or what has been referred to in places like ferguson as taxation by citation citation disproportionately targets communities at color. many municipalities are balancing their budget on the backs of otherwise hard-working individuals who have been channeled into the criminal justice system and for many of them their life will spiral out of control unable to thereafter robustly pursue the american dream. and of course it was broken windows policing that led to being counter ultimo a resulting in the death of eric garner. he was targeted for allegedly selling loose cigarettes. at worst that can in the strait

of offense for which he received the death penalty. which brings me to my second which we have got to address which is the excessive use of force far too often directed at unarmed african-american man. now again police officers, the overwhelming majority of them i believe our hard-working individuals who are there to protect and to serve but no one can reasonably look at the events of the last year which represents what has been taking place in many communities across america for decades that are brought to life in a vivid fashion now because of the miracle of modern technology. no one can look at the events of

the last year and conclude that we don't have an issue with the excessive use of police force. as we saw in that videotape when eric garner cried out 11 different times i can't breathe, and on 11 different occasions a police officer failed to respond respond. the medical examiner says he died as a result of expatriation triation. a chokehold was applied that had been administratively banned by the police department for more than 20 years. yet something led that police officer to conclude that eric garner was a threat to his life. no evidence on that videotape that he had resisted arrest. there something deeper that appears to be taking place as to

why some police officers feel the need to use that level of force particularly when the subject is of a certain race and a certain gender. if we are going to try to solve this problem we have got to confront it in an open-ended evidence-based real way. the last thing that i would suggest we have got to deal with is the fact that when a police officer crosses the line far too often the criminal justice system fails to hold them accountable. and we have got some actors in the criminal justice system perhaps because of the close relationship between the prosecutor and law enforcement who seem unable to fairly and

comprehensively present a case before a grand jury that could allow justice to be done. we saw that down and ferguson where it appeared to be that the prosecutor acted more like a defense attorney for officer darren wilson. seemed uninterested in allowing the facts, whatever they may be, to come out. the same thing of course happened apparently in the grand jury that presided over the officer penta léo killing of eric garner but this is nothing new. one of the solutions of course that has been presented is to figure out a way independently for prosecutors and the police

involved killing particularly when there's an unarmed civilian to present a case either before a grand jury or a judge so that justice can be done. a close if there's no accountability the belief in the system breaks down. it's inherent credibility which is necessary to hold it together erodes and one of the great pillars of our democracy is shaken. there are some who say well does america have the capacity to address these profound problems? 's and certainly there is reason for all of us to be skeptical in this climate, in the city where democrats and republicans

progressives and conservatives seem so bitterly divided where people can see the same thing unfold on videotape and come to two different conclusions. they have obviously got some tough challenges that we have got to work out in america but i still think that we can make it to the other side. as i take my seat i'm reminded of the time when a few young men were gathered in the state of one of the wealthiest people in the world. it would gather at this estate and they were on the side of the big lake and in this lake there were crocodiles and alligators and one small turtle. on the other side of the lake the estate owner shows up. he looks over at he sees these

young men and he cries out to them and he says if any of you are willing to jump in this lake lake, rescued the turtle and make it to the other side we will give you anything that you want in this world. about five minutes went by and nobody responded. so the owner of the estate turned around and began to walk away. then all of a sudden he heard a big splash turns back around and sees one young man frantically trying to make it to the other side. he gets to the middle of the lake, scoops up the turtle. he dodges the crocodile, dodges the alligator and somehow makes it to the other side, gets out dried himself off, hands over

the turtle. the owner of the estate posits for a moment and says i don't know how you did it. but congratulations. somehow you made it to the other side. now you can have anything that you want in this world. the young man paused for a moment and said well, i just want to know who pushed me in the lake. [laughter] what am i trying to say? sometimes you find yourself unexpectedly in a tough spot and when you are in that moment you have only got two options. you can either sink or you can swim. if you look at the history of this great country whenever we find ourselves in a tough spot in the aftermath of the civil war a nation divided but we

