there is no comparison which allows us to be able to produce the gas at a much lower cost. i think the real important point here is that right now what australia is experiencing because they are exporting literally 50%, more than 50% of what they're producing their exporting. even in the most well, the eia

projections so we will be exporting only 9% of our production in 2040. i think there really is no comparison to make there, and no threat that the united states would end up experiencing the same type. >> my understanding is our market is roughly about 40 times the size of australia, and we're talking about much lower levels of overall exports, correct? >> that's correct. >> mr. smith, i want to turn to you real quick. if it were enacted, this legislation is passed and signed, would you expect our bill to change the number of applications for export to non-fda countries that eventually would be approved or disapproved by d.o.e.? >> thanks for the question senator. i honestly think it would be impossible for me to determine based on the language if this is going to impact the number of final applicants. it would depend on the applicants on the condition at

the time, et cetera. so i would demure from making any prediction or forecast because these are case by case evaluations that we make. >> as you know our bill also requires d.o.e. to publish the list of countries that received shipments of liquid natural gas from the united states. do you have a just whether or not that would be important information for the public to have access to? >> we think that more transparency is good. so we've endeavored to create a process that's open, that is transparent and that makes all this information available to potential intervenors. so we think that is important. >> i will have one last question for you, and then i will yield back the remainder of my time. one of my interest is making sure we continue to grow jobs while sort of reordering our

energy infrastructure to recognize the challenges that we have with carbon pollution and climate change. natural gas is sort of a unique place within those changes. we have limited capacity right now to get electrical storage for example, but natural gas allows us to seem together different sources of energy in more real-time. much more effectively than old-fashioned coal generation, just because of how fast you can ramp up and down the turbine. the one to talk about a little bit about your thoughts on our relatively low natural gas prices that we have experienced with current policies will affect the ability to deploy those other sources of clean renewable energies, for example solar and wind power? >> thank you, senator. i'll focus on the natural gas portion, that's the technology

program that i oversee. one general comment that it will make is that these are long-term important and decade-old challenges. so we don't manage our technology programs based on a short-term fluctuation of the futures curve. eating these are important existential challenges, the development of the technologies that will try to clean energy economy of the future. all of these solutions from wind and solar to natural gas and hence geothermal nuclear, they remain core and important parts of the deal these technology program. that said, we have seen it fluctuations in natural gas prices that have come from a variety of sources and that is something we have to take into account. we look at price will look at a public determination. the impact of price on consumers, on manufacturers at a lot of issues you've heard you on the panel so that is something we are focused on. we think that is very important but over time as you look at a research and development program, not only in the area i

manage which deals with fossil fuels but throughout the department of energy, we have a commitment to make sure we are pushing those technologies here in the united states that would be important for the future. >> thank you again. >> secretary katz go. >> thank you, madam chairman. thank the recommender, thank the witnesses for being here today. i'm very pleased to be your and also to see a cosponsor of senator barrasso's bill. many people think of the sheldon as occurring in the western states like wyoming but that is not the case as we know. the eastern united states and my home state of west virginia have been blessed with vast shale gas reserves and we are discovering how massive there. if i could go straight the point for few minutes let me share a few facts a midsummer 2014 department of energy report on oil and gas reserves in the united states. in 2013 west virginia surpass oklahoma to become the third largest share glass -- shale gas reserve state the west virginia

the second discovery of natural gas as was done only pennsylvania. and, in fact, a full 70% of the 2013 increase in proven gas reserves is because of west virginia and pennsylvania in the marcellus shale plate. with more than enough with more than a guest of our both an industrial renaissance back home in west virginia and export liquefied natural gas. supply lng to our friends and allies decreases their dependence on often hostile regime in the middle east and russia as we've heard from the testimony. and the result will increase her own national security. not to mention a huge economic boon to certain ends of the country and certainly my state of west virginia. i would like to start with a question for mr. smith, briefly. as you know the lng facility in maryland has received a finding of no significant impact on november 5 of 2014. that was near three months ago. can give us can an idea of when the d.o.e. expects to provide final approval of that

application. >> thank you for the question senator. under our current process we move on these applications and republicans determination once they've completed the ferc process. that includes all of including the final notice for hearing in the process. we watch these as they go through the ferc process. that will probably be including in the february time frame. and so depending on ferc finishing that process, that would allow us to move forward with our final determination. >> thank you. as we all know the essence of what the actual reserves are is sort of a moving target. it started slower and it seems to be expanding greatly. i like the way is to isenberg framed it that everybody is winning. but i'm curious to know from you, mr. eisenberg and mr. durbin, as these estimates

