reat. >> that includes what they are readily able to use in their plan development. so we are making sure that we have the flexibility and resources to get that done. >> with all of the comments, especially making changes putting that into this and so forth. >> yes. >> take you so much and i yield back. >> we now recognize the gentleman from organ. ..

we are trying to work with the agency on it but it's difficult and it's a scientific veterinarian i look at these things as a scientific person i want to have the standards based on good science. even beyond that it would appear the current regional administration has their own mindset about what's going to be done regardless of what's being talked about by the collaborative partners in the region and we are having trouble getting this decision and i think it was the middle of 2013. there was a promise of additional help from folks here in d.c. to maybe move things

along at an accelerated pace and again in january there was some discussion with the department of environmental quality to help get the job done. so i guess the basic questions here that decision was supposed to be coming here in 2016. we have heard it's going to be put off until 2017. we have been hearing about this for a lot of years in the uncertainty creates a big problem for economic development in a region. we are trying to get people back to work and trying to do the right thing for the environment. the sooner we can get this decision done the sooner we can decide whether or not it's economically feasible to work on the portland harbor. i would like to thank both of them are not mutually exclusive but again region 10 going to the highest cost alternative in terms of remediation rather than the other remedial efforts that are actually out there. so is 2017 the best-case

scenario and can we hold with all the respect the agency's feet to the fire to get a decision? >> i know parkland -- portland hob was an issue that came up and dennis mcdonough who is our administrators actively involved in this issue in a way that tries to make sure it's moving forward and so i know we are putting their resources to this and will continue with this discussion. i think we have turned a better corner. i know we are not only looking at making sure we get the cleanup correct but i think mcdonough is the cheaper the step of the president. he didn't take on added responsibility. dennis mcclaren i apologize. we are looking at ways that while we may need more time to explore the final cleanup the decision on this that we will have site ready and moving forward regardless of when that

decision gets made so we will get that decision made as quickly as possible that but we are also getting all the preliminary steps ready so we can continue to move forward and not sequentially think about these issues. i think we are working really hard with oregon to make sure that is the case so that we don't lose any time in this process. >> with all due respect it takes a lot of time and i'm not convinced there will region 10 administrators shares your enthusiasm for getting it done in a timely manner. they are getting what i would perceive as getting beaten up on a regular basis with requirements and replacements. here's a group that could be a shining example of how the process could work and i appreciate your continued attention. another question is what products. we would like to be a big wood producing state.

that doesn't seem to be possible anymore but for the weather comes out up their safe wood composite industry that's pretty viable. they have been waiting for the formaldehyde standards for composite web standards. the rule was supposed to be done in 2013 is now two years later. uncertainty is the enemy of most businesses. most businesses can adapt it to know what the rules of engagement are. can you tell us what the status of the regulation is what it's going to be finished and is the present aware of site -- final signoff? >> i have been aware of the challenge we have been facing in getting this rule finalized particularly as it has to do with lime and it's in our ability to address what is potentially significant source of emissions but do it in a way that is viable and effective for the industry moving forward. we are working hard at how to resolve this issue so this rule can come out tonight you know we need for certainty you are discussing. i will go back and see if we can continue to address this issue and get it out across the finish

line. it's been since 2013 but this has not been without its challenges. we keep trying to develop a testing method that will work and be cost-effective but it remains a challenge for us. we will see if we can get it moving. >> thank you. i work with the industry and i think they are on your team in terms of wanting to get this done so thank you very much and i yield back. >> at this time time i recognizes the gentleman from virginia for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you ms. mccarthy for being here today. today is toward february 25, 2015 and earlier he told chairman whitfield were confident going forward with the clean powerplant under 111d and i'm just wondering your budget document states the clean power plan for the epa in and the central almond of the domestic thymus -- climate mitigation agenda has a reprint of time since it was announced by the president in june of 2014 at

that the epa has considered not finalizing this rule yes or no? >> no. >> has there have been a time since it was announced by the president in 2014 that you have considered as the administrator of the epa have considered not finalizing this rule? >> no sir. smack in the case of marine energy versus epa and gina mccarthy when your lawyer said the epa may not do a proposal related to final action with proposed section 111d related to the clean power plan your lawyers did not tell the whole truth of full truth and nothing to the truth, is that accurate yes or no? >> the proposal has proposed may not be what we move forward with but there is never been an indication to me in comments. >> they said they may not move forward. i wouldn't be a complete statement of agree since june 2014 and today you are confident you are moving forward. i was whole argument.

>> you asked about my confidence level and i'm confident we can get this done. >> let me move on been because it's interesting your lawyers have taken several positions on this. in the case of new jersey versus epa can't excuse me 517 and 574 2008 in regard to 111d the epa promulgated regulations for existing electric generation units under section 111d that i'm quoting now from the opinion that under epa's own interpretation of the section that cannot be used to regulate sources listed under 112. epa has conceived that the electric generation units remain listed under section 112 as we hold the regulations. i would submit the same as going bare your lawyers of art he conceded he don't have the authority to regulate under 112 and 111d and you are competent

moving forward. let me read you the language of the actual code. 111d1. prescribe regulations which shall establish a procedure similar is provided by section 110 under which each state shall it administer plan which establishes standards of performance for an existing source of any air pollutant for which air quality criteria has not been an issue or which is not included on a list published under section 111d or emitted from a source category which is regulated under section 112. so it would seem from the language from prior court cases where the epa conceded the point that there is not legal authority to move forward in my know you are not an attorney by training but i would have to submit to you as an attorney by training that if you are confident going forward on a 111d being upheld in the courts

your confidence had been misplaced in your lawyers are not telling you the truth whole truth and nothing but the truth. let me switch another subject. your budget request to implement the clean powerplant because you have indicated unique expertise. i assume however you do work well with the secretary of the department of energy. yes or no? and so then i have to ask why are we going to spend tens of millions of dollars of taxpayers to give you all new employees for evaluating and capturing these compliance strategies requires the agency to tap into technical and policy expertise not additionally needed in the epa for example nuclear when solar hydroelectric etc. when the d.o.e. possesses the excess -- expertise when i work with them and i would suggest that we do and that would save taxpayers tens of mine to dollars. you agree if we can use the d.o.e. sx verse instead of having to open up a whole new

printer that would be better for taxpayers of the united states of america yes or no? >> i do not agree that there isn't a need for expertise and epa. >> lastly do agree that people and employment are are connected with each other that people employ generally have a better health standard that the unemployed sometimes don't enjoy enjoy? you would agree with that i would think that i would have to say one of the concerns you have heard about the wave after wave of regulations for mr. mckinley and how that's hurting employment. i think the employment is existing and going in alphabetical order but at the height of the recession we had an 8.9 annual unemployment rate in 09, 8.9. in 13 at the end of 13 it's 9.8 because of regulations that are putting hundreds of thousands of coalminers and related industries, their jobs are gone.