came up with the 13th the 14th and the 15th amendment. whatever we found ourselves in the top spot plessy versus ferguson unleashes jim crow segregation on the deep south but we come up with the 64 civil rights act and the 65 voting rights act. whenever we find ourselves in a tough spot the presidency of george w. bush america comes together in a multiracial coalition and sends barack obama right on the street shattering the racial black ceiling. whenever we find ourselves in a tough spot because of people like those in this room bankers, lawyers and jurists and activist we find a way to make it to the other side and continue our long necessary but majestic march

toward a more perfect union. have a great conference. [applause] [applause] >> thank you congressman for this beautiful remarks. everybody let's go swimming. i'm going to introduce to you the moderator for next panel. chris hayes, lot of you should know him. he hosts the "msnbc" all in with chris hayes and the editor-at-large for the nation to ladies and gentlemen chris hayes. [applause]

>> let's all come up we'll do the introductions. >> all right i'm going to introduce this incredible panel and get into it. i want to keep the introductions brief because you have -- you are distinguished individuals with long credentials which you can read about here. honorable judge shira scheindlin united states district judge for the southern district of new york since 1994 and is

congressman jeffries noted she challenged the city's practice of stop-and-frisk and does tremendous opinions probably the single most important for my amateur perspective as a nonlawyer in this landscape in the last five or 10 years probably ever in terms of his era policing. nicholas mosby a city councilman from west baltimore represents the neighbor in which freddie gray lived and is married to marilyn mosby a woman you may have heard up as a prosecutor for the city of baltimore. [applause] elise boddie is a professor rutgers law school sybarite state and local government law. previously a litigation at the naacp legal defense fund. sergeant delroy burton and the chairman the washington d.c.

police union representing policemen and a distinguished member of that department for 21 years. and walter mack is a partner with six -- regulatory experience. he served as deputy police commissioner bernard said the internal affairs where he was in charge of investigation of an institute a policy to combat police corruption and brutality. nick i want to start with you, councilman. baltimore just had its most violent month since 1972 if i'm not mistaken 42 homicides. there is also during that same period of time a massive plummeting -- i wish i had a graph appear but it's extremely striking if you look at the data. what is going on a baltimore right now?

>> the city of baltimore the first thing i would say is when you look at a place like all to more we see a lot of urban decay and you know urban decay is as american as apple pie. we can continue to look at the criminality of the byproducts of that and we can continue to focus on the wet but we really need to talk about the why. and i say that because a decade of social economic issues that played out in places like alt-a more and being a representative and a person that has grown up in baltimore knowing folks who understand the plight of urban america at the end of the day we see the spike of increase before every summer. memorial day weekend is issa start to a place where you see unfortunately a lot of violence. ..

the trop in arrest has been happening for quite some time. then you also bring in the morale of the police force. it's really hard to quanity quantify the specific variables to tie it into. however it's a major problem. one thing i'll say, also we saw the city go up in flames and saw

the looting and rioting all the cameras and the coverage, right now we have in a major american city unprecedented amount of violence in 2015, yet we're not getting the same level of attention or curiosity associated with this area. and i think that is more the troubling aspect of it. tend of the day no matter if the individuals are part of an illegal element no matter if the individuals are putting themselves amongst harm's way and doing murdered or being shot, at the end of the day a major american city, we need to understand and now it's critically important that we develop ways of getting to these folks, and i say all that to just wrap it up to say we can continue to talk about policing, wen continue to talk about -- we can continue to talk about community policing and interaction with communities but we have to start talking about the social economics divide and the root of the issue and that is developing a way where you

