the moment a much different kind of street demonstration? secondly, what are we doing as a federal government peddling this kind of hardware? third, is this just the product of some swag oring, chus-thumping -- chest-thumping chief of police and procurement officer that want to have the newest and biggest and toughest looking vehicles? but then another question kind of came to me. don't we live in a country where people are fighting for the right of individual citizens to own military assault weapons? and aren't we asking these police to keep communities safe where those citizens might live? it seems to me that there's an entering conversation that needs -- an interesting conversation that needs to take place here.

i don't want to see armored personnel carriers in every police department in my state, by any means. but i also want to be cognizant of the fact that our police are facing weaponry that we are blessing here at some levels, and you've even heard it today in this committee, that go way beyond the threats that policemen historically faced. and i want to be sensitive to that. so how do you respond? >> i want to be sensitive to that too. but if you look at the usage of these armored vehicles, these helicopters, these bazookas, these m-16s, they are used for routine law enforcement -- >> which makes no sense. >> which makes absolutely no sense. now, if they were used to fight terrorism or armed robbery, bank robberies or hostage situations, then it makes more sense. and it's so racially biased, the way these, this equipment is being used. when there's a hostage crisis in

the white community, you will see the armored vehicles. but when there's a routine protest or drug arrest in the black community, you will see these vehicles and more. plus, we are rewarding people like sheriff arpaio who has a boatload of weaponry that he claims he needs in order to enforce our immigration laws. >> let's let the police organization respond. >> thank you, chairman. i certainly do appreciate what my colleague, ms. murphy, is saying and certainly do understand her perception, and i'm quite sure in conversations that she has had with many citizens in her community, across the country. let me say this as a 37-year veteran in policing where i've spent all my career from miami, florida, to orlando to new york and now to dekalb county,

georgia. the 1033 program, i think one of the failures of the program, sir, is quite frankly this: you just cannot give out this equipment to anyone who wants it. in ferguson, new york, that equipment did not belong to the ferguson -- >> ferguson, missouri. >> that equipment belonged, if i'm not mistaken, to st. louis county police department or the state police. now, some of that equipment, maybe all of it -- i can't say specifically -- may have been acquired through the 1033 program. but the way in which it was utilized in ferguson, quite frankly, in short, was wrong. all day, it's wrong. and many chiefs across this country have spoken out against the fact how it was used was wrong. now, the other piece or the other side to this, to your point, mr. chairman, is the fact that post-9/11 this country is still in a position where we're

keeping ourselves safe. police departments across this country are certainly being confronted with small arms and large arms that are at the pleasure of a lot of criminals that are out there. and we find situations -- and, certainly, i've seen situations in my county in dekalb -- where we have used equipment. they're not tanks, we don't own bazookas. and sometimes i think this equipment get exaggerated, pause none of us -- because none of us have rocket launchers or bazookas. but to the common layperson, it all looks the same. i get it, it's the optics of it. but the reality of it is there are going to be times when police are going to have to respond to active shooters. if we think about situations across this country where we've had school shootings, mall shootings, movie theater shootings, we want our officer to be able to get in, find that

target and do what need to be done to save lives of others. and the only way they're going to do that sometime is that they're going to have to be in armored equipment. the problem is not the equipment itself, it's the utilization of it. and before that, before those, that heavy equipment, in my opinion, is given out there needs to be, you need to be able to show a need for it in your community. that's number one. you need to be able to show cause and a need. and number two, you need to be held accountable to that equipment. which means that you have to have written policies which have its terms of engagement as to when you will take that equipment out and under what circumstances it would be used for. and one thing we cannot use it for is for people who are peacefully protesting in this country. we cannot do that. the optics on ferguson was horrific. and i think it shocked many

people in this country, all across this country regardless of whether they were democrats or republicans or black or white, men or women. it was shocking. and we learned from it, hopefully. but what we want to be able to do is also protect our police officers. but there has to be a time and moment when that equipment is utilized. because if i'm being held hostage in my home or in my bank when i'm making a deposit, i want the police to be able to get there and be safe in getting there so that they can secure that bank, arrest that criminal and get me home. so there is a place for it, but it's not to be used against american people who are protesting and exercising their first amendment right as to what we all witness and which, understandably, left a bad taste in many americans' mouths. >> thank you very much, dr. alexander. >> will thank you. >> my thanks to this panel. there has been a great deal of

interest in this hearing today. we have here a statement from senator leahy and statements from more than 70 different organizations wanting to be part of the record on this general overview of civil rights in america today. and sups there's no one here to object, it's going to be put in the record. [laughter] i want to say two, make two closing comments. first, i want to acknowledge marla silver on my staff who has been the author of the smarter sentencing act and has worked harder on it than anybody. thank you so much for what you've done. and special thanks to joe zogby who eight years ago, senator, i i think we need a subcommittee on human rights. i said, joe, what would we talk about? we found a lot to talk about. for four years and then when we were merged into the constitution, civil rights subcommittee. i'm very proud of what this subcommittee is set up to do, particularly proud of the fact that we actually created legislation that starts to address some of these issues