this is not counting the folks who decided to retire or shut down their businesses and are no longer looking from playmate. that was dickinson county at the height of the recession 2009, annual number 9.0 and today 2013, 10.0. our economy is getting worse because of your agency and i apologize i can't let you answer that because i feel back. >> at this time that the moment for maryland mr. sarbanes for five minutes. >> thank you administrator mccarthy for being here. just on the last exchange i fear that your legal justification for the departments regulation isn't tanned and i have high confidence and there's a strong legal basis for the regulations and the position you are taking. i want to thank you generally i want to thank the epa and the obama administration for picking up the slack on the issue of

climate change and addressing the ravages of climate change. unfortunately despite the efforts of many of us here to try to move forward with the statutory response that congress has not done the job that it should do. the epa again i think with sound legal authority has really taken a leadership role and i also want to salute your agency and the administration generally for the climate action plan which addresses climate change the clean powerplant, the historic international agreements which are being undertaken which finally puts us in a position of momentum in terms of addressing the issue of climate change. in doing that you are reflecting where the public is increasingly

increasingly. there is polling that indicates 17% of americans favor stronger limits on the amount of carbon that is emitted by power plants because they understand the health consequences of that and they understand the impact on climate change. over 80% of americans think that the united states should take action to address climate disruption based on a poll in 2013. this is becoming an emerging consensus on the part of the public. i think they are appreciative of the efforts that you and your agency and administration are taking to address this important concern. i understand the solutions are not simple. mission reductions have to be rooted in science aggressive blows to avoid the harshest impacts of climate change and reasonable intelligent folks can differ on how to deliver those results and we will continue to have this discussion in this committee. but i think there's a false

dichotomy that often gets put forward that somehow in addressing climate change we are going to have to undermine our economy. i don't think that is a fair narrative. i think we need to look at the fact that investing in clean energy infrastructure can actually produce a terrific advances for our economy. we need to get on the cutting-edge of that because our peer nations around the world are beginning to make those investments. we can be in the position of being the leader which will actually help our economy but not if we are asleep at the switch. when we say why are we doing these things there is a lot of good answers to protect the planet, to protect our health the public health and to protect our national security and to protect our economy by getting on the front and that these emerging technologies. can you speak to what the clean power act the clean powerplant

that you put forward and the agency put forward what you see in terms of the potential positives economic impact and the job creation affected back and have because it's an important part of the dialogue. >> thank you for raising that. i know that we feel very strongly that the way in which we have proposed this rule to provide flexibility to use energy efficiency and renewable energy as part of not just our standard setting process that our compliance process allows tremendous flexibility. if you take a look at where the energy universe is heading what is the mark in what is the transition source of clean energy future regardless of the clean powerplant and how can we follow back? how can we allow every state to identify what is best for job growth opportunity ways to invest in the economy and grow jobs. we believed because of the flexibility we have provided him

because we know the economy and the energy system is transitioning towards a low-carbon strategy businesses are transitioning. the government has the following recognized there are ways of addressing our climate challenge that can bring great economic benefit to this country and provide the innovation that we need to retain international leadership. we see this as being a path to the future instead of continued investment in very old technology that is not producing more jobs, that is not being invested in. the investment is in clean technology. >> thank you very much and thank you for your outstanding testimony and your work. i yield back. >> at this time i recognize the gentleman from ohio mr. johnson for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and administrator mccarthy thank you for being here. i represent much of appalachia ohio.

that is home to many cold fired power plants and home to the hard-working taxpaying men and women who work in those facilities to provide for their families. these proud men and women produce the energy resources that are keeping the lights on and heating the homes of the majority of ohio homes during this cold winter. so can you tell us why energy rich ohio was excluded from the hearings the public hearings on epa's climate rules? >> as far as i know sir those hearings were strategically placed around the country to ensure that people could have access to attend those. >> it's interesting that they were strategically placed in places where coal-mining and cooperations don't exist. >> how many coalmines are in

pittsburgh? i can tell you how many coalmines are in southeastern ohio and there are a number of them but we can fix this. i heard my colleague from iowa say that he invites you back to the iowa state fair. i would like to invite you to come to ohio. sit down and talk directly to the ohioans who work in those coalmines and most power plants who are likely to lose their jobs as result of epa's actions your actions administrator mccarthy. they pay your salary. they pay my salary so let me ask you where you meet with them? i will arrange my schedule so that i can be there, to be there with you and we can have a dialogue with the people whose lives are being affected by the regulations coming out of your agency. >> we are reaching out across the country. >> i'm asking you when you come with me because i will help set it up? >> every state is asking me to come to their state. >> that is a simple question yes or no. can i get with your team?

i will have my team reach out to your office to set up that meeting because i'm going to take that as a yes. is that we just said that you are willing to meet? >> i'm always willing to talk to you. >> will you come to ohio in may with the men and women reclaiming my time administrator mccarthy, simple question. but you arrange your schedule to meet with the people that are being affected in ohio by the actions of your. >> i'm happy to continue to talk to you. if there's a stakeholder that was excluded from the process i will work with them. >> you are not going to answer the question. it's clear why you left those folks out what i will set up a meeting and we will reach out to your team and say we can work that out. nuclear power is their only high-capacity baseload generation source that emits no carbon dioxide and we have talked about that little bit but we are in danger of losing some units in our existing plans for

multiple reasons. if any of them close overall carbon dioxide emissions increase. that's a fact because even if intermittent renewable energy wind and solar were to be displaced or to displace the power it must be backed up by natural gas generation so therefore i'm concerned about how the rules treat artistic nuclear fleet. for example plans that go through the rigorous relicensing process will not be considered the same as new nuclear units for compliance and it seems to me that they should be. so here are my questions. do you believe that the mrc will approve each and every nuclear relicensing application that receives throughout the compliance period and do you believe that every or even most operators who want to make a significant investment to pursue relicensing it before you answer that question your new rule basically assumes a yes answer

to both of those. >> i do not know of the success of the mrc process in terms of relicensing. i do know that we attempted to address nuclear energy and point out its value and current baseload and its value and its low-carbon strategy. >> but you have assumed that every nuclear relicensing application is going to be approved and you have assumed that those nuclear facilities are going to actually go through that rigorous process and investment to get there. i'm going to tell you i think that's a flaw in your rulemaking is something that you folks ought to look very closely at. i apologize mr. chairman but i've exhausted my time as well and i yield back. >> pajama yields back and this time i recognize the gentleman from indiana mr. bucshon for