provide opportunities for these young men prior to getting to the criminal justice statement. how to get to them before they get to the criminal justice system. >> elisa i want to ask you about jumping off that, historical trajectory here. there's two thing that strike me about this. if you go back and read the current information in '67. it lays out this very standard kind of view of a connection between despair hopelessness, racial segregation the building of america's gets to post world war ii, and the fact that inedibly this will produce environments in which people have no opportunities and produces crime and unrest, et cetera. then there's an amazing thing happened. in which -- that's the basic standard of liberal lie. and that's what say. nothing got better and crime went down. crime goes up until 1939 and from 1993 to 2015 this

absolutely historically unprecedented drop in crime happens but things don't get any better in west baltimore or the west side of chicago. they don't get any better in north st. louis what does change though, is the policing mechanism. right? and so my question is, how do you understand why now? why too we wake up in this world in which was happened to freddie gray can lead the nightly news, and if it happened in 2012 wouldn't not have, and if it happened in 1998 it wouldn't have. >> cell phones. we have confirmation of the brutality of some police officers against marginalized black and brown people, and i'm glad you mentioned the concerner commission report. the concerner commission was convened by president johnson in 1968 to study the source of racial unrest during the summer of 1967. this is racial unrest across the

country. one of the -- one over the findings of this kerner commission report was that the police abuse police brutality was the number one grievance among residents who were studied in these various communities. ahead of unemployment, ahead of inadequate housing. but what is important to understand in your question raises it -- is that there is a social contest that councilmen mosby has spoken to in which we have profound segregation profound racialized disadvantage and these interactions between the police and the community become highly racialized, and the police become a symbol of white power white repreparation. what is interesting about the kerner commission report is that dr. kenneth clark, an esteemed social psychologist, testified before the kerner commission in the 1960s and said, you know, your findings remind me of the

findings that were made after the chicago unrest in 1915. the harlem unrest in 1935. toe 1943. the point being that nothing is new and nose hag changed and here we are 2015, we know that in the last 16 years or so, we have seen over 70 unarmed men and women who have been killed by the police. so here we are again. it's deja vu all over again and to councilman's mosby's opinion we have these underlying social issues the profound agony and misery in many of these urban communities. and just to add to this and maybe we he can get into this later, we have a constitutional infrastructure that is largely blind to the racialized conditions on the ground. but i'll leave it at that. >> it's absolutely off point actually nothing to do with policing but has to do with what

you're talk about as the social environment. i've been a fer distribute judge for more than 20 years so i've done 2,000 sentences. let me tell you that every sentence report reads the same. the young man grew up without a father. the mother was a drug addict. the kid dropped out of school. in the ninth or tenth or 11th 11th grade. the kid began using drugs at 13 or 14. the kid has no employment hoyt. i have read 2,000 reports and i'm telling you 90% read the same. so there's a huge problem. that's one judge, 2,000 sentences 10 years. of course in a major city, new york city, but something is wrong when so many people in the community have the exact same description. i know walter is a defense lawyer and knows what the reports read like, and then you send them to jail. and what does that do? gives them a felony con springs then the can't get employment.

not to mention they can't vote but can't get employment and can't vote and we have a disenfranchised group of people without hope. so we need to talk about that and i'm glad you start evidence this. >> unfortunately the answer to that scenario has been more police. so you look at our major american cities, you continue to see increase of our police budgets. you see a continued increase in the emphasis and resources in place on policing in the community, yet you see the continued decline or drop or stagnant approach associated with budgets around recs and parks, education getting our children before the get to at the rim justice system. >> you know how many of the budget goes for the criminal justice statement? there's no jobs. >> sergeant. >> there's a couple of things here that we're not talking about. i'm glad the professor talked about the historical perspective and the fact of the matter is what we're seeing now in terms of race and racial disparity is

you're right it's not new because when the country was founded it was founded on racial disparity, the three-fifth's compromise. the pig issue i want to bring to everybody's attention that racism is an american problem. we act as if it's only the police with issues with race but racism is an american problem in terms of the unarmed people killed by the police or that were killed, we don't foe what the issues around the 70 you mentioned or that the significant period of time, but the murders in baltimore in a month are extreme significant and we can't just make that a tributable to the fact that the weather is changing and crime spikes during a certain time of year. all the things the councilman talked about are reasons for it. in terms of how we got there in the last 19 years or so, in criminal justice let's go back to the late '8s '8s so, early '90's