of the vast resource change how do your projections on the economic impact that will have been job creation and manufacturing resurgence, how does that change, in your estimates, and how closely are you monitoring that as we look at what the vast reserves actually provide? >> our policy and frankly, the will of the manufactures that is before is not a stable, secure, and consistent supply of natural gas. because we use it not only for electricity but also to feedstock for the many things we do. that's a lot of what i do for a living. we need to keep an eye on the policies that are coming out of washington, and places like that to make sure that manufactures can still continue to do what they do. so obviously, yeah the supply matters significantly. we are now staring at a situation where eih every single

year tells us we have more and more and more so we are very optimistic and continue to be optimistic. >> mr. durbin? >> in my written testimony i show a chart that eih puts in there, showing the difference in the projections on reserves from 2009 through today. i mentioned that. begin the point is its dynamic and we are seeing every year it is increasing. i think what's really important about this, even if this morning cia put out a new report or i should say statement talking about the vast increases in f-18 crackers and profane facilities all driven by natural gas liquids are being produced with his greater reserves spirit we're seeing that in west virginia. i should member -- mentioned the brazilian manufacturing company is looking to cite a major cracker in west virginia which will have major residual economic benefit to that region

and hopefully a resurgence of our chemical industry which was has shrunk quite a bit over the last summer years because of the usage of the natural gas is feedstock. i understand mr. smith, just quickly when you're looking at these -- i think my time is up and we are under pressure as a good former house number i know that i should quit when you read things -- redfin comes on but i will learn to talk to it eventually i'm sure. [laughter] >> we like that part in it senator. you are more than welcome to this committee. with that we will turn to senator stabenow comment i think you. >> thank you, madam chairman. this is a big deal here. we have this great new resource for us in america that is giving us an edge that we haven't had in a long time in other areas and how we make this decision is really, really important. i appreciate very much different states come a different perspectives but this is a big

deal. i want to first say to mr. smith, thank you for d.o.e. not only taking service with the need to move forward on understanding that you need to update your study on economic impact for america. and the fact that you are doing that. and i do know why we wouldn't wait for that to happen if we want to make sure we're doing this the right way. but i want to thank the secretary, and thank you for doing that. we know jobs are created when we don't export facilities, right? but we also know according to the charles river associates using natural gas increases american manufacturing output is white as five as the overall economy as just jobs in general. and creates a times more jobs than exporting. so i don't know why we are not very concerned about what

transport is saying. you're the end-user the guys who buy this. you're the guys who buy peculiar into buying it for industrial consumers but we also have a whole lot of consumers that are concerned by keeping oil and costs and so one. so the consumers as you said are taking all of the risks on this. so i would like you to expand a little bit more on this from the standpoint of leveraging this great resource. and i get it from and i guess the standpoint you want to sell to the highest user, price get that are china says we'll take it for $16 rather than american producers at four or five. i get that. but from the american standpoint, what i'm hearing mr. cicio when you were saying china by super $16 last year and turned around and subsidizes it so their folks pay $1.78, so now they're paying $1.70 and your bank in dollars. so how is that good for american jobs? so i'm desperately concerned

about manufacturing jobs and getting that eight times leverages for america. i want a china first also jump to i don't want to china first policy which i'm afraid this is. i want an america first policy. on us join it's not the size of the country commits of the government handles the issue, which is exactly what this bill does. this is australia light in terms of the bill. i am very concerned i would appreciate differences, but had to say to me in history folks look back at this and decide, now, what were we doing here in terms of americans and american jobs? >> thank you for that question. when we come to this issue we are not thinking short-term, and particularly looking at the nine x. and sing $3 price is out for the next several years. that is not the point. we are looking at long-term and

there's references to how much gas we have, okay? we look at 10 years out and women look at the eia, technically recoverable resources, we have a 58 year supply. we don't have 100 year supply. so in terms of jobs you are correct. we can take the gas and create a times more permanent jobs and if you export the gas. they look at the permanent jobs created by the export terminals. any job is a good job. make no mistake, but construction jobs are short-term. these terminals, the seven terminals, first up create 1890 permanent jobs. and when that gas goes offshore it's gone, okay? all we are doing here is let's emphasize we need to be looking long-term, and each approval

puts new demand on the marketplace that every study says the same thing but it will increase the price of gas and to increase the price of electricity. and we cannot forget that there's two parts. we are going to understand that, as i said earlier manufacturing is subsidized in these countries that we are competing with, the real world. and so we have to be -- it's not just the price we are paying here in the united states that matters to manufacturers who compete around the world. so we need to come to this with great care. now, for those of you who feel that we never have to worry about affordable supply of natural gas then you should be all for putting in place to fulfill putting in place the full emendation of the natural gas act that has these cautions the ongoing review of these terminals, these applications, monitoring, and the d.o.e.