five minutes. >> thank you for being here. we appreciate it. climate is changing and it's been changing for centuries. i believe reasonable can people can continue to have a debate on that. i think we can all agree that we should be working towards improving our emissions as we generate power. my position is that we should be doing this their innovation and technology development and not too overreaching federal regulation. would you agree that in general a rule that is proposed on any subject really should be based on the availability of technology to comply with the rules for the technology isn't available would you agree that maybe that rule needs to be revisited? >> we certainly know that when we rely on technology as part of our standard setting process we have to do our due diligence on that technology. >> i'm not going to repeat what

my colleagues talked about on carbon capture but the administration has taken us position that no new coal plants should be built in the united states unless it has ccs technology which was earlier pointed out that right now there's nothing that has been demonstrable to be successful to accomplish that and the one that you are quoting is not an united states and may very well not be financially successful. but you know right now are you aware that germany is building new coal plants without ccs as are other countries in europe and japan. did the epa objected that? >> vpa certainly is looking to be able, not just epa but across the administration to provide opportunities to continued advancement of the technology and to ensure that coal gets cleaner upper time so as part of the clean energy future. >> because these countries are building state-of-the-art power plants without ccs shouldn't we

allow them to build them in the united states? >> i know they are heavily investing in a variety of things. >> they are investing in coal and getting out of other energy sources because their energy sources they can't afford them anymore. they are so subsidized by the government the government can afford to pay the citizens can afford to pay for the power so they are going back to lower costs in energy and that's the truth. i want to switch gears though and talk about another subject. i was a medical doctor before it was in congress about medical incinerators and this has to do not just with ebola but other things. one of the recommendations by the cdc in treating medical waste in the past due to decades the epa has regulated hundreds of medical waste incinerator's out of existence thereby limiting options for hospitals to properly dispose of extremely dangerous material. my question is what are our options? the epa has limits the options in the name of public health.

what technologies are available for hospitals and first responders to deal with the threat of medical waste and ebola waste for example but others and what resources has the epa determined to such technologies comply with the standards before we have other problems potentially are other outbreaks? >> i think epa standards ensures her medical waste facilities can properly manage waste. i think you have been in the industry long time you will know that there are a lot of facilities out there that weren't properly managing normal medical waste nevermind the challenge of ebola. >> fair enough. >> we are working very closely across the administration and with the cdc and others to ensure there's a pathway forward to handle ebola waste and waste incinerator's today are capable of handling that waste very effectively. >> how many are there in the

u.s. that can handle that? do you have a ballpark idea of? >> i don't. i certainly will follow. >> this is something from the medical community standpoint that is an issue and it sounds like the epa takes that seriously. >> we have brought people together to talk about this during the crisis and we will continue to work with him on it. >> i would argue potentially with the threat of isis and other organizations in dealing with potential type of outbreak is a national security issue and we should just deal with it on the front end but the backend. we have to start dealing with that so i would implore you to look into that. so again you stated earlier but i wanted to say again does the epa plan to provide a proposed rule for new coal fired power plants to eliminate the ccs mandate based on the discussion we had previously about what other countries are doing and

about the fact that there doesn't appear to be technology available currently to comply with them and they? >> there has been no final decision made. we will look closely at the comments that have have come in covanta stand many of command on this issue and we will look closely at them. sydney thank you very much and i look -- >> thank you very much mr. chairman and i yield back. >> man can you quickly sum up with the epa's mission statement is from a? >> is protect the public health and the environment. >> but not to raise revenue or fines or anything like that just to protect the public health, right? >> yes. >> can you tell me the total amount of fines that the epa assessed and this is up your web site and i got this directly from fy14. >> i do not have that. >> administrative penalties assessed according to your web

site. fy14, $44 million. judicial penalties assessed $56 million. state local and judicial penalties from joint federal state local enforcement action $7 million. supplemented penalties, $11 million. fy12 according to your web site administrative penalties assessed 52022,612. judicial penalties assessed 155 million $539,269. state local judicial penalties assessed $49,000,231. supplemental penalty $4,000,658,000,000. i say all that because it seems like to me every time we are cutting and i may be making an

assumption here so stay with me, your total budget for fy14 was $8.2 billion. as that's not enough to operate the epa with? >> it might help to know that those funds go to the treasury, not the epa. >> if that is the case then why was webb industry find 395 or 387,000, $369 for not filing a pra report which is a one page paper. now they have never been or had any issues. they have had the facility for many years but they failed to follow at one time yet another facility they filed it that this was an oversight and you came in and find them $387,000 which is astounding to me for a piece of paper but yet you said that they

paid it in 10 days he would knock it down to $193,679. when they asked if that could be paid, the money could be used for an environmental project which is historically what a bailout you guys a lot to do what is a reporting issue, they were told by your agent the epa's agent no you all needed the funding. >> i don't know how that could be accurate sir. we don't get the funding. >> but there's an exception to the rule. if you look at the bill that you are referring to that the money is supposed to be going to there are exceptions to that. do you know what those exceptions are? if you look at the statute that you are talking to there are areas in there that allow that money depending on how it is written or what is assessed for for you guys to keep.

can you tell me that all this money was surrendered back to the treasury? >> that is my understanding. >> do you know that for a fact? because we are going through too maam and i think we are going through this process we are going through this process and try to determine how these fines are being assessed and how you come up with the dollars you are finding individuals. all this money that i have stated was coming right out of the back pockets of business owners coming straight out of the economy going where? what are we doing when we are talking about protecting the health of individuals? how does a 387,000-dollar fine protect the health of somebody when it's a piece of paper? there was nothing else.

>> we are talking about enforcement that allows us to level the playing field for businesses that are doing what they're supposed to do. and actually make sure we are providing the health benefits that our rules anticipate. >> how is this leveling the playing field? who isn't leveling it for other than punishing a company? >> the only think i can go back to your original question about the lies that there may be an exception you are citing that is for superfund money from responsible parties that epa gets to collect and dispersed to pay for the cleanup. that is the only instance of which i know of that i find whatever directly benefit. >> how could you drop it by $200,000 if they have it in by 10 days? this has happened to me personally in my company. >> you have a company that has been find? >> yes we have. >> i'm happy happy to sit down within your current position or is the person who runs that company to walk through that

issue. >> we are trying to figure out why we can't even get an understanding of why the fines are being assessed the way they are and get you guys are willing to immediately knock it down by $200,000. our find was nowhere near this. >> sir i will not apologize for this agency strongly enforcing the rules of the american public wants. >> you are making your own rules as you go. >> no sir. >> at this time i recognize the gentleman from north dakota mr. cramer for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you administrator. it's nice to see you again. it's eyes nice to see you. i'm having a hard time knowing where to begin because i have so many issues. i will start with the bigger waters rule.

do you regret not utilizing the small-business advocacy review panel and i realize you share this with the corps of engineers but was that a mistake? >> i don't think so because we have done a tremendous amount of outreach to small businesses looking at this rule and i think we have a comments when he could have a successful final rule. >> but the law requires an rsa does it not the law requires you to done an rsa. >> we went to the process of looking at whether or not we needed to stand up what we call a sipri for panel and we consult with omb and they both agreed we had done the necessary outreach. >> have you responded to the office of advocacy and they of course disagree with your certification that it had an insignificant enough impact on the small entities.

