aware of any house member running for president. you can ask senator mcconnell. >> state and local officials along with the general public garthed to pay respect to beau biden. the son of vice president joe biden. the former delaware attorney general and iraq war veteran died surveillance transparency act of brain cancer. we will show you some of the ceremony later tonight. the funeral takes place saturday in wilmington. the fda testifies about labelling guidelines set to take affect later this year. and a look at the federal health

care bill and subsidies. >> our two-day event will be senior speaker for the president and margaret dean on the last days of american space flight. our festival coverage is followed by a tour of "the new york times" book review at 7:30. on sunday at noon we continue our live coverage of the book festival with our three hour in-depth program. live from the lit fest stage we will take your phone calls and questions from the audience.

and the nasa film the four days of gemini 4, the space flight and first american to walk in space. and then a world war ii paragrapher capturing the world experience and stories behind the images. and then on american artifacts we visit with lemar alexander.

>> congress woman rogers and sanchez introduces legislation that would exempt more non-restaurant retail establishments from having to comply. joe pitts of pennsylvania chairs the subcommittee hearing on health. >> gentlemen take your seats and we will get started here. the subcommittee comes to order and the chair will recognize for statement. we will examine the costly burdening regulations regarding menu labeling requirements as proposed by the administration

and scheduled to be implemented by december 1 2015. the subject of the hearing, hr 2017, the common sense nutrition disclosure act is sponsored by our subcommittee colleague and republican conference chair kathy mcmorris rogers and loretta sanchez. the legislation helps small businesses owners, and consumers who want easy access to accurate accurate. it will be subject to a process to avoid violation and possible criminal prosecution. hr 2017 seeks to improve the clarify the final rule made by the food and drug administration implementing the menu labeling

requirements of section 4205 of the affordable care act. the fda issued a nearly 400 page final rule establishing a one-size-fits-all national nutrition disclosure requirement for restaurants and similar retail food establishments. the concern is the smaller businesses. small business that are not chain restaurants but indeed subject to the rule will face an increase in regulatory compliance cost. consumers will see higher food

cost perhaps fewer choices. some retailers may find it more of an advantage to stop selling restaurant-type food all together. instead of purchasing fresh sandwich sandwich sandwiches consumer may have to purchase pre-packaged sandwiches. fixing the burden could benefit thousands of organizations that would otherwise be burden with regulations that will be costly and hurt job creation. according to the office of management and budget the fda labeling proposal would be the third most burdensome proposal in 2015. 14, 536 180 hours to comply. the object of the legislation is to provide clarity, flexibility

and certainty for these companies while insuring consumers have access to the information they need to make to inform nutritional decisions. i give the rest of my time the my partner. >> i represent the house of delegates and burges many decades ago. he has been there since 2011. in his legislateive capacity he is on the labor department and public safety. he is a member of the legislative commission and serves on the board of directors for the virginia public safety organization. he is here not in the roll as a

member of the delegates but his role of a food store that is known as the food city super market chain. and as you might gather from the name they do business in kentucky, virginia and tennessee. and he is here to talk about menu labeling as it impacts the grocery business. but probably most importantly i should not leave out is israel also attended a fine institution of higher learning when he went to college at emery and henry college which is where i went. so it is great you let me introduce by friend to the committee. >> yield for the opening statement. >> today we are examining legislation that will roll back a policy that is designed to give people information to calorie information when ordering food. congress man dateded the

nutrition information be included on package food more than 20 years ago providing the public with calorie information allowing people to make informed choices. the law focused on expanding access and ending the worst abuses of the insurance industry and provisions to promote prevention measures and general wellness. we know consumers make better health decisions when they are empowered with information. 45 4205 of the afford care act.

the legislation we are considering today may weaken this important tool. when enacted the provision built off the thrust of the more than dozen state and local policies. hr 2017 could undermine the compromise diversity. as written, it had significant financial and public health burdens on consumers and taxpayer funded budgets.

it would create an uneven playing field for competition among the businesses. i appreciate the concerns raised by stake holders represented today with menu labeling requirements. i don't support the legislation but i am sympathetic to the concerns and timing implementation and enforcement. due to lack of guidance or undering questions on the agency's rule i ask the fda to provide a year of additional time for food establishments to comply. the fda should extend the implementation period to review and address the issues and comply with the important requirement. thank you for calling the hearing and when considering the legislation we must always keep the priority of transforming our broken health care system into a true health care system in mind.

>> thank you, gentlemen. recognize the chair of the full committee mr. upton for five minutes. >> today we will discuss bipartisan legislation that seeks to provide balance to the proposed menu labeling. we have been spear headed by kathy mcmorris rogers. good friend of the leadership and active committee member. the bill seeks for clarity and to allevate the burdensome the menu rule placed on businesses across the country. take my big-based country dominos. they have 34 million different potential menu combinations.

91 percent of orders are placed online. it would cost each store an average of nearly $5,000 a year and it would not address the goal of informing consumers. this places a burden on businesses all across the country. restaurants and similar food establishments have until december 1st of this year to comply with the foutstanding

questions and issues. complying with the final rule takes time and resources and the fda made it harder by failing to provide more clarity. businesses need to know how to complay and plan and put things in place and fda's failure to provide clarity made it impossible. today we will hear from the stakeholders and i hope we can find solutions. i want to yield by time the the sponsor of the bill. >> thank you. i would like to thank chairman pitts and upton and sanchez for co-leading this bill. our efforts to clarify.

this is simple. clarify the bill and this is why my staff and i met with other stake stakeholders 20 times and asked how we can improve the legislation. something we heard again and again was the 50 percent revenue trigger for what defines a restaurant is not fair. i would like to ask consent to insert a letter from the national restaurant association that discusses the 50 percent revenue exception in hr 2017 is concerning. >> without objection so order. >> i would like to say these concerns have been heard. and i intend to fully address them as we move to committee mark up. i hope we can discuss the merits of this legislation beyond one

point. like many other regulations, good intentions don't at add up to practical policy. this regulations tries the cookie cutter approach. i don't think this is workable or affordable. estimates state it will cost american businesses more than a billion to comply and 500 thousand hours of paperwork. one of the most expensive regulations ever. requiring domino's to post every potential topping combination, more than 34 million outcomes when 90 percent of their orders take place over the phone or internet doesn't make sense. this is providing access to calorie information in a practical and flexible manner by clarifying not significantly

altering this complicated regulation. >> i would like to recognize the ranking member. >> i would like to ask for consent to put in the letter addressed to you and mr. green. >> without objection. >> this can play a role against obeseity and diabetes related disease. 78 million adults and 13 million children are affected by obesity and it is a serious public cost

with stroke heart disease and type ii diabetes. we know overeating calories is one of the primary causes of obesity. thanks to the labeling and education act, in which i was a co-sponsor, it has been available on grocery stores for years but not when eating out. this is a gap considering american families are eating out twice as much in the past and spent half of their eating dollars outside of the home.