having a requirement to revisit that, to be sure it's not impacting the economy. if you do we have so much gas then you know then that triggered will never happen. so you should be supportive and not afraid of fully implementing the natural gas act. >> senator portman? >> thank you madam chair. appreciate you for having this hearing today. appreciate the witnesses giving us great testament to a rep as a file which didn't used to be viewed as a great natural producer, now we are thanks to marcellus shale find and also utica. most significant you did the right now. we are proud of that heritage. i appreciate the fact that national association of manufacturers is your supporting this bill, the chamber of commerce supports this bill. i am a cosponsor now because of look at the alternatives and i think this is the best balance. deal we does have the ability to review these plans and approve

or disapprove based on the impact of the american economy. that's in this legislation but it's a balanced approach and again that's what so many manufactures are sporting a also i would tell you all how does a lot of manufacturing for facilities including lng export facility. i noticed in your testimony you talk about chart industries testified in ways and means committee, ohio-based manufacturer involved in lng supply chain. it's going to help manufacturing as well. i do think it's important we have a balance in the legislation. i'm interested in legislation because of a broader interest that i had but i think this regulatory regime we have in this country is putting us behind in so many ways. back in the good old days you could get a greenlight to produce something, make something, move forward with a project in the trent of america pretty quickly. now we are ranked 41st in the world in dealing with construction permit category by the world bank. we are getting worse. of the country are getting

better. germany, something like number eight. south korea is something like number 12. and capital is flowing to different places around the world and not come here because of the time it takes to permit something but yesterday i introduced legislation with senator mccaskill that we introduced last you that is bipartisan, a balanced approach that he did at some of. senator king is a cosponsor. he's got an incredible background in this having been a government but also in the private sector dealing with her many. what i like about this legislation is it doesn't take we d.o.e.'s approval authority but it does so you have to do it in 45 days. i appreciate what mr. smith said today about the fact that this legislation can be implemented by d.o.e., that that's enough time given a run up to the to be would understand whether this is an appropriate project or not. the legislation that would introduce will help more broadly. this legislation is specifically with regard to lng exports, i think as part of a bigger effort we've got to undertake. consistent with the 2006 and

2012 transportation bills our legislation pretty much mayors that in terms of the permitting and have litigation reforms work comments on. mr. eisenberg, let me ask you a question. can you use the four reports of requirement in the bill that the we does approve or deny these pending permits within 45 days of the completed review? mr. smith has indicated live deliver the. i assume you would agree that a deadline like this gives the we apple time to review the application, but also is giving investors some certainty that this project is going to be completed, greg? >> that's correct. thank you. we poll our members are bravely and want to be clear about who would represent the we represent 14,000 members and that small manufactures, reading sized and large energy intensive manufactures that are also represent by mr. cicio's grew. on balance we offer regulatory certainty for frequent the regular certainty is the number one priority of our membership right now as we pulled and

quarterly. it came of the most the most weekly cited into the there two types of regular certainty come on the phone and make sure the revelation put in place that are new our regional and the records were certain on the backend when you apply for a permit you can get it. your legislation you recent introduced, the legislation the rapid act in the house these mirror all sorts of other legislation and laws that are in place at the federal level that would impose a deadline or shot clock or something like that that say you can please, please uphold the law but do it in a quick expeditious fashion. that is the closest thing to what our policy at and i want to miss which is a quick upward a decision on export license. >> mr. smith, i think there is some misunderstanding and again i appreciate the leadership senator barrasso and senator heinrich abroad to this but this is the only permit that is needed. the lng export application is

not the only federal permit to what of the federal permits are you aware of that projects like this are going to get and is set in addition to the local bishop local or state permits? >> like i said you have to run a outlet to get these things but it takes about two years before you even pre-file the site and all these kind of things. then you have to go through nepa studied by the government can take longer, can take less. you have all of the time you have to demand basically everything agency check the box and make sure everything is comply with environmental laws economic interests that is part of the nepa process. you do examine the economic impact, and then you get a final decision. >> are the deadlines associated with those permits? >> on nepa actually not. there actually is none. you can actually it falls under the six-year civil statute of