>> i have not directly spoken to them and certainly have had a interagency discussions. it's important to remember that the clean water rule is a jurisdictional rule. doesn't result in automatic permit decisions. it says they are certain waters that need to be protected for drinking water and other reasons and the permit decisions themselves are what actually will be the result of the impact on the further discussion. >> the rule as i understand it presumes to narrow the jurisdiction but the epa office of advocacy concludes that the economic analysis doesn't sync with a gas and i have to admit when it gets to the issue of the lack of clarity which of course is stated in the definition of avoid navigable waters are seems to me as i look at the seven categories in your rule

the definition gets cloudy or not more specific in my view. in fact somewhere after three out of the seven that would be clear to wouldn't it to say navigable waters are waters that are navigable for interstate commerce? >> actually the area that lacks clarity is not the issue of navigable waters. the supreme court spoke definitively that navigable waters need to be looked at in a way that isn't the traditional definition. we haven't looking -- been looking at navigable waters the same way. their ability to provide the functions that we look for are severely impacted by the waters that flow into them so the challenge we have tried to face in the clean water rule was to take a look at how do we identify those tributaries and wetlands that feed into those

navigable waters that we need to understand and protect so they won't degrade those waters. >> you just used some new terms and i might add floodplains. that is adding, not restricting jurisdiction in my view. it looks to me like you are reaching for more power as opposed to further defining it. i'm concerned that is not the role of the epa but the role of congress. >> i appreciate your asking that. we are actually looking that as a way to be clear and to narrow this because there is so much uncertainty that there are more case-by-case decisions being made that need to be made. we are trying to provide more clarity but we also know there are a lot of questions in terms of how people are reading the rules whether we were clear in our intent and clear language and we will work through those issues moving forward so the

final rule addresses some of those. >> given little time i have left and want to make a couple of comments. i hope the technical conferences are going well and you are paying close attention to those. >> my assistant administrators attended those and we think they are excellent opportunities to understand what the energy role is. >> i think that consultation earlier would have been better. with regard to mr. sarbanes comments about the epa being in more sync with a growing population or something to that effect i would want to state the absence of congress acting on cap-and-trade were choosing to not pass cap-and-trade should not be viewed as neutrality is by the people's unit -- to catch up to the public at the well because the public supports it increasing for the climate action plan in the clean power

rule. i would submit to the public as a way ahead of epa in line with the congress with regard to the keystone xl pipeline which so far the only agency that has said anything remotely negative and by the way wasn't all that negative referring to we have consider the lower price of oil. i want to remind people that the price of oil is roughly what it is today when transcanada applied for it. thank you again. >> at the time i recognizes the gentleman from mississippi mr. harper for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you ms. mccarthy for being here and i think we are near the end so that's a good thing. >> that's a good thing too. >> if i could talk to specifically we have a number of industries, number of groups in my home state of mississippi that are greatly impacted by the

rules that are promulgated and enforced and one that i would like to touch on per minute would be our wood in pellet heating unit manufactures. they are problems with the performance standards that the epa just finalized, you know it's something that really impacts us. these are small businesses that don't have a lot of room in their budgets for r&d costs in addition to testing lab fees and those things. i think most companies are going to be okay. they can probably get there but the second stage which i believe is scheduled to be implemented in 2020 that's going to be extremely costly. it's that slow emissions targets

that would be almost impossible to achieve with the current technology we have in the resources. my question is what budgetary support this agency plan to provide to manufactures as part of your goal to deal with the air quality issues that brought this forward? >> congressman i want to first say i believe your businesses were engaged in this but we worked really hard with the small business constituencies on this and the small business minister's office for advocacy. we did make substantial changes in the final rules that sought to accommodate their interest in making sure that there was fewer impact in terms of existing stoves that are generated in out there for sale so they could have additional time to get those sales out but also to extend the timeline for compliance. i apologize i don't know the specific dates so i can't

confirm that we did make a lot of changes. i would be interested in hearing from you in working with you to see if they address these issues of concern. >> we will make sure we communicate further on that because i believe it's something that would necessitate additional discussion and movement and fairness but what do i go back until those companies that are now looking at a large lab testing fees or costs that they don't really have in their budget to be profitable? what do i go back and tell them? >> i think we did a good job trying to make sure the testing components for moderate enough that they didn't impose a significant cost to the manufactures. the other thing to recognize and this is something maybe we can work on together is in the past epa and states and regions have had the funds that actually support the distribution of these cleaner stoves. i know that there are states

that will be looking at the stoves as being opportunities for them to meet some of the air quality standards they are facing particularly in the particulate matter. if i can provide any opportunity for that dialogue to happen on how we can work together will be a pleasure for me to do that. >> thank you for the offer and i believe we will follow up on that with you. if i could take i believe the clock hit. i believe i have a little bit of time left maybe a med -- a minute and a half. i feel like the shot clock ran out. what i would like to do the follow-up is on the issue of how much implementing the proposed clean power plants will cost taxpayers in this is specific to my home state of mississippi. i checked with our mississippi development authority and they indicated the minimum incremental capital cost of mississippi to comply with the proposed rule would be $14.2 billion.

which will primarily consist of constructing generating facilities not likely to be built unless compelled by federal mandate and the rule will almost certainly cause the premature closing of existing coal plants in mississippi which would place upward pressure on electricity prices. if the cost to mississippi to implement the clean power plant would be $14.2 billion would you agree this is too much to ask from mississippi consumers? >> certainly our economic analysis didn't indicate that was an amount that would be necessary for mississippi to spend. in fact i think you may be lower than we estimated as the lower range for the entire united states. we should be sitting down and talking about what the options are that we think provide tremendous flexibility for every state to design a cost-effective strategy. >> do you have a figure for

mississippi? >> i do not believe they broken down by individual states but we certainly can have those conversations about what the underpinnings were when they came up with that number. clearly it seems like it's order of magnitudes larger than one would expect. >> thank you and i think i'm out of time have expired twice. >> we welcome back mr. scalise the majority whip for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman i appreciate that an administrator mccarthy thank you for coming to testify about your budget and this is part of our oversight rule to look at some of the proposals that will be made by the department throughout the year. i want to talk to you about some of the proposals that not only are being proposed and some impacts we are seeing and how they might have devastating impacts on our local economies but also ask about some of the others in the past because as you make proposals you attach to