the availability of this information helps consumers make choices about the food they are purchasing for themselves or families. this isn't a new idea. these efforts with consumer access to information led the restaurant to work closely with congress to draft a strong policy that will provide to consistent requirements for restaurants and retail food establishments and clear information. fda issued final regulations implementing the labeling requirements in december of last year. this was challenging issue for the agency and i want to acknowledge -- i want to thank fda for following the intent of

the law and taking into consideration the concerns raised in the more than a thousand comments received. we hear from witnesses today that there are areas of the final rule where additional guidance might be warrants like how to address prepared food items in various parts of the and other things. i agree further clarification is needed particularly for establishments without prior labelling experience like grocery stores or convenience store. fda minimized to reduce the cautioncost of burden and worked to address the areas of concern. i have no reason to believe why the agency won't continue to work with stake holders. we know the fda is working on a guidance document to clarify the outstanding issues we will hear about today. it is these reasons i don't support hr 2017 and support

providing covered establishments additional time to complay with the final labelling rule. i thank the witnesses for the work on the issue and look forward to hearing about the legislation. i yield the rest of my time. >> i thank the ranking member for yielding time and thank the witnesses for being here. we agree the rising obeseity rates are a concern and access to nutrition information is an important step in addressing this issue. the affordable care act requires nutrition labelling at restaurants and other places people purchase food and the fda has been working to implement this requirement in a reasonable way and provide guidance to stake holders to have concerns about their ability to comply. however, to the extent additional guidance is not

supplied for the december 1 st deadline additional time is warranted. i look forward to working with stake hold stake stake stake stakeholders to make sure it benefits consumers without over imposeing requirements on businesses. >> thanks. that concludes the opening statements. any member's written opening statement is made part of the record. when you see a request you would like to submit the following document for the record. the statement for the food and marketing institute. without objection so order we have one panel before us today. we have sonia hubbard who is

here on behalf of the national association of convenience store. and mr. israel quinn is here director of strategic initiatives on behalf of the national grocers association. and third is lynn del of domino's on behalf of the american pizza community. next karen rascof chief communication officer for duncan brands. and margaret wooten director of the policy center for science in the public interest. thank you each for coming today. you will be given five minutes to summarize your written testimony and it will be entered into the record. there is a series of lights on

your desk. when it hits red i will ask you to conclude. i have to run a tight gavel because we are scheduled for a vote. we will go as long as we can and hope to get through the member's question. ms. hubbard you are recognized for five minutes. >> chairman ranking member green, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. my name is sonia hubbard and i am the ceo of easy mart. we own and operate 300 convenience stores in texas, oklahoma arkansas and louisiana all of which offer foods subject to the fda's current menu regulations. i am testifying on behalf of the national association of convenience stores. 60 percent of members operate single hp stores and many do

business under the name of a major company or franchise of larger businesses covered by the menu requirements subject of the hearing today. the convenience store industry strongly sports hr 2017 the common sense nutrition disclosure act and the efforts to provide customers and consumers with nutrition information they want and need. indeed most of the food sold in the convenience store is pre-packaged as has been discussed and provides this information already. if congress enacts hr 2017 consumers receive more nutrition information than today and receive it in a way that is more useful. the food operations of the convenience store is different than that of chain restaurants yet the fda's final ruling was geared toward the chain restaurant model. many chain restaurants sell the same food prepared in the same way and displayed in the same menu at all locations.

that is not true for the convenience store. convenience stores sell different foods based on the locations and market demands and even stores that do sell the same items may offer them in different ways. as easy mart we have different foods in different location which in return requires different menus. even when different stores have the same foods like a breakfast sandwich they might have a different calorie content because the suppliers are different. easy mart deals with 50 food supplier and it is difficult to get the nutrition information we need from them. we expect some will not get us the information by the december 1st deadline and there is not much we can do about it. nothing in the law or regulations require the supplyier suppliers to get us the information we need. the food we offer changes frequently. at any time time we may be

testing 15-20 new products and some of these will become long-term and others may only be temporarily only adding to the complexities and difficulty of complying. we want to provide customers with useful information and the hr 2017 doesn't roll back the regulations but instead give us the flexibility do to this. legislation allowed us to do one menu board in the location rather than a scattering of confusing signs throughout the store that repeat the same information. a basic wall of words. it will allow us more flexibility to display calories and ranges and averages rather than trying to come up with exact calorie counts. the bill gives us more flexibility for foods we are testing. and in addition the bill would be helpful in curbing the high punitive name of nature of the

enforcement. it should not be a felony if the store doesn't prepare the food the same way as another store on the same day if a clerk makes a mistake. we need recognition of the good faith efforts to comply and nothing should be serious enough to charge a store manager with a felony. finally, we need more time to comply once the regulations are issued. we must analyze each location differently and we need time to work with suppliers. the bottom line is hr 2017 is good sensible legislation that will improve fda's rules by helping businesses actually comply and that will mean more good useful information to consumeers. i thank you again. >> the chair recognizes mr.

o'quinn. >> good morning rankchairman, ranking members and subcommittee members. our company offers 105 grocery stores in kentucky, virginia and tennessee and we are an esop company. we are members of the food marketing institute and nash national grocers association. i am here representing a lot of grocers. we appreciate the work you are doing to consider the impact of the fda's labeling on menu and the need for the common sense disclosure act also known as the hr 2017. more than 90 percent of the foods in our grocery store have calorie information and the full panel listing fat sugar, sodium and other contents. many of the remaining items we source from the store.

if a fruit or vegetable is ripe in the produce department, we bring it to the bakery and deli department and cut it up and put it in the salad bar. many of the bakery and deli prepare things that might be specific to a store or regional stores. we have a team of quality assurance that is based on safety and that is providing labeling ingredient labeling, bio terrorism and recall notifications. we also have our own safety and quality standards that go well beyond these laws. i can promise you the last thing we want is someone to get sick from the food in our grocery stores. you might how any of this is related to what we talk about today. these are areas that are a priority of the super market industry specifically and where we devote time and resources.

they are regulations not applied to chain restaurants. when the fda takes a chain restaurant menu labeling law and stretches to out to grocery stores on top of the other food safety and nutrition laws it should not surprise anyone that the glove doesn't fit. we are committed to aiding our customers in making healthy choices and i will highlight three things we are doing. we along with other grocers have a healthy initiative department that helps associates and customers make more informed decisions about healthy eating. we didn't have to do it but it is the right thing to do. we invested significant resources in the scoring system. a system that gives a 0-100 score on the shelf tag. we are involved in a farm initiative that used to be tobacco farmers and now are growing the freshest fruit you

can find. we went from purchasing $750,000 in product to nearly $6 million last year alone. we are able to offer premium produce at a very affordable price and you can known the specific farm from which that product came. we were doing locally grown a long time before it was cool. you may or nay not be aware that grocery stores operate on a profit margin at 1 percentment. when you operate on a razor thin profit margin you don't have money to spend things that bring little to no value. the cost is passed on to the consumer and consumers can't afford to be paying more and getting very little in return for those investments. our industry asked a lot of questions and attempted a lot of meetings with the fda throughout the process and we have had very few meetings and answers.