rather than just talk about them. and that is primarily due to the guidance of joe and the staffers who have worked with him. i thank joe and his family, here today, for giving me such great service to this judiciary committee. there may be some follow-up questions coming your way, and if you could respond in a timely fashion, i would certainly appreciate that. as i said in my last hearing, this is my last as subcommittee chair for the time being, and i'm hoping senator cruz or whoever succeeds me will continue in this tradition of addressing the issues of our day. thank you for joining, this subcommittee stands adjourned. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> today the cato institute hosts an all-day conference on surveillance, examining issues of national security, law enforcement and civil liberties. live coverage begins at 10:40 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> this week on "q&a," political reporters share stories about being on the campaign trail with

senator mitch mcconnell. >> he had planned for four years this campaign. this started in 2010 right after he saw what happened in the are republican primary for rand paul, the kentucky republican senator. rand paul beat mcconnell's hand-picked guy, trey grayson, in that primary. and at that point mcconnell realized i have to recalibrate everything i know about republican primary politics in my home state. he started to make changes, he hired key staff, he started to build this very sophisticated infrastructure knowing this would be the most difficult race in his campaign. >> so they knew they were going to spend a lot of money on technology. they had watched the obama campaign in 2008 and 2012. they had watched harry reid's re-election in 2010. they knew that they needed to go from his 2008 race where he beat democrat bruce lunsford by about six points, it was a tough race. he was going to have the latest technology. we had done an interview in

2013, and he said he was going to build the most thorough senate campaign ever -- >> in american history. >> in american history. and he probably got, he probably got there. >> sunday night at eight eastern and pacific on c-span's "q&a." we're airing one program from each year starting december 22nd at 7 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> senator mark begich of alaska gave his farewell address on thursday highlighting programs he championed during his time in the office. senator begich lost his bid for a second term to former alaska attorney general dan sullivan. his remarks are just under an hour. >> mr. president, i came down to do my farewell remarks, i'll just say one comment if i can about senator coburn before i can if i do that, and that is, you know, he is absolutely what many people said here about his word. just yesterday was an example of

getting something resolved, so i wish him the best, and as all people, there's always other activity after the senate, and i wish him the best. mr. president, thank you for providing me this body a few minutes to discuss my six years serving in this body. it has been a true honor, true honor to serve with you in the short time that you were here, and to all my colleagues. but an even bigger honor to serve alaskan, my fellow alaskans. alaska is a huge state, 660,000 square miles, more than to my friends from texas and california, please don't take this personally, but more than double and triple the size of states like texas and california. alaska's a very small place in many ways. people make personal connections with their elected official.

at the end of the day, we pretty much know everybody one way or another. alaskans more than likely will see me at a checkout stand at andy's hardware or hanging christmas lights at my wife's store or doing the errands with my son jacob at times that he's not very anxious to do. but it is a small state, and they'll see me more doing that than, honestly, on the floor making speeches or on c-span. so when alaskans contact me with an idea or a complaint or a problem, we made sure we responded. after six years in the senate, i'm most proud of the work that helping alaskans and their families. my office responded to more than 360,000 individual letters and e-mails and phone calls from alaskans. to put it in perspective, 360,000 is roughly half the population of the state. lots of my staffers here with me on the floor today.

i thank them for their unwavering service to their fellow alaskans. truly i have the best of the best. some that worked with me when i was mayor and now working for me as senator. many will go on and continue to do incredible work not only for alaskans, but for this country. i thank them. we took on 3,000 individual case work and cases to help alaskans navigate the federal government, helping them get their social security checks, making sure the local post office actually delivers mail, and in alaska that's important. fighting for benefits for individual veterans.

but i'm also proud of the great policy work we did. and when i say "we," it's because sometimes ideas came from alaskans, sometimes they came from this body, sometimes i would have a crazy idea i'd write down on a sheet of paper, but at the end of the day, it was my staff that did the work. opening alaska's arctic lands and water to responsive resource development, npra, also had to convince the epa to free up permits for kensington and greens creek might bees. when -- mines. when i first came into office, i have to say not everybody knew where the arctic was. that's not the case today. probably some of my colleagues got tired of hearing me always talk about alaska no matter what they said. actually, i would have these maps, and i just saw my friend here, al franken, and he remembers this. he is this incredible -- he draws incredible maps of the united states.

one day he drew that map. he does it all freehand. and i remember him drawing that map one day, and i said you missed two things, alaska and hawaii. he says when i drove around, i drove around in my car and traveled with my parents, they weren't states. they were just territories. and the map they bought were just the maps of the lower 48. so i sent him a dot to dot of alaska. he sent me back a nice letter with a map of alaska drawn. and, you know, when you think about the arctic and alaska, i know my colleagues at times it didn't matter the issue we were talking about, somewhere i would weave alaska into the conversation. the arctic is an unbelievable potential. we've just touched the tip of the iceberg and more work to be done. working on defense and important part of alaska, military bases, securing f-16s and getting f-35s and making sure the benefits for those that are serving continue to be there for them. one of my, i think, important