them what types of impacts that of impacts of might have in certain ways. i want to take for example mercury and air toxics rules. other federal agencies like ferc when they were looking at this set plant closures would be much higher than the epa estimates were going to be. seems to me when epa got this information you all kind of scoffed at it but in retrospect now that we can look back and see the administration's data concedes it will shutter 10 times more the amount of electricity generation than you originally anticipated. how do you respond to something like that when other agencies within the obama administration were saying what you are proposing would be devastating to electricity? and even more than what you are anticipating. you were 10 times off on your estimates. >> sir i am not necessarily agreeing that the mercker and air toxins standard was the

precipitate or for all of the closures we are seeing. >> but ferc made that warning. are you disputing with her? >> there were concerns with reliability of cost which is why we work to address those issues together and frankly none of those concerns are proven to be a reality. >> so you're disputing they have the shuddering as of electricity generation 10 times increase occurred since the rule? >> i said there were a number of closures. whether they were attributable to the mats rule that the energy role is transitioning is the question i raise. >> people need more electricity and you come up with a rule that other agencies say will have devastating impacts and those things happen you say it happened that maybe wasn't our fault. >> why would they shatter those plans? >> the shuddering of those plans were market decision.

>> a market decision based on achievable standards. >> the compliance timeline is this april and we have not received any requests logistic request to extend that timeline beyond what's affordable and factored in. >> you factored in that the maps rule would have of minor impact electricity bills and midwest mutual capacity prices have skyrocketed over 340% largely due to maps. they have had a 340% increase in rates in the midwest. you need to go back and look at some of the stuff. i know the president talks about global warming and they are canceling flights due to snow blizzards and people are trying to keep their homes. these rules are having dramatic impacts. i want you to answer some questions about a study that just came out by the beacon hill institute at the university of boston. i'm not sure you are familiar

with the study that just came out. they just came up with an economic impact study on the effects of the new epa rules on united states and i would ask unanimous consent that they can submit this report into the record. in this report they break down not only national impacts which are devastating but they go state-by-state. in my state of louisiana the institute for public policy which looks at this information and economic data, they one went and broke this down and looked at the report and according to what they have seen you would have an impact in my state of louisiana alone of an increase in utility rates by 22%. electricity prices would go up 22% by 2030. the state of louisiana alone would lose over 16,000 jobs based on these rules. you just have to ask and i will quote from the president of pelikan institute along with

the significant costs it's worth noting the increases in electricity prices would disproportionately affect lower income louisiana to spend approximately 70% 70% of their after-tax income on energy. these cost me to be taken into consideration by state and federal policymakers closed quote. are you while taking into consideration devastating impacts like this on rules that you are posing when you increase people's electricity rates? 16,000 jobs lost in one state alone and of course this is a national impact that this would have. >> i don't know if study you are talking about and what rules you are looking at. >> this is the suffolk university study that looks at the impact of epa rules. >> i'm happy to take a look at it but i know congress has charged us to do exactly that comments take a look at the costs and benefits. >> i would urge you to look at this study.

>> when we have done that we have not seen the damage you are indicating. >> a 340% increase in electricity prices in the midwest alone is happening. that to happen in the. if you can look at this study in relationship to propose rules. >> i would be great. >> the gentleman's time has expired. that concludes -- >> mr. chair by mike i would like to think the administrator for her presentation today and her dialogue but the committee on a particular number been instances where members have asked the witness questions and then didn't give her the opportunity to respond to that. i think we should extend the opportunity if she so chooses to respond to any of those situations today. i would also make the plea to the committee that we interact with these witnesses and a much

more courteous and substandard style so we can achieve what we are all hoping to achieve. >> i think most people were pretty courteous today and i do know that there are questions that were submitted that you said you would be getting back to the committee with answers. if there is some response you feel like you were not given an opportunity to make that would be happy to give you that opportunity now to respond. >> mr. chairman first of all you are always a gentleman and i appreciate that very much. the only issue that i didn't get a chance to talk about a little bit more specifically that i wish i would have is the issue that mr. griffiths pointed out on this 111-112 issue. the only thing i would have pointed out was that he was quoting from the clean air mercury rule and the reason we were defending that way as the conflict occurred in cammer but does not occur in 111d and art

clean power plan because that was the same source category this seems totally than being regulated under two different sections. they do not have that conflict here so we do not believe that issue is really going to impact the legal viability of the clean power plan but i thank you very much for raising this and for allowing me to testify before you today. >> i think one thing that is certain that courts are unpredictable and we never know precisely. >> we can all agree on that. >> we do thank you for being with us today and taking the time to discuss the fy16 budget and look forward to working with you as we move forward. that will conclude today's hearing. the record will remain open for 10 days and we do look forward to getting the responses that you have committed to giving back to the committee. thank you. the meeting is adjourned.

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

morehouse college professor david price discusses race, stereotypes and upper tail of black women in media and that house minority leader nancy pelosi leads a briefing with the congressional delegation recently visited cuba. later another chance to see epa administrator gina mccarthy's testimony about her department's 2016 budget requests. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell has agreed to introduce a homeland security funding bill without blocking the president's immigration

executive order. on the next "washington journal" we will get congressional reaction.

..

doctor rice is faculty representative of morehouse college board of trustees. they're he has helped to develop curriculums for the film studies major and minor and advises students across disciplines. he now serves as faculty to the program with a facial -- with a special focus on emeritus studies.

he graduated with a bachelor of arts and earned a doctorate personality study. with a masters degree in journalism he frequently applies his research to cultural criticism serving on the editorial advisory board for the journal of legal education and previously served on the editorial advisory board for the journal of popular culture. his writings and opinions have appeared in the "washington post" los angeles times, dallas morning news, huffington post five magazine among other media outlets. i personally met him several years ago and have the opportunity to enroll in his psychology of the

african-american experience class. this class changed my life. it is our hope this we will cause you to think about question and reflect the world around you. we introduce doctor david rice. [applause] >> thank you very much. good evening to all of you. i want to thank wellesley college for having me this evening. it is a big deal to be here. i want to thank doctor cameron and black women's ministry, a group responsible for bringing me here. you took some of what i was going to say. i want to thank alexis griffin because of the dedication that she had in the class and in making sure i was able to come here. she said almost immediately after she took my class that

she wanted me to come have a conversation with you all. she beat me up significantly around a great she earned in the class which was a strong grade. [laughter] nonetheless she made sure i was here. my knew dear friend, ms. harris who made sure i arrived safely and unscathed from the airport. and so we were all a bit anxious. thank you for saving my life on several different occasions. tonight i want to unpack a few ideas which is make it

matter. it is essential to my conversation with you is honesty intellectual, academic, and practical honesty. the exercise of democratic space and the comprehension and negotiation of narratives all presented and assembled hopefully in a way to make us more aware of how we can practically make black lives matter. as has been said, i am a research psychologist at base who looks at narratives in search of expressions and development. an asset driven individual that leads over into my research which means i am looking for the best in all of us. and i. i am also trained as a journalist. i like to tell stories. i hope you don't mind and

will and does me by telling stories that incorporate observed experiences of others and observable behaviors i have felt personally held personally in service of theory and thinking toward praxis that is reasonable in framing behaviors toward social justice and fundamental, democratic freedoms. okay. that is what is up. honestly 250 this came up 1st. honestly, make it matter i have maintained a history of being unconvinced when i see #anything. it probably shows my age. it can present as trite.