we believe hr 2017 is a huge step in the right direction. we thank the panel for putting the bill in and thank you for your time and attention. >> the chair now recognizes ms. ledel. >> i am honored to have the privilege to speak on behalf of the 20,000 pizzareas that make up the coalition and for 900 domino's small business owners. our request are simple modern practical solutions that will inform consumers in a better way and relieve the cost burden from small business. i believe you will find them more than reasonable. there are 34 million ways to make pizza based on the crust, sauce and topping. pizza hut published they have

two billion. so you cannot fit all of the iterations of a pizza on a typical board like you can burgers. fda understood and said just put ranges. but for a pie that is a range of up to 2,000 calories and many for a slice as well. we think they should be more precise so customers know what they are eating. our solution is to put them where they go: online. half of domino's, pizza hut and papa johns orders come from online. the rest of the customers who don't order online pick up the phone to order. this means very few people our figures show less than ten percent, walk into a store and look at a board and order in that way. think about your own ordering habits. to illustrate with a specific

example, we spent a day in a domino's store in michigan 91 percent of orders were placed online or by phone and 7 percent in store and not 2 percent of customers even used the menu board to place an order. it makes no sense to retrofit this information on a menu board. the second thing is the expense imposed on business. most people think of domino's or papa johns as big business. but half of owners only own one store and our average is five stores per franchise person. this is the common model for pizza. why make the small, local business people who live, work and hire in your district pay thousands a year for something nah no body uses. there are other were --

provisions of the final rules that define memories broadly forcing businesses to calorie label anything a customer could order from. the primary righting of the restaurant is the original description but i think primary means first and for most not all. in our business we send advertisers out and posters out in stores and they are not intended as menus and can't be considered primary. this isn't unique to pizza. it spans across many restaurant types. fda claims to have recognized this point but the definitions they laid out in the final rules don't separate. the final fda regulations require you have to certify at the corporate and individual store levels you have listed all of the correct calories and you could face criminal penalties should you do this wrong. what about class-action lawsuits

lawsuits? if a teenage pizza maker is heavy with cheese and doesn't match the requirement? i hope that we can all agree that putting too many topping on a pizza shouldn't result in crippling fines and threats of jail time. even with the fixes we proposed the job of calorie label is not easy about we think it is worth it. people have a right to know what they are eating which is why have been disclosing calorie information for 14 years. but to get ready systems will need to be put in place so we asked for more time to get it done. let me be clear. in no way is a delay in the rule a solution. we must have a legislative fix. we are not seeking an exemption.

we want to comply. we ask you to support and vote for hr 2017 for the sake of the important voters. chairman pitts and members of the subcommittee thank you for listen to me. and thank you for your leadership on this issue. >> thank you. now recognizes ms. rascof for five minutes. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. i serve the chief communication officer for duncan brands. they are the parent company of two of america's most beloved brands. duncan donuts and baskin robins. both are a hundred percent franchise and duncan included more than 10 500 in the united states alone and the baskin rob

robin owners own an average of one restaurant and duncan donuts own about six. they provide national uniform menu labeling for many years and continue to be a national standard for providing nutrition information on all restaurant type foods is critical. over the past several years, duncan brands and others have worked with congress and the administration to help reform what had previously been a complex, highly localized approach to menu labeling. before the federal solution, laws were being passed on a state-by-state, city-by-city bases and counties were competing in some cases. competing state and local menu labeling laws were difficult and disruptive for businesses as well as looking in the industry.

this is an important step. it has been long overdue and remains critically important. we acknowledge today's food service industry and large and complex. we appreciate fda's commitment to working with stakeholders. we believe that fda followed the intent of the law and did so in a manner to minimize cost and burden burden. i can assure you the fad has worked to address most of the significant and potential costly issues to us.

likewise the knewnew laws are intended to benefit consumers and benefits by pressing on all establishment establishments that serve restaurant type food. this includes not only restaurant chains but other service food retailers with 20 or more locations including convenience stores grocery stores and others. hr 2017 includes a provision that imposes a percentage revenue threshold exempting grocery and convenience stores from having to label their food. we disagree with this. the benefits of nutrition labeling are important no matter the size of the menu or percentage of sales from food. i hope congress will maintain the labeling. we welcome the competition and

believe that restaurant food and grocery stores should be held to the same standards restaurants sell. this is about the type of food being sold not the business format. there have been many concerns expressed in regard to the cost of information and communicating that. to be clear, the regulations state that food service operators only use reasonable means and lab testing is not required. this is a business decision not a legislative one. from high text to low text there are many communication options

available to retailers. we don't support the language in hr 2017 that clarify this point. and to be clear we do not believe any additional legislation is necessary. all clarifying information can be handled through fda guideanceguidance. >> dr. wooten is now recognized. >> i am margaret wooten the director of policy at the center for finance in the public interest. i appreciate the opportunity to share the consumer view this morning. we support the senate beep bipartisan request to the fda to give the industry more time to comply with menu labelling but strongly oppose hr 2017. the common sense nutrition disclosure act doesn't support common sense or disclosure.

common sense is to side with the american people who are affected at risk of obesity verses domin domino's who is in need. at a time when two thirds of americans are overweight or obese half of our dollars are spent on away from home food and studies link eating out to obesity. common sense suggest that congress support american's ability to make educates choseices from the wides range. i admire the guts of my fellow witnesses. it is clever to focus on the fixes hr 17 provides them while failing to mention the bill would exempt them from providing calorie information for their prepared foods. this bill most definitely would not make it easier for people to access meaningful easily

accessible nutrition information. that is why over a 115 health experts and organizations support this bill. supermarks say they are willing to give customers what they want. but fail to mention 80 percent of americans want supermarkets to provide calorie information for food like fried chicken soups and more nan a quarter want it for the hot dogs and natchoes and other items sold at convenience stores. how are people supposed to make informed changes with the nutrition information is withheld from them? super market and convenience stores cost about the labeling reminds me of the concerns which i was first working on menu

labeling software. it is inexpensive and many supermarket supermarkets have dieticians on staff who can conduct the calorie analysis and restaurants show the labeling is affordable and feasible in the dozens of jurisdictions where it is in affect. it is not genuine for grocery stores to promote themselves to customers as alternatives to restaurants but at the same time lobby how different they are. supermarket bakeries buffets and soup bars are like those in restaurants. 7-eleven and others are among the hundred top food service establishments in the country and some belong to the national restaurant association. it is particularly hard to

understand why pizza restaurants need a special exemption from listing calories on in-store menu boards. many people order by phone or computer similarly many do not enter fast food restaurants and order instead through the drive-threw drive-threw. likewise pizza restaurants shouldn't not deny nutrition information to their in-store customers. and pizza is a real problem in american's diet. it is the fifth largest source of calories and the second biggest source of saturated fat and the third biggest source of sodium. if any restaurant needs nutrition labeling it is pizza restaurants. the variability of pizza with different crust and toppings is