and what did our counsel true demand from the legislators governors and the president? we had crime problems and we demand something be done. what ways the solution? mandatory minimum sentences. we increased our police departments to deal with that violence. and as a result, we put a lot of people in prison, based on what was requested from the community through legislation, through our elected officials and that is what we're seeing now. in terms of the history in baltimore and the things the judge and the counsel member talked about those socioeconomic issues are not the police -- that's not something the police can solve. that is outside of our area of expertise, and until we deal with those issues, the old adage is true, and an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. what we spend to-e incarcerate someone is better spent to make sure they get through school before they get in the system. that's absolutely right. >> let me follow up on one thing. there's a young man who was shot

and killed in atlanta. he was a veteran and he was struggling with mental illness. he was running around a housing complex naked and he was clearly acting out of control. and it's a horrible tragedy. and the thing i kept thinking about was someone call the police to deal with this individual. we sent the employs. we america the citizens of atlanta, the citizens of america sented the police to deal with this individual. and, god if i mutt myself in the shoes of some 28-year-old who shows up, he's not trained to deal with someone who is schizophrenic and having -- it seems to me we ask the police to essentially interact or maintain order in situations that run the gamut from outright criminality to profound mental illness to -- >> chris it's budgetary priorities inch washington dc,

for example we have a department of mental health and we deal with individuals that have mental illnesses all the time. the department of mental health does not have transport capables so the call the police to deal with transports when they want to move someone from, let's say a community mental health facility to inpatient -- >> don't have their own voc vehicle? >> no, so they call the police. we had a tragic incident. someone with mental illness stabbed the police officer. the crisis team was on the scene and could not assist the person. when you put a police officer in the situation to deal with someone that is going through essentially what is an emotional break, and particularly if the person has no clothes on you can't control them. i wish they had a taser or something else they could use to incastrated that person. i don't know the facts of the -- incapacitate the person. >> i think it's tremendously important to acknowledge that policing is a really, really difficult and challenging job

and i completely understand that. and we also have to understand the social context the difficult environment in which policing takes place. it's also very important to make sure that we talk about accountability of the police. the police are vested with authority by the state to coerce people to arrest people, in some instances to use deadly force and so i want to make sure that's front and center in the conversation because it's not to discount the difficulty of the job. but at the same time we have to talk about -- we have a problem. the congressman just discussed it at length. we have the statistics, we have the individual stories. we have a profound, profound problem so we have to -- the approach we take has to be about institutional reform and has to be about working within the culture of the police department to institute mechanisms of accountability, change our law

probably and constitutional doctrine but i want to make sure we -- >> well, let me -- i'd like to hear your thoughts on conditionability. >> i just want to jump in and say that all problems cannot be solved by the police department. there were other providers that were not available. but a young 28-year-old police officer arriving on the scene should not be the first time that the issue at least has been brought to his attention what do i do under those circumstances in? this day and aim there are tremendous providers of that policing practice -- best policing practices available for training and in many times -- many of those trainers, many of whom i know, their first reaction is, force is your last resort. if you arrive on a scene where there is a naked person and who

is -- obviously you have to see there's nobody about to be harmed but the first thing you do in unless you're qualified is ask for help, is ask for a response from within the department. because no police officer certainly in new york, do not feel they're going to get support from anybody in the civilian population, that they're isolated and that the only folks who are going to respond to help them under those circumstances are fellow officers and therefore a lot of this is training. the solution is not soley within the department, but there are best practices that are available. there's a learning curve and basically a force solution should be the last solution an officer goes to. >> i don't disagree but we go back to budgetary priorities. when are whenever the budget that is tight the first thing cut is training budget in 2010 the metropolitan training department cut the academy staff by a third when the economic