wife, physical freedom, equality. the commercialism of it all loses me. having a slogan for the revolution is not cool if they're is no they're there. i can be critical, but i do not swear myself a cynic. i took a picture of myself and a 30 after trayvon martin was murdered, but it felt a little cynic to me. it felt a little much for me kind of like when shane guevera t-shirts and medallions felt a little much.

everybody has these things, and there is a high degree of commercialism associated but is they're any they're they're? as an aside it should be noted that i never thought the leather or wooden african medallion was work could be played out and was pleased to see marchand lands donned a few in his forced appearances before the super bowl. that was awesome. so go seahawks. that is for my seven -year-old son. i told him i was coming to the new england area. [laughter] i think he is not incidentally put in hear.

we we will get into the theater of disobedience a little later when we talk about public narratives. my characterization of social media and its relationship to calls for social justice the black lives matter movement that emerged in 2012 after the state sanctioned killing of trayvon martin. at 1st it was like this well, of course they matter and of course there relegated margins on a regular. i know this. i am a black man who grew up in georgia. i was and am frequently understood as invisible object, immaterial. i understand that the struggle israel. so black lives matter.

i wanted more, someone to feel the pain four of growing into one with proverbial and literal crossers trained on them as it is for us. to me it was real. this system said that it was all good. that was doubly so. eric garner getting choked to death by the cops and michael brown. barbara and her four children mistakenly pulled over for a felony. they were pulled out at gunpoint. shot and killed, but we would much prefer to have him alive. so on and so on. in the face of these flashpoints because this is

not exhaustive representative of the death of extrajudicial killings that we experience, noting but with these flashpoints there seems to be the need for more than protests and admonishment. the admonishment of the communities to respect the law keeping in mind that this is a law and order that is killing us because we are black. i fashion the need for a different type of solidarity revolution i had spun in my minds eye. i remember the release i felt being they're after rodney king's verdict. perhaps irresponsible, but

to be honest, also honest is the distance was the result of looking through an academic, distant, patriarchal, entitled elitist. in defense of myself that is our -- that is okay. both perspectives are important. they are part and parcel of figuring's one way through the elegant do of white supremacy, hegemony, and patriarchy. also, we must include this baseline which in the slaves even the most well-meaning of us, but we cannot stay in the spaces west we render ourselves ineffective in working toward systemic and endemic change and rationalize ourselves. the contrast between burning

this joint down and the social media revolutionaries need to do something more real is illustrative of the concept of double consciousness outlined by wb debaucheries. and it has me recalling my initial cast of identity orchestration. identity orchestration was a theoretical framework that privileges multiple narrative identities toward the end of unity within the cell and with the self relative to society. this was originally done with young black men in an attempt to complicate us beyond stereotype and visibility. after this work hear and the work of many others here we are with an absurd need to

articulate that black lives matter. to be clear, black rage and resistance is a psychological response to terrorism and accuse spikes in the legal snuffing out a black lives within a pretense democracy. some of what i have written about is it must be noted the malaise of cognitive dissidents -- it must be noted the malaise of cognitive dissidents that envelops those who are respectable and even the peaceable is bound in a national why that we value black lives. the lies told the smiles and platitudes and a corpse. the protest the anger the rage that is the truth. we are told to muffle it

conflating there is never an excuse for violence against police or for those who would use this as a cover for vandalism and looting. misrepresenting the people in poor need for rebellious resistance against a society, government, city and a militarized police force. rage is the real, cathartic and common sense a hammer a tool that can be situated to effectively confront violent racism pushed on to the black committee a truth we are told to tuck into a perverted sense of democracy a psychological defense and truth telling and attachment to hegemonic norms is a psychological defense explaining black lives

matter is dismissive in a way that allows for alignment with the dominant group. to realize you could be arrested for breaking into your own home or killed for getting skittles and iced tea for asking for help after your car stalls out that is a lot to process a lot for me to realize that my son the 21 -year-old and a innocence i work with everyday i could be killed. that is a lot. protective thinking might have made to resist being in that group. but, no. i belong to an exceptional group in so much as we have

employed agency in the face of a society that hands and shoots us lead. so the rage and reticence are bound in truth telling. set aside the respectability we occupied by default of being in this room right now our dominant cultural go ticket we lose sight and touch with not who we are like but rather lose sight and touch with the fact that we are the brother or sister on the corner even if and when it be a virtual corner. it can present as ever so nuanced this distancing of ourselves.

communities that our parents have come from or grandparents. the willie wonka willy wonka that is the formal academy makes distancing even easier my contention is that privileging respectability is colluding with a singular oppressive culture which is opposite the type of education we need from and for those who comprise the 21st century democracy. my students health jolted me from the fog. body on the hot asphalt. intentional or not the statement made by police and the state that black parties are disposable and worth less. earlier this year i got live

on twitter. whatever. they did not say get live. so -- please let's have a conversation. i have had an account since before this year. problematic for a couple of reasons chiefly because they're is so much information and i never no quite what to say. all this pressure and i am often at a loss of words. that said, on the evening of november 24, 2014, i was drafting an exam to be taken the next day. that is the same day they're was an announcement a grand

jury would reveal its decision whether or not to indict the officer who shot mike brown. i compartmentalized my feelings. i knew to be applied and not be basic. i was pushed with a tweet from a student in class. how are you feeling as we await the verdict? focusing on now. exam relevant. this we will be there. following cops as they ripped on black rage but that was not enough. another student followed if this man is not indicted i feel as if our class needs to be spent thinking of what we can do to help ferguson. true that, i thought. i wrote, that should be an agenda item either way. we want to make sure we do that on what you learn not

feelings only. then the decision to not indict was announced and i had to go downstairs so that i could put some physicality on the ball i was watching on television and got a phone call from yet another student asking for direction as she and two other students and one from duke were holed up in the king's chapel trying to figure what to do to demonstrate solidarity. they took to heart the title of the exam which was make it matter, and they did with a significant 1st step they organized a walk of solidarity that went to the

cnn center in northwest atlanta. the many did not finish the exam on time and i had a heated discussion with them about that. nevertheless, they made me proud to be a part of there committee, showed and shared that we matter because we are hear and continue to employ activism these many months later. i love them so much. they continue to employ activism and a lot of it has to do with defining the problem, asking the right questions, and applying the appropriate action accordingly. and that has to do with research. it is interesting to look at the growth and commitment and it is worth noting they found the process of activism does not necessitate being on front street.