no different than the variability of subway sandwiches with different meats breads and spreads or icesundees. hr 2017 provision to allow the restaurants and other food establishments to label only a fraction of the menu is a recipe for confusion and be deceptive for consumers and make it difficult to order. i urge the committee to oppose hr 17. your voter's health depends on it. >> as it was said you are making me hungry. thank you for the testimony. we will now begin questioning

and i will recognize myself for five minutes for that purpose. with the implementation date of december 1, less than six months, there is a lot of outstanding questions for the fda. considering the short amount of time for compliance and lack of guidance from the fda, would you all agree there should be a delay at least for impmentation. yes or no down the line >> yes, sir. >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> we are willing to agree to a delay. >> that is reasonable. >> ms. hubbard what are the biggest issues your businesses are facing and what do you anticipate the cost is going to be for implementing the

regerationsreg regulation regulations? >> i think the biggest challenge is the diversity in the industry and our own stores. we are 45 years old and acquired a lot of stores with different products. if you will envision one store with the food service on this end offering a fountain as a bundle piece and the dispenser is down here and the coffee here and hot dog and pastry case. we have to have the posting of the calorie counts adjacent and it will be depicted throughout the store. it would be a wall of words for the consumer to read and find the calorie content. if someone were to move that piece that displays the calorie count is this a felony?

we are trying to implement. >> what are the biggest issues you are facing with this? >> i think they come in how you label the products in the grocery store. if you take a salad bar area for instance we looked at multiple ways to do this. if you put something on the spoon itself and perhaps by ten year old cousins come through and moves the spoons around, you are subject to fda penalties. if you label everything on the sneeze card and someone comes through and cleans that the alcohol based cleaner makes one fall off and it will be conhard to

be consistent every single day. >> would you respond to the issues? >> i think the biggest head scratching is why we would put unclear range information on a menu board for those very few people would be able to read it. we think maybe a booklet on the counter top or maybe an ipad. but putting ranges on a static menu board that will not help consumers make a good decision seems to not make sense to us. that is the one issue. and secondally even though we are a big company with revenue as pointed out, we are small

business people. half of the guys only own one store. we will make them pay for something that people are not looking at that is just beyond a challenge. it makes no sense at all. >> ms. hubbard, you said you would support a delay. if congress or the fda uni unilaterally delay the compliance for a year would that solve the problem or are we back delaying the regulations again? should hr 2017 be put on a fast track to the whitehouse? >> i absolutely don't think a delay solves the problems. we have the issues on how we communicate this to the consumer if the intent is to provide useful information to make choices don't we need to do that in some concise way they can find it? i think we have all walked into

restaurants and been overwhelmed by the menu board. can you imagine that 50 times worse with the configeration of the sodas and such. >> my time expired. i recognize the ranking member for five minutes of questions. >> thank you mr. chairman. i want to remind the panel this act passed in 2010 has taken the fda a while to do it. here we are five years later and still have a problem with obesity in the country. some of the suggestions in here we are not going to stop people from eating what they want to. i am going to go to domino's or duncan or get enchiladas in texas. but we want people who are concerned about their obesity, children's obesity, parents obesity and ultimately into

diabetes. that is why it was part of the affordable care act. i would like to see what we can do to make it workable. we have folks who are complying with it in convenience stores but we still need to make sure the consumers have that information. and i don't know if a booklet on a counter is the best way because fast food stores are meant to be fast food. no one is going to look through the booklet waiting for a hamburger. i want to thank duncan donuts and the restaurant industry for your work on the final law and leadership. consistency in labeling requirements is critical for the industry and consumers to insure the presentation of calorie information is easily understood regardless of where they live or dine. much of the discussion on this issue has been focused on types of restaurant retail restaurant food restaurants

should be covered by the menu labeling requirements. it seems to me the focus should be on types of food that should be covered and especially on consumer demand for ready to eat and prepared food continues to grow. in your testimony you note similarity between supermarkets and restaurants. we heard from supermarkets cost of compliance would be up to a billion due to the items. i have not heard that concern from restaurants. can you explain what the cost of compliance with fda's final menu labeling rule would be for the duncan brand restaurant. >> we spent the last year looking at this to insure we were able to comply with this by the end of this year. we too have a very complex business. i mean if you look at the different ways you can order coffee, 15,000 different ways,

sandwiches 3,000 way and ice cream 80,000 different ways. we understand this is a complex business but we have been able to figure out a way to do this. the cost of this is going to be baskin robins it is about $400 per restaurant and a third of the duncan donut restaurants have digital boards and the cost is label the drive-thru and that is about $600-$700 and without a digital board it is about $1,000. there is a multitude of in expensive ways people can label whatever business format they have. >> dr. wooten there is a lot of talk on the scope and definition of similar retail food establishments. the intent of the law wasn't to confine to restaurants but rather than apply broadly to

entities that sell food to consumers. this is a decision based largely on an increasing trend of items prepared outside of the home. that has been going on for a couple decades with my children and grandchildren. as someone who were involved in the drafting of the original legislation is it clear the law was intended to broadly cover restaurant-type food? >> absolutely. when the law was written it included restaurants and other food service establishments and that was meant to cover the broad range of food service establishments that provide prepared foods. i remember the supermarket industry trying to get an amendment to strike that part of the law and make it clear they were excluded and not successful in that effort. they knew they were going to be included and they should have been preparing for this and getting ready as the restaurant industry has been. >> dr. wooten can you discuss

what you think the impact from having certain food establishments exempted? >> not having nutrition information in supermarkets and convenience stores limits people's access to information. they are increasingly competing with restaurants and people are just stopping off at the grocery store and buying fried chicken or meat loaf with sides just like they do at restaurants. more and more people are turning to supermarkets for prepared foods like they do for care carry out. and many people order over the phone at pizza restaurants but those who walk in want the information. it is from where the consumer is ordering that matters and where they need the information. the law doesn't require a pizza chain to put up a menu board if they don't think enough people are going into the board they feel they need to have a men

aboard they don't have thooo have one. but if they feel enough are coming in and putting up the board with the prices and pizza next to the board they need the print the calorie information. ... i really struggle with this.

this is the perfect example of a nanny state. of a national government telling individual citizens, and saying, what is best for them. and directing and pushing private sector individuals to push people to consume things that they feel -- it is. and it's unfortunate but we are here so we have some issues to address, and i was here when we passed the healthcare law. all we passed was the senate version of a bill. we didn't -- obamacare that passed healthcare law was senate bill. that we passed on the floor without any additional debate or oversight for a year and a half later.