limitations. you can delay these things forever. that's part of why the senate is debating the senate bill right now. >> and with regard to state and federal permits? mr. durbin or mr. smith or others who want to chime in. >> out some of the. maryland is perfect example. in addition to everything they are doing at the federal level many state permits to have to get as well. >> why times expire. i appreciate your indulgence madam chair and appreciate your testimony today, gentlemen. >> we turn to senator toronto. >> thank you madam chair. -- senator hirono. >> mr. smith was asked a question regarding if we create administrator our regulatory certainty in the timeframe for approvals that would we expect more applications and mr. smith

opined i want to see of the palace with you think very brief answers, please would you think will be more applications if we great certainty as this build a? >> i don't with the number of applications be affected by the time i. it will be affected by company double eagle deputy finance it line of customers. is a very long-term, very expensive propositions. i think those that are moving forward, knowing that there is some certainty at the end, after a very long extensive but a predictable process at ferc, and by way during that entire process deletes one of the cooperate agencies so that part of the effort of the. >> it sounds as though the ferc process is a much longer process than what do we has to do once ferc is approved, rights because it is longer but it didn't be we as part of that process. during this entire time not a case-by-case basis of a bin and

engaged in the studies that have been raised several times here to look at the broader national pictures go to economic impact and those are ongoing. that's what our feeling is having confidence ferc process not the foundational items they need at that point been in a very time in specific way to make a determination. >> okay, so i think the rest of you, you agreed that it's the ferc process actually sort of the big question mark. so you wouldn't expect additional or increased applications as a result of this bill. and yet i do want to open a can of worms what are you okay with the ferc process? >> again, i will speak. we believe the companies that we work with as i said, it is a long, it is an expensive, it is a comprehensive process but it is a predictable process but one differently with and so there've not been complaints about the ferc process. >> thank you. let's move on. i do have one note of caution

though about exporting natural gas because it has to do with our ability to predict what is going to happen. after all, about 10 years ago we thought we would be importing natural gas. so it gives me cause. and also a state like hawaii where we are looking to import liquid natural gas i would love for the industry to help us figure out how we can do that in meet domestic needs in a cost reasonable way. but that's not for this hearing. i understand that the extraction of gas does create a byproduct of methane, and that there are methane leaks, and methane is an extreme the potent greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change. so i would like to ask this of mr. durbin. assuming that lng exports increase and therefore, their

woody moore extraction activity, will there be or are there efforts by gas producers to reduce methane gas emissions are in the production process? >> and descended to. i'm glad you asked the question because the answer is an emphatic yes. let me tell you what is already up and. look at epa's own data nothing from industry on methane emissions from natural gas producers, you go from 2006 which is kind of the peak out to the missions we saw in 2012 the reduction of methane just from natural gas producers was 39.5%. the dates are important here are 2006 was before the shale gas revolution. so in those six years we've added thousands of wells. we've increase production by over 25% during that time you methane emission from natural gas production has been reduced by 39.5% and that's going to continue because it is in our interest to capture the methane. methane is natural gas. that's what we're wanting to

sell. it's also the continued improvements in efficiency and technology in the industry that have us today where the most productive natural gas will in the country in northern pennsylvania is producing 30 mcf a day. 10 years ago the most productive well into united states produce only five. so the numbers are just for relative scale. we are producing a heckuva lot more gas at the same to methane emissions are plummeting within our industry. >> so i take it they would not be in favor of the epa regulating methane emissions from this activity? >> to be clear it is regulated by epa under the current law. we set the current regulations you know we are having all these reductions under current regulations. i would argue epa does not need another new regulation. >> thank you. i think my time is up. >> thank you. and we're now going to turn to senator gardiner.

i will be excusing myself from the committee right now. we are going to start vote you very shortly, and senator cantwell will be a4a period. we want to make sure we get through all members and have an opportunity before the ethics it's going to be a little bit choppy from here on out and i apologize i won't be able to hear your further comments. but please know how much i appreciate what you have provided the committee today. this is a very important issue. i think we would recognize that and again i appreciate the level of cooperation that we've had. and i think a place where we have a compromise bill that i think will be helpful to the country. with that i will turn to senator gardiner, and he will be followed by senator franken. >> thank you, madam chair. and thank you ranking member cantwell for then today and thanks to the witnesses for your time.