downturn. we stopped hiring and we stopped training and that is bad for a police agency because you're not only training your new people. you have ongoing training. another example. hand to hand defensive tactics training. all police officers leave the police academy and they are proficient at that training. it is a perishable skill that if you do not practice, you will lose it. don't know any police department that hat ongoing in service hand-to-hand defensive tactics training. we do firearms training, derefresherrers on the law but this is a fungs of the training -- a function of the training budget and is a political question. are you going to put the resources to have the kind of training everybody believes police officer should have, the people with the decisionmaking. >> when you look at the budgets of police department us through the entire country over the past couple of decade, they are exponentially have green. when you see other types 0 city softs cut or kind of just

flatlined out for two or three decades. you're right when you talk about budgetary priorities but it's budgetary priorities inside of the police department. this year alone baltimore city's police department, got $22 million more than they had last year, and last fiscal budget. but where is the money going? going to the training? is that the core competency of where we're trying to drive the experience and the know how in forces or going to other equipment and other intelligence and other technology to kind of overpolice the community. >> money in our police department -- the same for most government agencies and most businesses -- are personnel cost. the personnel cost drives our bug that i'm aware of and what is left over after the personnel cost is for discretionary expenditures. >> i want to bring in judge shindlin. there's two things here.

there's a sort of set of layers in the problem if we call it's problem. there's how police act in a situation, right? there's weather people should call the police in certain situations right? that's an interesting question. think there's a question surrounding the mckinney pool party, should anyone have called the cops on a bunch over teenagers acting -- in a pool party. there's what the police do there how the police are trained. there's what we as a society want the police to do. right? and then there's the law. there's the constitution. which is ultimately the binding constraint we think on howl the police can act. now, functionally, it occurs to me that most of the time the constitution is essentially irrelevant in street interactions. like sure, police are trained in and it everybody knows they get their probable cause and fourth and fifth amendment and miranda, et cetera but the law in a street interaction between

a police officer and someone it might exist later might exist in your courtroom when it gets dragged before it, but does it actually exist? does the constitution in any real meaningful way exist in that moment between a police officer on the street and a citizen? >> that was a short question. how to begin to answer that. i can only answer any the context of the stop and frisk case which the congressman so carefully described. the problem with stop and frisk as it became developed in new york you know it was 4 million stops, and half of those were of african-americans. so that means 2.2 million people were stopped. now, they're suppose told be stopped on reasonable suspicion. but you're right nobody was interested in that because the policy was -- there was evidence here -- the mayor said, the purpose of this is to instill fear instill fear in everybody and if they good out carrying a

gun they will be stopped. so it's going to be a deterrent. but the constitution says we don't have things like preventive detension weapon can't lock up everybody we think might commit a crime elm can't go into homes because there might be guns in those homes. they might be effect enough stopping crime but that's not the standard. the notion you can step2.2 million people to instill fear was one of the big problems. the other one was this message went out. we need target the right people. this is said, quote. we got to target young black males between 14 to 21, because they're committing the crimes. the problem was all those 2's 2 million people stopped 90% absolutely innocent, even of the six percent that were summonsed and arrested, those were all dismissed. so you have all those people wrongfully stopped. again, i'm not against good police work. i want good pro-active police work, but it's got to be within

suspensional limits. we you talk about reasonable suspicion you have to talk about what is reasonable to stop somebody. here's the funny stuff that couple out. stop dismiss that's walk too fast walk to slow, if they're looking around,ston them if they're looking down. what is a furtive move? this is true. this is what they would write up. this person made a furtive gesture. i suspect my furtive gesture is different from your furtive jess tour and it's in perception of the person decides that you made a furtive move. how is a cop supposed to discern and again the answer is training. i -- walter said, i totally agree with. training training, training. >> in the context of discussing policing we have to remember american policing is not homogenous. we do not have a national police force so you don't have a standard across the 18,000 police departments we have in this country. most of which are less than 50