so the -- i want to go to miss hubbard. here's an example. i have sons that i love very much. so they go and they get a drink at one of the convenience stores they have personally titled a scoured a. i'm not sure what is in this thing. i think it's sprite, coke, powerade they mix themselves. you can't label for that, can you? >> no, sir. that's one of the complexities of the bill, and of that self-service and also would entail we list the calorie count for the items in cups without ice. i would also bet your sobs also put ice in their cups so even

what we provide them isn't going to be accurate if. >> how many kind of items just in one of your locations would have multiple concerns about getting the right calorie count and if you didn't, and if you were held accountable by, i guess, federal law enforcement, i guess we'll have federal law enforcement police going into tree tail store -- into retail stores checking the menu labeling and ensuring adequate calories are posted in multiple combinations? >> virtually everything we serve would have some sort of the ability to -- all of the drinks, obviously, have a wide variety of calorie count combinations. some of that self-service by the consumer. on this prepared items even, if i have a clerk feeling generous that day and -- o strap an extra

slice of cheese on there they don't cut the pizzas in eight eighths. all of those things -- and you point out the obvious concern. this is a felon now and how do i protect -- >> a felony. >> mr. quinn also a delegate, i guess that's what you call in virginia part of this debate early during the healthcare law was the same debate we have here in energy and commerce, is that there was a concern that if we don't have a -- this is not a national bill there would be maybe local community movements or county movements or even states would then disrupt national chains, so, some of the national chains say save us from ourselves or save us from the different parts of the country who may do individual referendums and-- can you

speak to that, from both positions that you -- as a representative, not representing the state but just can you address that? >> yes sir. i think that we certainly have seen states and individuals localities across the country adopting menu labeling laws and i think that certainly becomes very difficult for single store operators or even a medium size grocery chain like we are to comply with this patchwork of regulation. none of those have been in our area but have been in plenty of our friends' areas and so now you're saying that the fda is going to come in with a more overarching rule spend force it across the done entire country. then you have the federal rule that would supersede the state laws but all they have to do is mimic the exact same regulation at the local level and then all of a sudden it doesn't supersede, it's more or less exactly the same. so you can have fda in your

store one day saying this is not going to work, you're outside of your five calorie variance and you're in big trouble. you could also have someone from a town or a city or county coming in and saying the exact same thing if they set up a law that does not supersede the federal law. so you'll be right back in the same boat, only fda will have promulgated regulations. it's not like there's going to be a regulatory process by local county government. you're going to deal with on the fly interpretation by someone else. so to me that's a really slippery slope to start down. >> chair thangs the gentleman, now ranking -- now recognize the ranking member. >> i'm listening to the description of mixing thed so daz at the fountain, and i hate that. i'm a purist. some of those machines now you press coke it gives you five different cokes and i'm always

afraid aim go get cherry coke. i don't like to do that. but anyway, i guess i'm going to be asking questions about pizza here. i want to start with dr. wooten. aisle interested how hr2713 treats serving chances do the fda final rule allows pizza slices to provide calorie counts per pizza or standard slice with a listing of the number of sliceses per pizza and hr217 seems to allow covered establishments to list a number of servings and number of calories per servings or the multiserving item that is divided before presentation to the consumer. do you think the fda final rule on hr217 are offering two different approaches for

accomplishing the same policy goal are there differences between them and if there are could you explain implications. >> actually hr2017 has one other option and that's to list the nutrition information by the serving side or subdivision unit without having to list the number of servings, which is different than the far. you could reduce the numb of calories in a seize a overnightly slicing into it ten satellites instate of eight. you too take a plate of chicken wings and put half of the wings on one side and the other half on the other side and say it's two see servings and then change the calories. so the law as written would not require that the number of servings be listed and without that information it's very difficult for consumers to be able to compare options.

even with the servings listed it's really difficult. so say an appetizer nachos, is four section and the chicken wings is two servings. you can't compare that. it's easier to list the calories for the whole appetizer the whole pastry, the whole dessert and then people can compare and decide which one they want. this is not about telling people what to eat. this is about giving people information so they can make their own choices about how many calories they want to eat given what a terrible health burden there is from obesity and other diet-related heath problems. >> we have heard from pizza places and convenience stores about difficulties they face with coming up with calorie counts for their myriad choice is whether it's the been different beats a's self-serve soda machines. restaurants also face simply

difficulties. so could you tell us whether things are just more simpler for the restaurants? >> i think we're all similar. i spent 15 years work at 7-eleven. my ceo was previous -- was ceo of pap f pa john's, we have a good understanding of the challenges. we at dunkin' brands have a complex business we have thousands of different combinations to offer. sandwiches coffee, ice cream when you factor in baskin robbins. we're located in 1600 cone vaccine stores. hey free standing restaurants manager specials, tests, limit time offers. it's very complex. i empathize but we spent the last year figuring out how to label the products to make nutritional information available to consumers, and i feel all of us can do the same

thing. and may i add i'm sorry the honorable congressman from illinois to left but to say people are not interested is a mistake. every month 400,000 individuals visit blockbuster.com and bass skins.com pages to get nutritional information every month. millenials in particular care about this information. >> i think you're right. i mean, i think that i'm a little bit like mr. shimkus in that i don't pay much attention to it, but i think maybe that's because we're older. i think younger people pay a lot of attention and maybe we should pay more attention. thanks a lot. >> the chair charges the gentleman and now recognizes the vice chair of the subcommittee, mr. guthrie. >> thank you for being here and speaking to us today and on

dunkin' donuts. you're in new york city and they start is in 2007 so you have been working moan ulabels almost eight years. >> we've been working hard and fast the past year but certainly we have had more insight into this than perhaps others at the table who don't have operations in some of the localities with nutritional labels. >> was it difficult to commie with the new york city laws. >> i remember sitting around a table sake, we want do it, and -- we can't do it, and we did it. >> you said you had been working on it -- new york city has hassed -- >> new york city, we were able to get that into place, i believe that was 2008. we were able to get into that place. we had a deadline and we met it. >> the new york city standards similar to federal standards. >> we have been assuming they were very similar to fda and as we talked to them that's our feeling, it's similar. >> okay.

another question. just acknowledging -- when you look back -- and all of us want people to eat more nutritional. i was at something last inning and they had a menu, anywhere from see roar to 1,080 so depends on the size you get and that was enough information for know say i know which one i'm going to get. i want to go closer to zero. and so it was just trying to -- that's reasonable to make people more healthy. i just went through our schools and we actually have a lady in davis county, kentucky can making sure that kids only get three pickles if they gate cheeseburger. so if they get four pickles they violate federal law. and that sounds silly but that's true. and so what we're trying to say -- that's actually fair. i'll take people and show it to you. so how do we get information in people's hands that i think the vast number of american people

want. i think they want the information. but in a way they can sit back and say washington is doing things that are reasonable. so we talk about having to display 34 million different pieces of information if you take -- i don't know how many ingredients but factor is out 34 million. it gets almost -- i think dr. wooten you said something to the point that menu labeling software is very inexpensive but if you take menu labeling software that is expensive to come up with calories and have to print 34 million different combinations or print it all through your stores. my kid live on their phones, so why not have it displayed in a electronic way that people have access to and they can always have it. that just seems to make sense to get the information to the people and take care of all the different problems. i don't know why that doesn't make sense. would that be easier,