is in the house of representatives introduced h.r. six the domestic prosperity and global freedom act that we passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. one of the things that made that bill so successful was many of the students made today by the witnesses including conversations that we had with people like doctor or von from hungary, and others who recognize the national security implications of a strong and vigorous opportunity with united states to share inner energy security with our partners around the globe. and so today talking about senate bill 33 for a short straight for piece of legislation granting opera for lng export applications already pending for my machine depend on how you look at the department of energy, and it's not too often we share in these kinds of opportunities where you have a bipartisan bill that will create jobs, create energy security add to our national security all at the same time to something i wish we could do more a. i do believe this has the opportunity to create a number

of american jobs across this country, clued in colorado my home state. we are the nations leading producer of natural gas. mr. smith, doctor pollack in testified last congress in 113 comes that the department of energy is keenly interested and invest in energy sector of our allies and trading partners. getting american lng export add to the energy security of our allies? >> thank you for the question, senator. we look at a variety of factors including international aspects so i would say currently the fact that we are importing less lng the we expected already impacting local markets and thus benefiting our allies and trading partners, the fact u.s. producers are at nutrition contracts in advance many being built has impact on global

markets. we think all those things are positive and those are things explicitly care about a note in our application spent reading between the lines it is clear you believe the department then she believes that export lng does increase, as to the energy sector of our allies because we believe it has an impact. >> mr. koranyi do you believe in the same position correct? >> absolutely. that goes back also to senator barrasso's question, a source the future is concerned. so we have the benefit of diverting energies was the response to come to the united states and also looking into the future, if you look at the traditional wisdom because asian gas prices are higher, most of the supplies go to asia. i'm not really sure about that. if you look at the contracts, opel composer european natural gas supplies. they will provide guests to spain, to the uk.

asian gas prices since last victory came down by 47%. so the gap between european and asian prices are not that big. if there is another couple from russia, for ukraine then that could send of european natural gas prices. so to sum up yes. >> mr. smith, again in response to the question to senator barrasso you had mentioned maybe does the chairman, you have said that the 45 day time frame and net 33 was workable is that correct? >> that's our view. we could comply with the law. >> do you have the same view about mr. johnson building a house that moved through the house yesterday? i think it is a 30 day timeframe spam i haven't compared the details, but over all i get i can say the 45 day limit in this bill is something we could comply with. >> mr. durbin, doctor juergen testified the united states is

demand constrained, not supply constrained to assist us with less congress when it comes to natural gas but in colorado -- would you agree that the u.s. demand constrained and not supply constrained? >> absolutely. it's a matter of infrastructure we need to be focusing on. >> does that lend itself to having too much supply and, therefore, drive that investment in new production? >> absolutely. >> is that something that s. 33 could achieve as well as giving our investment production opportunities a chance to push to make new investment? >> this. by making clue we have a new robust demand outlook year, it will provide consistency. it will provide the incentive and the motivation for the industry to continue the production not only for export but for the natural gas liquids and everything else that will try to manufacturing in the united states. >> i do want to keep in line with the spirit of senator

capital, when the red light comes on the wanted for some part of this legislation is what comes in natural security. i know last congress to significantly amongst people who states that moratoriums -- put moratoriums emplaced, who voted for the alan j. export bill knowing full well that our potential to export lng is only a failed because of our opportunities utilize techniques like hydraulic fracturing. they understand and recognize the importance of an abundant supply of energy that we can share with our allies and what it means for national security. i hope that continues to be a part of this very important debate. >> senator franken? >> i will pick up from senator gardner there. we are able to do this because of hydraulic fracturing. i don't want to i want everyone here to understand who developed the technology and who's responsible for that.

and it's the taxpayers of the united states. mr. durbin talked about how coming 2009 projections of the supply of natural gas going out were so low that the prices were going to be very, very high. and mentions that now they're much lower than the projections. we are hearing senators talk about discoveries of you know of reserves of natural gas in their state as if this was just a discovery that happened out of nowhere. this is because of the taxpayers doing investments in research into three-dimensional microsized with imaging --

seismic imaging done in labs. and please listen to this. because i say this over and over again. in this committee. this whole renaissance in natural gas is due to research done by the department of energy paid for by the united states taxpayers. and projects done with the oil and gas industry. in horizontal drilling. but understand that this didn't come out of nowhere do and let's have some historical context here. so who paid for this? who is responsible for this unbelievable renaissance? the american taxpayer. and that includes the minnesota taxpayer. now, do you know how much