accomplishments that i just -- it's incredible to hear the stories, the veterans, the new model of care we developed over two and a half, three years ago. 77,000 veterans serve in our state -- live in our state. and there was an idea, i remember i was campaigning in '08, i called it the hero -- [inaudible] people said it'll never happen. and, of course, people who know me when they said never or no, it means yes, they just didn't spell it properly. today now in alaska it doesn't matter if you're a veteran in the smallest, rural or biggest cities, you will get health care. the first in the nation. i remember the example how important it was when i was in bethel one time, and this gentleman came up to me, i was in a vfw hall. a lot of you have been in vfw halls, and you know when someone's coming at you in ap aggressive pace -- an aggressive

pace, it's probably not positive. he held his hand out and showed me his scars. he said i had to go to anchorage to get this taken care of. and then i was about to, plain, and then he said but do you know what i get to do? every single week now when i need my therapy, i with go -- i can go to the bethel, not fly to anchorage to get it done. that is the model of how to do the right thing. when it came to fisheries, alaska's well nobody for it. well known for it. i know, don't mean to pick on senator franken, but i remember him coming up to me because we coined a phrase on modified, engineered fish. we called 'em franken fish. it was not about you -- [laughter] it was about this fish that was chemically enhanced that would really destroy fisheries in alaska and be bad for the market

and bad for consumers. we fought, because alaskans brought it to our attention every single day. for native rural health care, which i just mentioned some of the things we did. for two decades, and it wasn't just about what we did for alaska. everything we tried to do in our office is can we do it for alaska, and does it have an international impact? will it impact the rest of the country in a positive way? i remember hearing and reading about the money owed to our tribes for money that was not paid by the federal government for two decades. of dollars for clinical services they produced. and we did some things, and the net result was alaska received over $500 million in settlements over the last year. but on top of that, many tribes across the country now -- almost three-quarters of a billion dollar cans. for money that was owed by this federal government for services delivered to individuals. and earlier week we were able to pass another piece, taking away the restriction of our tribes in

alaska so they can now, you should the violation against women's act -- under the violence against women's act, to be able to dispense and do tribal government in a sense of improving the situation on the ground when it comes to sexual assault, domestic violence and substance abuse. there are a lot of examples. but, you know, it's hard when you talk about these because there are great things that have been done not just individually, but collectively. but in this place we spend a lot of time doom and gloom and how the sky's falling and the worst case scenario. but, you know, we've come a long way in the last six years. i think about, and people who know me, i don't care how bad the situation is, i am positive about it. because there's always another day to solve these problems and make things happen. and when i think about where we were, i remember coming on this floor as a freshman in '09, the chaos in this economy was unbelievable. the amount of jobs we were

losing, 600 plus thousand a month, equal to the whole population of my state unemployed. boom, gone. or the issues of unemployment was around 10%, stock market, 6500. two of the largest automobile industries in this country, flat on its back. no housing starts were happening, market was crashing. deficit was $1.4 trillion per year. i mean, as a new member, it was -- i wasn't sure what i got myself into, to be frank. and some of the members that came with me were trying to figure out what did we get. but we didn't sit around, and i know always you hear this doom and gloom out there. you look back in six years, we had some battles here. and most people think we don't do thinking. but where are -- we don't do anything. but where are we today? 17,000 plus in the stock market today. i can tell you alaskans saw this because every year, i know i hear from my members who ask me

question all the time, we get a permanent fund check based on investments we make based on revenues we receive from oil and gas. that check doubled this year from 800 to under 1900. why did it double? because it's based on the stock market average of the last five years, and we dropped off '09. so the market was doing better. every alaskan felt it. felt what this economy has done. so when the naysayers out there, it's just not accurate. and i think of gm and ford and chrysler. they have added over a half million jobs. good paying jobs. unemployment 5.8, almost a 50% drop. over ten million new jobs and the longest stretch of private sector growth on record. 56 months. just last week, and you always hear it's not good enough. well, of course. but it's a heck of a lot better -- i just remember the chaos on this floor in those three, four months. and as a new member, what we had

to go through. and the deficit has dropped by a billion -- or a trillion, i said a billion. a trillion dollars a year. we're down to about 480 billion now. we've sliced off a trillion a year in deficit, annual deficit costs. in alaska we've seen incredible things. more jobs in mining and timber, tourism, nearly one million visitors, 78,000 people in the fisheries jobs, fisheries industry. but it's important to remember this is just a moment in time of challenges we have as a body and as a country. it's important to remember there's lots of work ahead of us. but we have accomplished a lot. but we spend a lot of time on in this floor debating what's bad about this country. rarely do you have, and i mean, we're seeing it now because a lot of us are coming down and giving our farewell speeches and

talking about good things. and there are a lot of things that we should be proud of as a country. i'm proud of the last six years what we've done. this country is back on track. we have more work to do to make sure people's incomes rise, but that's starting to happen now. the challenge is going to be for my colleagues or that are still here and for this country is, you know, it's been an incredible honor to be in this body. but what do we do to make sure we move forward? so we don't have this as a platform of negative attitudes and views, but about opportunity and possibility; not about things that we sit here trying to figure out how to kill, but what we try to do to improve and give new ideas a chance. you know, i said it earlier, i'm a very optimistic person. i believe in what's possible today can be even better tomorrow.