ms. hubbard, and down the line, if you were able to do electronic? >> yes. we have already looked into both having that on our web site and we have a mobile app. i think the millenials and younger generation live by those and that would be a way to easily gather in and they could do combinations and it could math mat include compute those. agree that most of the generation may need some of that. what i -- i ill disagree our locations are similar. i you ever walked in a dunkin' donuts there's one point of purchase and one menu board. ours are split throughout the location. you could have ten places in my stores and based upon the rules as they're written and the advertisements we would have to post the menu combination on every single piece. >> we want everybody to have information. how can we do this in a way that

people -- i could take your to davisor, conclude, and show you the lunch room lady make can sure they're get three pickles instead of four. they can't 'reach in and give them four. because that violates federal regulation. and you want to talk -- just dealing -- i know y'all want to offer this information in a way that works and opportunity look absurd when reporters go with you to a school and say, are you kidding me? somebody in washington worries whether a kid gets three or four pickles? i say that's why you're here. i didn't -- they're doing it. >> you can absolutely have information overload. our tags already have a new score. you have front of package labeling larger back of package labeling talking bat lot of labels on one single food you could put a label across the front just like a tobacco product that says this product

will make you obese and people are still going to buy the product if they want it. so i don't think that -- i think you're arguing apples and orange here. everyone wants people to be healthier, but in the end they will eat what they want to eat and doesn't matter what you put on there they're going to get what their taster is set for on that day. >> i almost never pick up something that has the label on it and not read calories. >> now recognize the gentleman mr. schrader. >> thank you mr. chairman. i guess for dr. wooten and miss raskof. these rules -- and to everybody -- this rule is not ready for prime time. we have had considerable discussion how it would be implemented. i understand that. and although the rules come out -- [inaudible conversations]

>> it's my understanding that there's not been a whole lot of guidance going on, and some of you already addressed this. some of us sent a letter asking for a little delay to hopefully iron out -- get more guidance before we went prime. i'm grateful for this hearing and for this bill so we can look at what options we may have to make this reasonable and work as i think like everyone testified we want to actually have good information for consumers. that's good. but i am curious. do you think a little bit more time is needed or is this -- she would just do up and down votes on this type of legislation? >> i think that there's a lot of common ground here with all of us, and i i think we can focus on that. i think we agree that an additional year is fine. we at dunkin' is ready to go now

but we all want to get the final guidance from the fda. we want to make it clear that promotional and advertising materials are not covered by this as law intended. we want to know that when we reform late product, how long do we have to get that information to the public. so i think we can all agree there's a good deal of common ground here and we need to get the final guidance from the fda bit don't think it's additional legislation. that's final guidance from the fda. >> many of us expected that food establish. s would be able to implex menu labeling directly from the final rule but it has turn out they have lots of questions that need answering that go beyond just mere interpretation, and to guidance is necessary and that guidance is going to take a little bit longer was there will be opportunity for public comment. hearing people testify today many of them don't have a full understanding what is required. 34 million possible combinations of peas says not required by

law -- pizza is not required by law. if they don't recognize that their lawyers need read the regulations more carefully. other things about having ten different signs in the convenience store is not required by law. there's clearly some misunderstanding what the law requires and the guidance will help to clarify that. also as some of them become more familiar with the regulations they'll realize this is not as burdensome as they think it is, just like the restaurants did ten years ago when i first started working on menu labeling in oregon and other places. i heard the same complaints from the restaurant industry. once they started to do it, they realized this is not as complicated as it seemed. they worked through it, did it, does not cost them a lot of money their customers like it and use it and it's helping them to make lower calorie choices when they want to. >> i appreciate that. mr. chairman, i ask the letter that a lot of senators, representatives, put in be a matter of the record if that's all right. >> without ox, -- objection, and

i have a let from wegman's put in the record. >> jaws last question. i guess for maybe miss -- other states have gone their own way on this and already as we heard implemented labeling requirements for convenience stores, grocery stores, everything. so how have you dealt with that so far and isn't there an opportunity maybe with some sort of federal -- better federal guideline to make it easier for you guys to compete in different venues across the country? >> sure. we originally and always have agreed that a federal preemptive law is a good idea because we have been dealing with a patchwork of different municipalities and changes. but my argument isn't about how difficult it is to get the 34 million ways up. i actually already do that online. any pizza you can concoct in your head i can give you the

actual calories for that slice. i want to do that for my consumers. what i don't want to do is retrofit on to a menu board just to fit in the box of the law, to say well, put ranges. you don't have to put all 34 million. that's true. but i want to do that. i want to do that because it's the right thing to do. what don't want to do is put range consumers will not understand and make my shawl business franchisees pay for that. >> with that yield back. >> now recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania. five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman, this is an important tissue deal with obesity in america. i want to look at the picture globally. fun of us want to have the epidemic of obesity and problems it wrings with it. there's a lot more that goes with it. there's couple of schools -- not

in my district -- one study in naperville schools outside of chicago. they actually required physical activity intensive not just battle ball, throw the ball, get hit, sit down, but real cardiovascular activity where they wear monitors, and they found their obesity rate plummeted, and they found that kids who were involved in activities, their reading scores went up, math scores went up. similar studies in madd and other places. but it does raise other issues. so calories itself, i'm concern about it's -- if you look at studies out there the cause of obese di, including genetics, familiar live history age of the person, pregnancy sleep levels emotional wellness, medications, other health conditions such as thyroid smoking. anybody propose we put all those things on the message boards,

too? those are much more predictive. in other words if what you do is sit in front of your tv and eat our food you will get fat. i don't care what restaurant it is. and i get concerned we're taking -- pardon the pun -- a small size of information we're not giving americans the information to get off your butt and move. some boxes boxes of cereal say that and that a good message. i look thought the messages go through and we'll have -- if we'll be comprehensive let's be comprehensive the daily chef specials are exempt from this? does that -- is it more -- i would is it more difficult to provide nutrition information a convenience store than a restaurant?

>> i think our concerns are -- i think miss wooten said we wouldn't have to have multibe menu boards. i may need new lawyers because mine advised me i do. the regulations say anybody adjacent. so offering food or the including the fountain drink on this side of the building, adjacent to the product. so it is the number of menu boards and postings that i would have to have in the enormous combination and i believe it would be information overload. >> now you compete for customers against traditional restaurants, too. >> my particular store does not. we offer limited food offerings. >> prepared food. >> yes. >> we have fewer items unanimous most convenience stores than a lot of sit-down chain restaurants so fewer items to analyze and they don't have to send the items to the lob which

this cost estimate you have seen run the recipes through menu analysis safety ware or get them from a supplier or database. >> those who have online ordering are we going to have the technology to provide that information on the kiosk when you say want the special number one, it's going flash -- is that what we're proposing? doctor? >> the calorie information disclosure is tied to the method through which the food service establishments provide information. so if you're a restaurant that has a printed menu think calories would be there. if you have a menu board if you have foods on display like your dove nuts on display at dunkin' donuts the calories are next to each doughnut. the way the information is provide will depend on the way that the food service establishment decides to give information to their customers about what is available and the price. >> but there's individual reaction. it's different if you say if you smoke you have a high