they see that the real work and struggle comes in the strategy behind and including the commercial for the struggle the grammys, the oscars sporting events diane's or what have you. this is the strength and articulation of patrice colors and alicia guises black lives matter which is more than a slogan or commercial. it is deeper than that. they explain the movement a unique contribution that goes beyond extrajudicial killings are black people of black people by police and vigilantes, beyond the narrow nationalism that can be present within some communities which merely call on black people to love black, live black and blight blithe -- by black

while our sisters take up roles in the background or not at all. affirming the lives of folks it centers those that have been marginalized within black liberation movements a tactic to build or to rebuild the black liberation movement. an ideological and political intervention in a world where black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted. it is more than just a #slogan. i hang my hat on all of that, but i want to focus a bit more on the ideological or ontological aspect which assumes action and the implicit call to make black lives matter. so i have been an admirer

for a really long time. and in my classes i often play a recording of her talking about the importance of utilizing democratic space amplifying and/or demonstrating your voice is of value. leveraging your democratic space and a realization and execution of one's agency is bound one to the other. agency is a social cognitive theory intentionally influencing wife circumstance. in this world -- or and this view personal influence is part of a causal structure. they are not simply onlookers to their own behavior.

they are contributors to life circumstances and not just products of them. the exercise of your democratic space is consequence of how you influence psychological functioning. so if we consider the folks in this room we can no they're is an amount of privilege we possess. we have the luxury of pulling and pushing and stretching ideas together in an effort to shift paradigms rather than only dealing with the real as it comes to us. it is a privilege to be at morehouse college, harvard mit, privilege to be a man within patriarchy to be white in a white supremacist tiered society a privilege rooted in a moral imperative

that says this privilege comes with a price responsibility to figure how to employ capitol agency democratic space and a helpful way to the whole society. how do you make who it is you are and assets associated how do you make that matter? practicing black lives matter. >> like using who you are to create a context within black folks can affix the liberties. the specific leans heavy into honest self-assessment and politicking to figure the best and most effective fit. this level of invested agency necessitates you as an instrument of social

justice are aware of the influences that inform how, when, where, and why you act towards self and others. so in short, narratives are stories that frame, guide command ground behavior vital to individual psychological unity. informing how it is we socially identify and behave they have a lot to do with implicit bias. we heard a lot about that when talking in the media. the idea is that an unconscious self takes cues from a stereotype and a storage reservoir of information about capacity or comportment based on race or culture. racism persists or exists even among those who claim that they are not racist.

we have been exposed to that before. music, television, movies, news, and other media are not at all trivial. they exist as powerful socializing agents because they bolster, refine, and disrupt personal narratives that can influence behavior. let's connect the dots. from the standpoint of one's personal psychology self narratives help to define who you are by creating psychological cohesion for unity. the life story model of unity and asserts that people living in modern societies provide lives with unity and purpose by constructing internalized and evolving narratives of the self. i was born in dc.

i went to school hear, married and partnered. i live hear work year providing a script that allows for my life click together comfortably. there is more sense making the result of, narratives common narratives shared with others. suggesting my story is valid this is how i maintain visibility within society. in her book they're is a great chapter that helps to bridge the psychology i am talking about more substantively. of course she says a lot of good stuff but i want to

enter with the distinguishing between narrative and stereotype. paraphrasing, within a 21st century want to be post- racial society will more easily dismiss stereotypes. narratives are different because they are a mechanism by which we identify and place ourselves within the world. telling our life story attaching ourselves to others. there is a cognitive processing that takes place. we make sense of th

a psychological dimension that functions to answer perplexing and complicated questions. the ones that we all ask. who we are as a person what does my life mean and how

do i fit into the adult world. we look at broad stories and can incorporate them into how we understand or experience people because of the storied nature by which we understand stats -- understand self. we often behave and engage based upon that understanding. our self reflection is important but how we incorporate broad narratives if black lives matter the explicit narratives we taken and help inform our context. our relationship to society and our fit within it.

so off-center they confound authentic selves and relationships. here is a little bit of an example. this is going to require some participation. anybody no what this is? this is scandal. what is it called? they're we go. we are excited but. i wanted to make sure we no. we celebrated grays anatomy and scandal and the other

show. the other one that was on for a 2nd. all right. anyway, so we want to respect and understand that. why is this dangerous? let me help you out. olivia pope reinforce the stereotype about how black women can be. i happen to watch scandal. in the last couple of episodes because i caught up over the weekend the season finale she is dancing around and is like i choose me.

anyway, i am going to have both of you. she is not choosing. she we will be partnered with both of these men. as the episodes progress she is kidnapped and everyone is looking for. he is going to do whatever he has to do. and so to escape -- i'm sorry. i have to do it. so what she says is look why don't we put me up for sale to the highest bidder

because we know that the president we will either pay for me or other people will. so the thing is i don't think that i am pulling too much thread. how comfortable we are as a society with having certain types of stories put out they're how it is those images in these stories influence how it is we feel about the world we live in. it is curious to look at. my relationship as a man how do i begin to relate to my partners? and that becomes an interesting question. this is one thing that is important to look at. here we go again.

anyone no about him? he is awesome. and the big hubbub was that he was not wanting to give interviews for the public. people have taken out for him. and then he came out and spoke publicly. i thought -- you can find this on youtube. the critic who talks. if we reduce them to narrative terms we can look at it that way and terms of there being owners and we will do what it is they say that they need to. if we talking that way, he points out this theater of

disobedience. he is skirting the line of what it is he needs to do and is able to maintain this unadulterated self. it becomes important to look at narratives and those ways what is being done within and across media. and he actually said that. you all are largely immaterial to me. the people i care about my family. that is important to look at important to look at. okay. first look at this one.

this guy right here. while. he is a notable artist and out of the just came. 2014 for still drive. the interesting thing, i no who he is because i am older he showed up. i no who he is. he called morehouse in advance of his album release and said he wanted to speak specifically to a psychology class. he talked to them about what success looks like. and we know he graduated from st. john's.