natural gas we produce in minnesota? just as an estimate. mr. durbin? >> i'm not aware of natural gas production in minnesota, sir. >> zero. this does us no good whatsoever. this does minnesota no good whatsoever. the eia just says this is going to increase the price of natural gas. this is going to increase the price of electricity to every minnesotan. of heat to every minnesotan. the cost of operations to every minnesota manufacturer. this does my state no good whatsoever. now, i would appreciate it if those from the other states who

will benefit, the benefits of this, the jobs, the gdp growth and the jobs will be very concentrated by sector and region. mr. durbin, he represent the natural gas producers. i would venture to say that your sector will benefit from it the most. don't you think? >> we certainly are benefiting from it but i would argue with your contention that say the entire nation has been benefiting from this. if we didn't have this natural gas revolution, if he didn't have the production the prices where they are, you wouldn't have manufactured in minnesota that would be able to take advantage of it spent so we should be thanking the taxpayers of minnesota. we don't reward them by raising -- >> your contention about d.o.e.'s role in helping get to -- >> i don't have all a bit of time sir. the point is is that there's no benefit at all for the people of

minnesota in sending this abroad. this is what will happen, is that this will benefit, the steelworkers are against this, meant hack in minnesota where they mined iron ore and make ballots called aconite the heat those ballots up to 2500 degrees fahrenheit with natural gas. this is going to drive up the cost of natural gas. this is going to hurt minnesota. this is why the steelworkers are against it the united steelworkers. manufacturing creates a times as much jobs. yes, if you export a natural resource, the people who produce that natural resource benefit but it doesn't do anything like the kind of create the kind of jobs that we in minnesota have created because of this technology that we taxpayers in

minnesota, help to promote. so i just want this perspective, and going forward and i know my time's up, but i've been a little on prevent senator capito. members when they talk about this natural gas renaissance, understand where this came from. aside from the subject on natural gas when we're talking about renewable energy, when we talk about all energy, let's understand the role that research, basic research and applied research, have played in our nation in making sure that we are energy independent. thank you. >> thank you, senator franken. turning to senator cassidy, let me just remind the committee a point out that the committee

heard concerns about natural gas prices two years ago. prices have fallen since then. the obama administration has issued three separate study showing that natural gas prices will remain low with lng exports. the administrations most recent study shows that prices will remain low, even if the department of energy approves four times the amount of lng exports that's already approved. so at least for additional studies have confirmed the administrations findings. >> speak of the pervasiveness of the benefits of fracking to type an article ready where minnesota actually produces much of the frac sand. and so the price of fracking santos increased much of of the benefit of minnesota's and wisconsin's. so the benefit of this which george mitchell taking the db research but actually commercializing this, even goes to minnesota which is really good. i had a couple of questions though, one related to that and one to another. this is about jobs. i can tell you to our families struggling because they don't have jobs.

we know there's going to be a downturn in employment in the oil patch because of falling oil prices. i'm interested if we can increase the jobs in natural gas production, because of an exportation. north louisiana, that players decrease production because of dry gas, is not what the people want to make a true chemical products. mr. durbin or mr. smith, do all have an idea of thousand jobs will be created if we could i'm sure those -- and shutter is closed down wells and to begin to ship that dry gas to markets that after one dry gas any idea how jobs would be great but? >> i don't have specifics to that i know there's been several studies come in fact nam had one do with pricewaterhousecoopers showing expanding natural gas develop, we could create

1 million jobs in the manufacturing sector across the country. so there's a question that by providing for these exports you know a certain come and much more certain demand at length for this product and we're fortunate here in the u.s. of najaf prices and oil prices are largely decoupled. >> so if we increase -- >> a bit of housekeeping for our international guests. there are headsets available with simultaneous translations in five major world languages. ushers will have been throughout the hall for your convenience. put our ushers raise their hands? if someone raising their hand? okay. if you need a headset, we will help you there. it is an honor to serve with bob as co-chairman this year and we thank you for joining us this morning. each year this event is one of the most special and memorable in washington.