police officers. one of the things eye troubled by is out of the stop and frisk case the term has become demonized and it's not supposed to be demonized. the way it was employed in the new york police adapt pay may have been incorrect but stop and frisk is a legitimate tool when done properly and when you have rome suspicion. i suspect if you look at all the other police departments and all of them are getting additional scrutiny -- you won't find another one that employed stop and frisk the way nypd had. my experience is washington dc and i consider is a progressive police department because we did things, for example, stop and frisk, we had a written directive in 1972 on stop and frisk. and essentially that has not changed because the guiding principle that governs it has not changed. >> i don't want to lose the point that judge is making,

which is that the standard of reasonableness -- we have the stop and frisk context the context of excessive use of force. the question of what constitutes a reasonable seizure under the fourth amendment is essentially toothless. it's -- the court said it's a very fact, bound inquiry and so when you have -- >> stop anyone for anything. >> for walking fast, for walking slow for looking furtive and in newark we have a wandering you can stop people for wandering, so right in the hands of a responsible judge with integrity, who wants to be fair, fine but in the hands of a judge that may not have the same standard of integrity that's a problem if we respect to training, that means is that the police don't really have guidance about what reasonableness is. so, as i understand it, maybe the d.c. police experience is different -- but they're trained

just to use reasonable use of force. what dot that mean? we have to -- what does that mean? we have to talk about bringing robustness to the question of what constitutes a reasonable -- >> let me respond to that. a lot -- i've always of the view that leadership within the department is really the most important ingredient in delivering services to the streets is what it boils down to and there are different forms of leadership and the department can go a long way in accessing all the information available most times when there is a criticism of a police department one of the thing is always do is take a look at the internal affairs or inspectional function within that department. almost universally it is weak, and inappropriate it's light and has the disrespect not only in the tv programs but disrespect within the department. so basically the best training

is it really is a seamless collection of data not only from the courtroom but also, hey what is reasonable suspicion? i've sat in on reasonable suspicion classes taught by very accomplished people, and they -- it's not just a question, reasonable suspicion go out there and do it. it's let's analyze look at these cases see how the judge analyzed the situation. let's apply it to what is going to happen on the streets of new york or the streets of baltimore and what what it means to do. when you act like a cowboy, you're going to be sanctioned quickly, and you're no longer going to be in the department. >> right, there's also this issue. which is that i ride my bike often to work in new york system when i ride my bike to work i break the law rue routinely. i stop at red lights, don't run red light. i used to do that but that's crazy and reckless.

but there are a whole bunch of laws guiding how bikes can operate in an urban environment and i cut a lot of corners. okay? now, i could be stopped by a police officer but i'm not. i suspect if i looked different and if i was in another neighborhood i would be. walter scott let's remember, what was walter scott's infraction and he had a car. it had three brakelights two of which were working. one of which was out okay? so by the letter of the law -- i spent time in the south carolina brakelight statute. by the letter of the law it was a legitimate stop because if you have a brakelight, you're supposed to have at least two -- one but if you have one and it's out, then that's a violation. the point is if there's a entire category of stops of policing, of contact between police, that might be legitimate, might be justifiable on the law but

folks suspect and are probably right, are being driven by essentially a kind of cloud and racialized suspicion. >> most police officers don't dig into the minutiae of the law. the really good ones do. i used to do that. for example in dak it's illegal to play ball in an alley or street. play any game in the street with a ball or in an alley it's illegal, five dollar fine. tight 282 of the d.c. code. and i was working in an early and this was in 1998 that had aislingant amount of violence -- a significant amount of violence and the people i had to work with and were the perpetrators of the violence-ended up going to jail on federal inindictments but in order to deal with the element and the things they did every day, they were in the alley one day, set the basketball hoop up, playing basketball. the guy's got to take that down. it's against the law. whatever. yes, it is against the law bleach it or not it is. you can't play the game this