percentage risk you're going to get an illness. not everybody who spokes gets cancer but a high percentage of not everybody who gets cancer smoked. do we reach the point where we give people false insecurity. if you know your calories, you'll be okay, and the other factors i mentioned. i'm actually more concerned about kids that are not moving. it's that formula. you have to -- if you take in the same amount of calories you burn you don't gain wait. if you take in more than you burn you game weight. we have a long way to go in terms of other things but i see my time is up. >> they're charges the gentleman. members are advised we're now voting on the floor so we'll keep going for watching the vote total. get us over there in time. ranking member submitted another letter for requests to be submitted to the record, signed by congressman welch kilmer,

and schrader to secretary burwell, without objection, entered in the record, and chair recognizes the gentle lady from illinois five minutes for questioning. >> thank you mr. chairman. there's also built of deja vu for me. my career started in the grocery store 45 years ago when a small group of housewives wanted to know how old our food was because everything was code dated, and we did -- like detectives cracked some codes and found things that were days, weeks, months and years beyond the date. we didn't question the date and now everybody looks at the date. i look to stand in the food dairy section and watch people check the milk dates. we want to encourage people to look at the calories. whether or not my colleague from illinois does, maybe he should. and maybe we all should.

and i just -- i want to suggest in terms of pizza. if there were a board that said, on a slice of pizza this is how much sausage on that slice this is how much pepperoni adds to the slays. i can figure out relatively whether i get sausage or pepperoni or if there's a difference or if i get mushrooms or whatever, i can see that. this is not hard and i'm sorry it's not hard. to list the additions you have on a pizza so i can check and see which is the better choice if i'm watching calories. there may be a gender difference. i don't know a woman who doesn't look at the calories on food that we're buying. and we all should. in terms of the grocery stores, many serve as catering operations also. why on a catering menu would it be harder to list what the

calories are on those things? i would make decisions i do get catering things from my grocery store. would like to know that. what is the difference between if there is one ham sandwich or a turkey sandwich and that kind of thing when i'm having a party. the costs of obesity is -- just for the healthcare costs is projected to be $344 billion by 2018. so even if you don't care about diabetes and all the other related things to obesity, we ought to be caring about the costs of what -- what it costs our healthcare system to treat obesity and that would be one of the most important pieces of information. so i don't quite understand the

problem here. i did want to ask -- who was the pizza -- why is this not a simple idea? the fda suggested it. >> well, to do what you suggest to put the information that you just described on a menu board it would be very, very hard to read and a little like a forest -- tree falling in the for rest and and nobody -- >> excuse me. i'm sorry. i you have price and calories -- these arguments are just silly to me. >> there's nobody in the store virtually, almost nobody in the store to look at the suggestions you're making, but i do want to do exactly as you suggest and as you started out in the grocery store. i want to give you that precise information online, to put -- >> no, no, i wasn't saying that about the grocery store now. if you go to the grocery store lucky us, you see that date,ly

and irof expiration date and people want it. we have been disclosing voluntarily for 14 years. >> online. >> online. >> i hear about young people, too, and i'm telling you -- of course juvenile diabetes and juvenile obesity is a problem but certainly more than just young people. i wonder if you want to comment dr. wooten. >> well, there are a lot of people going into pizza restaurants. it may only be 10% but those people who do go in have the right to nutrition information just like those people who are ordering online. if they don't think it matters they don't have a menu board and list out all the options there are, but if they have a menu board and think that people need to know what is on the men skew list the prices for it, they need to post the calories

because, as you say organization piecety is one of the most -- obesity is pressing -- >> when i order pizza there's a menu attached to it so i can do it by phone or online again. why not on that menu? just list that. that's. >> that's what wearproof posing. we propose we bring the calorie information on the electronic or online menu -- >> no, no, when i get the pizza there's usually a paper menu attached it to. why couldn't it by on that? a carry-out menu. >> we consider those to be promotional materials. they're ads with fliers that say order this special. one of the other problems with the legislation for us and many restaurants. >> the chair thanks the gentle lady. we have eight minutes left in the vote. chair recognizes kathy rogers for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman, and i do look at the calorie counts

and my democrat colleague and i loretta sanchez share nat in command, we're wire trying to do and working with everyone to accomplish the goal of providing this information in a common sense way and that's the purpose of the legislation to accomplish the goal of the calorie count inside a common sense way, and i appreciate everyone being here today. i wanted to start with miss hubbard. you and almost 300 stores. that? >> yes, ma'am. >> did you purchase them all at once? >> no. we have been in business for 15 years, and we have built some in 1970 that have evolved and morphed. we acquired many stores and our construction mold has changed. >> are they exactly the same on the inside. >> none of them do. >> >> host: you sell the exact same stuff. >> no because we have -- we are operating in four states and different markets and the

consumers demands competition would merit different servings at different stores. >> is so it possible you night need to design, guy install david menu board at each location? >> essentially every single location. >> how much will this cost you? >> trying to put -- trying to figure out compliance and how many different menus. we think it will easily hit a million dollars for all locations. >> next i went to good ms. little from dominoes. a bipartisan group of house and senate members sent a letter to the fda requesting a one-year delay on the enforcement of the regulation. do you support a delay on the enforcement of the regulations? >> we support and appreciate that. however we do not think it's the solution. we really believe we need a legislative fix. >> do you think that even with a delay, you and your franchiseee could be able to eventually comply with the regulation? >> we could put ranges of

calories on menu boards that would not make sense to consumers and that would cost our small franchiseees a lot of money. we could do that, yes. >> do you think that others in the pizza community papa john's, pizza hut godfather's the same way the smaller the company, the more difficult because of the cost of compliance. >> as the rule is currently written, could you or one of your store managers potentially be criminally charged for failing to comply? >> the way the law is currently written there are criminal penalties because you have to certify that the information is correct, both at the corporate level and at every store. there are 75,000 pizza stores in the united states. that's a lot of paperwork and lots of teenagers who made hand-made products and even thole we have very precise recipes for each thing they can by off a little bit if they're

just a little heavy handed with the cheese or don't put as many pepperonis on. not the same calories exactly. and i don't think that warrants sending a kid to jail. >> ty, thank you. next i wanted to ask who is responsible for having the correct calorie count at each location? the individual manager or someone in the corporate office? >> if it's something coming out from our central menu that something that most of the restaurants are going to carry that is something that we at the corporate office there three are things like manager specials, and those would be example as our understanding -- those would be exempt is our understanding. >> if the fda or local law enforcement officer were could come in and find that, for example, a doughnut had been oversprinkled and deliver did not comply with the posted calorie count and was outside the allowable standard, who woo be at fault. >> the reasonable basis standard