today some 3600 of us have gathered in this ballroom, and then auxiliary rooms down the hall. we represent all 50 states and 130 nations. as the song says oh let the nations be glad and sing for joy for thou shalt judge the people righteously and govern the nations of the earth. let the people praise the, oh, god. let all the people praise to be. for the 130 nations represented in this room today, the glad, be joyful and praise god. since 1953 the national prayer breakfast has exemplified and celebrated the power of prayer and fellowship in our lives but we come together, addressing what another in songs and hymns

and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the lord with your hearts. we have a truly remarkable program of the guests and performers this morning them like a weekly prayer breakfasts in the senate and the house. we will have scripture, prayers songs and speakers sharing their stories and reflections. our hope is that you leave today with the new blessings and perspectives about the strong community of faith in this country and around the world. spent my name is bob casey and honored to be here this morning with my coach or roger wicker. my friend who has labored with us these last two years. roger, we are grateful for your work. in just a few months will have the opportunity to give a warm welcome to the president and the first lady when they arrived. in the meantime we hope you're

enjoying your breakfast and getting to know those at your table if you don't know them already. we are honored you are with us. and now to lead us in our first prayer of happy to welcome rabbi gregory marx to the podium. for more than 25 years rabbi marx is from the spiritual leader of congregation beth or in maple glen montgomery county, pennsylvania. we are grateful he is with us today and he will do operate and then we'll have a break and then we'll go to the second part of the program. rabbi marx. >> thank you senator. good morning. >> good morning. >> the biblical prophet micah proclaimed -- it has been told

you what is good and what the lord requires of you. only to do justice, to love mercy and walk humbly with our god. justice without mercy leads to harsh judgment. mercy without justice creates a world where there's no accountability no moral goodness. at this moment may god bless us with both mercy and justice so that we may tenderly care for those in need of compassion and rejoice in the good of others. we celebrate this morning our uniqueness as well as our commonality. we come from our different faith perspectives yet are united in a fervent desire to strengthen the hands and hearts of those who seek to build an enduring society which tolerates neither bigotry nor hatred. master of the universe inspire us to release those reservoirs of the spirit in mind which make us truly partners with you. grant us patience and help us in our daily tasks. may we never give in to despair

despite their enormous. give us a love for truth about cleverness, for people above things for god above all else. remind us in the immortal words of abraham lincoln that religious devotion is not about having god on our side which mistakenly process to condemn the faith of others, but rather it is about being on god's side which requires devotion to civic duty, tolerance, humility, justice mercy and peace. be with us as we seek to establish new ties of friendship across religious, racial and ethnic boundaries, to great innovative opportunities of service, to rejoice in the growth of all of our children, to lovingly and faithfully support our fellow men and women who are in need of god's care and affection. may god bless our beloved and noble country and those who defend her so that each may one day sit under their own fine and

figtree and none shall be afraid. give us a good sense and understanding to buttress the moral fiber of american life that we may gird ourselves with integrity and to successfully meet the immense challenges before us. keep us from pride which prevents us from seeing the need for real change, and steel us with a commitment to stay the course when necessary. but most of all god she'll us from inpatient judgment towards those who differ from us. may we always remember that your exalted whenever and wherever men and women work together to fulfill micah's prophetic vision of justice, mercy, humility. and let us say amen. >> amen. >> thank you, rabbi marx.

at this point continue enjoying your breakfast and the conversation with our table guests. the president and his party will be here in a few moments. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> madam president, i come to the floor in my position as the vice chair of the appropriations committee, and to urge the senate to pass a clean homeland security appropriations bill. now yesterday the senate rejected a procedural vote to take up the house homeland majority funding bill. madam president, this is not about debating though we over which bill over that bill. there are two distinct differences. the house bill has both the funding for fiscal year 2015 in

it that would take care of every single agency under department of homeland security to defend and protect the nation. but at the same time it is loaded with five immigration writers that we call poison pill writers because the president said it legislation to fund homeland security passes with these five immigration riders, he will veto the bill. the president wants to fund an appropriations bill, so july. the house homeland security bill is taken up by the senate which simply be a delaying tactic. we would talk, we would debate we would offer lots of amendments on immigration. and after we get lots of amendments on immigration it

might go to the president to the president would veto it. it would come back. and after all is said and done more would get said then get done. we've got to pass the funding for the protecting of the homeland to yesterday, the entire world was just gripped with a poignancy and sorrow about the ghoulish murder of a jordanian pilot. the threat of terrorism is in the world. attacks by isil on people, the possibility of a lone wolf in our own country a cyber attack in retaliation because we dare fight back against isil or we are willing to challenge some of the other international predators directed at us. you know we've got to protect the united states of america. that's what the department of homeland security does.