i think he is a magna cum laude graduate. very friendly but he talked to a group of students. this is what it looked like as people begin to tweet one another. but i think not only what he did in terms of coming in speaking, but if you listen to the album they're are good important narratives about what his life looks like. i love her. she is dope. the thing that is so important about her as being in terms of the history of civil rights, it's so

remarkable because of how it is she has been vocal. they were concerned about how lbj was presented. she said i was not interested in writing or developing a white savior peace. that is profound. she could just let it speak for herself. that kind of speaking truth to power is important. the lead actor david but you said it correctly. he is very powerful man they are partners in this. one of the things that he

said on martin luther king day. he was brought up to speak and gave a powerful speech. part of it that i honed in on was he said we are not used to having black people at the center of their own narratives and telling about themselves and being unapologetic. that becomes something that is important for us to be able to look at. dear white people good movie. the reason i thought it was so powerful is because it

speaks directly to why and how it is black lives matter, the intersection analogy presented is profoundly important and those types of narratives becomes vital to amplify. i have a couple more. they're you go. this is on a foldout. celebrating its 20th year anniversary last year. if you look at a documentary about the making of the film and the impact of it the thing that impressed me was that he talks about being intelligent, some of the things he faced along the way but they start talking

about all of the folks in the picture and a large number of them that are either dead or in jail this can be viewed as typical pathology, but to recast that he talked about how folks in this picture did not necessarily get along that well. for the sake of what they were trying to do they set there together with one another. that is a powerful commentary on community. he's only successful because of his mother his father and his brother. that kind of relationship that type of interrelatedness to communities and making sure that you amplify is so important to recognize and look at when we we're validating black lives.

just an example, one of many you guys no who this is. she just did some big acting debut. she came and engaged in talks. and when ferguson popped off we were talking to her, and she was saying how it would be an authentic for it to cut a record looking at ferguson for a typical way. she was looking at her personal agency. and in columbus circle she was part of a hug station. she gave hugs to people needed a hug. seemingly insignificant but profound. she said she got really sick afterwards.

i think that those types of stories, narratives become important. trials of mohammed ali is another film i suggest you see. powerful. a hero to me and to many folks. the interesting thing is it shows the political stand he took and the repercussions which we are able to romanticize. the more important thing is it looks at his ex-wife his brother, folks around him and reinforces what it looks like to be a part of a committee. so often we look at this idea of rugged individualism that is not how it plays and i think these narratives become profoundly important

because they demonstrate how they interact one with another. let's see. this is from saturday night live a couple of weeks ago. one of the things i dig about this story is why he did it. so he was shook when he heard there was a non- indictment and ferguson and said that the only way that he really knew how to do something or speak out was through music. how he characterizes the album after 14 years of not having put in our mouth. he says it's not necessarily black people. we can all be black the science deliver salvation

if we understand and invest in community. it was an outline of a peace that he did. is they're anybody else? i we will show that a 2nd. i went all the way back. one of the folks i really want to talk about is a gentleman by the name of michael render. he goes by the stage name of killer mike. so he actually i met him and airport.

i was moved by his most recent incarnation as a part of a group called run the jewels. a great album. they're getting on the airplane together, and i tweeted him. you need to come to the department of psychology. he said, when do i do this. we have been going back-and-forth. not trying to stock you. you have to be delicate. i went back and forth with. we developed a way for him to come and teach this class i teach now. he is committed to three lectures. he gave his 1st one yesterday. he we will come in and out of the class.

i cannot say enough about him because of how invested he is in community and charged the students to make sure they were not interlopers. the responsibility he said that they needed to assume. and he is doing this for peanuts. i look forward to more work with them. those are examples of my personal interaction and/or commentary. this is a picture that is powerful to me. black men, black boys psychology of modern media. they wanted to take this picture as a part of a final project. this thing right here what

they used to do was have this poster that had all these different flavors some in uniform some in a backpack but they're was a diversity. i put this up. we need to know what it is your narrative looks like. the popular narratives are easy to look at but what is it that your narrative looks like and how is it important for you to put it as center? he have got to have the courage and confidence to be able to do that to assume that your life matters in such a way that is demonstrative to others about how it is they can value and be a part of democracy.

as i explained and inferred, we understand self and identity. because of the framing capacity it is a significant artery by which definition is achieved. we have to be aware that is part of leveraging presentations about who we really are. if we are to make it matter we look at who we are and whatever discipline or position and recognize and amplify the assets that are core to whom who we are and what our humanity is. we help to rewrite master narratives. we center within a democracy and demand accountability for humanity. this is one way to make it

matter. individual responsibilities and the struggle for paradigm shifting. indeed because of you and we have a lot of work ahead of us to ensure that we make it matter which includes honesty and fully considering narratives that have the capacity to be destructive or to redefine black people with whole and healthy identities. so finally our lives matter. folks have started to co-op. of course it is crucial to focus on the urgency of attending to black lives. in doing this we developed

the path and the structure to extend beyond this finite space to the realization of a true american democracy. [applause] so i am happy to engage any pushback, to try and answer questions. i look at this as a collaborative effort. so i welcome a critique and pushback. any questions or comments. please. it was perfect? >> thank you for your lecture. i was wondering what major

influence do you see in incorporating narratives? how do you think the coverage would have changed if more narratives were included in events like ferguson. >> the more that you incorporate authentically who and how black people are the less you have to articulate. again, that becomes a profound an important statement. it demonstrates that they're is some disconnect between new line you and how it is black people are. so the more that we have those narratives whether they be fiction or

authentic, the less we have to assert ourselves -- it is a shame we have to say black lives matter but it persists as this kind of -- ralph ellison talks about invisibility. it is not based upon me. most easily we can say stereotypes, but is based on the narratives put forth about us. thank you for the question. >> thank you for your lecture. i find it interesting when we talk about giving different narratives about what it means to be black or african-american and i

wonder if it is our responsibility. is it not ridiculous to think that we all aren't a model if we are one type of people? >> asked me the question. >> do you think it is ridiculous that we have to present these different narratives of the perceived to have different backgrounds? >> i think that's ridiculous we should not have to have the responsibility. everyone does not necessarily have to assume the responsibility. what i charge you with his i think you have. so to whom much is given much is expected. you have this tremendous privilege and it comes --

it becomes important to recognize. we must exercise it responsibly. understanding your because my grandfather -- i won't go into that story. i stand here because of the folks who went before me. because of the sacrifices they made, the things they said, the way they position their lives so that i could be here my job is not just to get an education and money and live the fiction that is the american dream but to help liberate others. and so i see the charge as largely similar.

this is an for the basic experience of being smart but how is it you will use the education you have and how is it you apply it in a way that makes the world better for women lgb q transgender folks, place yourself in your agency or democracy and make the world better. it sounds often times so grandiose, but it really is not. we have a responsibility to be hear and say something. did that make sense? >> it does. >> other questions or comments? >> thank you for being here.

i was a little confused. could you explain? >> i can. i was saying, i was talking about having some distance. it seemed like a lot of commercial. it seemed all beef and no substance a lot of #and diane's and these kinds of performances but what was undergirding it? this movement. the creators say it is not a moment but a movement. we have to figure out how we attach ourselves to it. and then progress and perform accordingly. ..