under the fda protects all of us in the food service industry. they understand that when you are making hand prepared food, there will be errors. my understanding with the fda is really this is all about any penalties are there to try to go after anybody who would deliberately mislead the public. it's not there to catch people who -- >> is it possible that one of your employees could be potentially charged with a criminal charge. >> that's not our understanding: that's incorrect. >> so who do you think would receive the citation or the criminal charge? >> our understanding is that the fda, there would be -- we're still waiting for more guidance but what we understand is that the information would be given to us and would give us time to correct that. >> okay. and then to -- wanted to ask ms. little and mr. oquinn, you're dwight different from -- do you think this regulation tries to treat entities whicher twice different cookie cutter

fashion which doesn't make sense? just say yes or no because i'm out of time. >> yes. >> yes. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you to the gentle lady. we have less than three minutes to get to the floor and vote. the chair recognizes the gentleman, mr. griffin five minutes for questions. >> thank you mr. chairman. again, great to see you delegate o'quinn appreciate you coming to capitol animal bring wisdom from southwest virginia up here. there is anything that you wanted to talk about that you haven't had an opportunity to talk about? >> thank you cockman griffith. this has been a very frustrating process. our industry meets with fda on a regular basis -- >> you're not talking not hearing -- >> no the hearing has been smooth but the process throughout the whole -- throughout the fleshing out of this has been difficult because we meet with fda on a regular basis 0 an wide variety of topics and this topic they have been absolutely unwilling to meet or communicate and so here

we are discussing a delay versus some clarity and reasonable flexibility but it has been a very frustrating process but we appreciate the opportunity to air our side of the story. >> well, thank you very much for being here. i'll ask both you and ms. little the concerns about -- we have heard both today the concerns about somebody being charged with a felony i guess miss hubbard one thing you said, ms. little, as currently written. now, intent is a good thing. but as a lawmaker for a number of years only a few years here but a long time in the virginia legislate temperature -- itch you don't make it clear somebody will misinterpret the intent and while the intent may not be to charge the worker with felon because they get a little excited with the cheese on the pizza or something where they don't follow the exact recipe, you have said the way it's

currently written it they could be charged. is it a problem win we wofford though statute and intent or do you all just disagree completely -- >> i'm not a lawyer but it's my understanding this falls under the food and drug cosmetic act and there's sort of a presumption of guilt ahead of time. there are criminal penalties that could be put on folks and i -- >> you might like to see words like intentionally and repetitively or pattern -- >> as o'else to inadvertently credibility. i agree with mr. o'quinn. i it has ban frustrating experience waiting for presumes fda and i frankly don't trust the ultimate outcome of their rules will be correct and i really believe we need this fix. >> i appreciate that, and i would probably have more questions for you but the votes are on the floor and i know the chairman has been very efficient let me have this time. thank you for testifying and i hope we can straighten this out.

>> thank you. >> i yield back. >> they're charges the gentleman. the time has expired on the floor. we have additional questions. i'm sure members will. we'll submit those to writing. this has been very, very interesting and informative hearing. i remind members that they have ten business days to submit questions for the record. i ask witnesses to respond promptly. members submit questions by the close of been on thursday, june 18th. so, thank you for your patience, your item and it's time for lunch, i think. with that excellent hearing. without objection the subcommittize adjourned. fran franklin

[inaudible conversations] >> beau biden son of joe biden died of bran -- brain cancer at the age of 46. his casket laid in honor at the delware senate chamber in dover. vice president biden, jill biden and beau biden's wife and family joined other dig any tears in -- dignitaries and other ceremonies in legislative hall. there will be services in wedge to be on stamps president obama will deliver the eulogy. this is the arrival of beau biden's casket at legislative hall.

[inaudible] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [sirens]

[sirens]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> this is the arrival of vice president biden's son beau biden's casket in delware. funeral coverage will be on saturday.

>> on the next "washington gorgeous" a look at the legislation changing the nsa's data collection program. then a discussion with the co-author of undercover jihadi on how radical islam recruits followers, and the executive director of the national center for transgender equality. "washington journal" live every morning at 7 al-eastern. you can joined the conversation with your calls and comments on facebook and twitter. >> the u.s. supreme court will rule later in the month on challenges to the use of tax credits for healthcare insurance exchanges. we'll hear from constitutional lawyers and the attorney representing david king in the king versus burwell supreme court case. senator ted cruz of texas chairs the senate judiciary

subcommittee hearing. [inaudible conversations] >> hearing come to order. welcome, everybody. welcome to the members of this committee. before we get to the substance of the hearing i want to take just a few minutes to discuss the empty table before us. it's a symbol for how little regard the obama administration seems to have for the american people. two weeks ago this committee sent a letter to three current employees the u.s. treasury

department, requesting their attendance here at this hearing to talk about treasury's role in develop obamacare exchanges subsidy rule which is hurting millions of people across the country. and which is directly contrary to the statutory text of the underlying bill. specifically this committee sent letters to mark maicer, the assistant secretary for tax policy at treasury, to emily mcmahon, the deputy assistant secretary for tax policy at treasury and what a serving as the acting assistant secretary for tax policy when the rule was written and finalized and the deputy tax legislative counsel for tax policy at treasury. shortly after these invitation letters were sent, the treasury department reached out to my staff and brazenly indicated they did not intend to send any witnesses.

and i would note, our former attorney general eric holder, the first attorney general in the history of this country be held in contempt of congress. these three empty seats demonstrate the ongoing contempt for congress and for the american people that has manifested by the obama administration. for the treasury department to tell the united states senate they have no time, they will not even answer questions about how they promulgated rulemaking in direct conflict with statutory text. is the height of arrogance. the beginning of this hearing was to give them an opportunity to come and answer questions to recognize the oversight responsibility given to the senate given to congress by the

united states constitution. by their absence i take it the administration is saying they are not subject to oversight. and yet at the end of the day the american people provide the ultimate oversight. given that the administration refused to cooperate in this hearing, it's my hope that the full committee will take it to the next level. of invoking compulsory process. so that members of the executive branch will be made to answer whether they tried to follow the law or whether they were instructed by political operatives to disregard the law in the interests of a political outcome. that's a question the executive needs to answer. and the purpose of this hearing is to begin getting to the

bottom of it. now, can understand why the administration is reluctant to engage in this discussion. i can understand why both in substance, after over five years of obama barack barack hussein -- -- the american people were assureds if you like your plan you can keep your plan. millions of people discovered the promise was false. it was knowingly deliberately false. as millions of americans had their health insurance plans cancelled. the president promised the american people, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. that too we now know was a statement that was knowingly deliberately false. today as a consequence of obamacare, millions of americans

lost their jobs and have been forced into part-time work, lost health insurance lost doctors and are facing skyrocketing insurance premiums. so i can understand why the administration would be reluctant to defendant defend that record. i can also understand why the administration does not want to answer questions about the underlying legal questions. the statutory text is straightforward. and at the end of the day it is not a complicated question. what the administration did is took statutory language of an exchange established by a state and through transmotor fix indication that would make hari houdini shake his head in wonderment defined the federal government's exchange as an exchange established by a state. ...