department of defense protects us over there. the department of homeland security protect us here. after 9/11 one of the worst days in our countries history the congress came together shortly and we passed legislation to create the department of homeland security so we would take every agency that is involved in protecting the homeland, both in under one umbrella so that they could look out for us. now, we need to look out for them. every day we ask men and women who serve in the coast guard, in secret service or border patrol protecting our borders, in customs making sure, you know, products like counterfeit drugs are not crossing their borders into our country. now, we need to pass that bill. we need to make sure we do not have a shutdown or a slam down

when the funding expires february 27. in december when i chaired the committee, in the closing hours of passed congress, i worked with my subcommittee chairman, senator landrieu, the vice chairman of homeland security approach senator coats and we put together a crucial funding bill that totaled $46 billion to invest in agencies that protect us. it was $1 billion more, 1 billion in the continuing resolution. we could've taken it that bill up within, but there was a desire because of controversy over the president taking executive action on immigration not to do it. so here we are in february. now it's our time to find a clean homeland security bill.

immigration -- fund. immigration is a serious policy issue. i don't dispute that. it deserves serious debate but don't add it as a series of riders on a funding bill. rather let's take up immigration separately. now, i remind our colleagues that in the last congress, the senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill only to have it die in the house. so we say let's pass our bill again. let's have the house take it up and let's have a real debate with it. but in the meantime we will have funded the homeland security bill. now, this isn't just barbara mikulski talk about more government spending. every past head of homeland security, the department of homeland security, has urged the senate to pass this separate

bill. tom ridge, the original chief executive of this agency. michael chertoff who also served under president bush and janet napolitano. they are calling for it and so my. madam president, right now our coast guard is out there safeguarding our waterways. we in maryland can we just love our coast guard. and we love them because number one, they are always there for search and rescue. never do they are always there to protect our bay whether it is against a possible oil spill or drug dealers trying to sneak up. they are there. we also know how brave they were. look, we all recall with helicopters they went in and rescued people doing the horrific hurricane katrina. theythey do it every day. then there's secret service. secret service is in the process of reforming itself. they need to protect the president, the vice president the first family.

but you know, what? they are also out there being a government g-man fighting things like credit card fraud are intended there's a cyber warriors protecting our critical infrastructure, our critical infrastructure, our banking, our power grid. then there's fema. right now responding to disasters weather blizzards or hurricanes. and then their state and local first responders. one of the programs i am so proud of in the department of homeland security is the fire grant program. that fire grant program is a competitive grant program, not an earmarked program, a competitive grant program where local fire departments particularly those in our rural communities, can apply for a grant to buy the necessary equipment they need to protect them so they can protect us. madam president, i know you're familiar with this in nebraska. turnout here for a firefighter

respiratory equipment to protect their breathing, the telecommunications, the fire retardant republic material, that can cost as much as 1000-$2000 per firefighter. you can't do this on -- >> live pictures now from the national prayer breakfast. this is the 63rd annual prayer breakfast. it is traditionally held during the first week of february. shortly after new congressional session starts and the president's state of the union address. as you can see the president obama just a arriving for the interest the senator bob casey and roger wicker leading off the event along with secretary the air force president obama speaking at this more live coverage on c-span2. >> keep the program moving along. at senator wicker and i said earlier, we we're honored you are with us this morning and we're grateful for the folks who helped with his put this breakfast together of you.

to begin our formal program, i am honored to share with everyone in this audience an excerpt from a message from rome by pope francis. this message is to all of us gathered here at this national prayer breakfast, and he writes in part, and i quote dear friends i send prayer for all good wishes for you for the fruitfulness of your work. i ask you to pray for me and to join me in praying for our brothers and sisters throughout the world who experienced persecution and death for their faith. upon you, your families, and those who serve i cordially invoke god's blessings of wisdom joy and peace. we are honored that the holy father would send us that message.

the entirety of the message will be read at today's luncheon. while pope francis couldn't be with us today in person his excellency the papal nuncio, the holy father's representative in the united states is here today. we are honored by his presence. all of us -- [applause] all of us as will have the extraordinary privilege today to be joined at this breakfast by another inspirational spiritual leader and peacemaker, his holiness the dalai lama. we are honored by his presence. [applause] when i was in state government in harrisburg, pennsylvania, i work in the finest building and fight over the building in front of the building was an inscription that they think is a

good summation of what it means to be in public service and i'm quoting from that precept inscribed on the building. here's what it says. all public service is a trust given in faith and accepted in honor. senator wicker and i and those were in the river elected officials have accepted that honor to serve. .. oasis from that politics of the