way. and they that helpinged me, and i went to take the ball. the guy took the ball. he started saying, listen, you're under arrest, mike, whatever. and i ended up arresting him. went to court in front of the honorable judge. he said it's illegal for this guy to play basketball in an alley? yes, sir it's on the books. and i cited the title. he said, okay, let's proceed. the issue here pipes can get frustrate elfed what is on the books. the police officer didn't write it. >> come on, that's a copout. >> it is not a copout. >> sleektively -- >> it's not a copout. if you live -- >> playing basketball -- >> that's a perfect example. why someone is playing basketball. >> those visits were -- and we did a long-term investigation on them -- wait a minute -- those individuals were indicted on a 310 count rico inindictment, the large ed in d.c. tom. one of the largest groups to narcotic distributors and involved in all kinds of

violence -- >> but they were playing basketball at the time. >> yes they were. that's a police department tool that is in my toolbox. >> we're saying the same thing. you've did not actually arrest them because they were playing basketball. you arrested them because -- these were guys you wanted to bust. >> no. had he picked up his ball and walked away i wont have arrested him. it's when he refused. >> you didn't have suspicion at the time that they were involved in this rico -- >> yes we did. >> you did. >> but it wasn't -- you arrested them -- >> i arrested them for playing ball in thele alley. i didn't get on the investigation later in the year. when i arrested them for playing ball in the alley i was patrolman, they were playing ball in the to alley. i asked them to stop. he picked up the ball and continued play and i arrested them. >> i want to weigh in here. there's nothing wrong with targeting police resources to where they should be targeted. if you knew that this is a dangerous and high crime area, and you had a basis to make that

stop good. and it did in fact in this case result in a prosecution and all the rest that followed. but hearings what i found a lot. one of the common things written down in the forums was high crime area, high crime area, plus furtive movement. this means i had no suspicion before as you did in your case, before the stop. that these people had done anything. then what happened in the stop is that it escalated. there's the danger, chris. the danger. it's company to target the resources, maybe even okay to make the stop when you have at the technical basis but use common sense and judgment to and that seems to before gottennen lost in the eric garner case, this ised a an mr.tive violation. they've say he was resisting arrest. apparently the video shows the man walking backwardses hands up saying, don't arrest me. don't arrest me. if that's called resisting that's a strange idea. then from -- to go from therefrom to a chokehold and a

takedown and all that followed, that is the problem. the lack of common sense of how to follow up. so in the statistics, which i could go back to, when a black person was stopped was twice as likely to be frisks than the white. >> they were effective with their perception of cause with white people because they were not being -- >> wouldn't have stepped them so lightly. with a black guy they stopped them more lightly so they got less contra band, less guns, more dismissals and more force and more frisks, all less on the white population. >> this discussion we look at the community and we look at the police it's like x and os and we are not bringing in the human element. unfortunately in a lot of these communities a lot of the police don't come from the communities do not have any interactions with these communities other than policing in the communities

and there is a huge cassism between the cultural died of what is reasonable activity and culture you. take myself and maybe place me somewhere in asia, naturally i don't really understand and know how they interact and how the culture is and what should be perceived as some strange activity and i think that is a problem that we don't really address, that unfortunately a lot of the police officers that are policing these urban environments that we feel are below overpoliced aren't naturally from the communities and don't naturally have the connectivity. >> we have to put into the fold of the conversation the deep racialized suspicion and fear, and fear of the police, racialized suspicion by the police. all of that is part of the element of the encounter between the police and the community and that informs -- there's research on implicit bias, why we think people who are walking

down the street might be suspicious of a crime. want to go back to walter's point about accountability and the culture of the police department and there's an elephant in the room frankly which is about the role of the police unions in this conversation. from at least where i sit all i see from the police unions is sort of a defensive approach to this problem. right? and is there room for police unions to say look, we have very good officers in our midst. 're responsible officers, officers of integrity but we also have some bad apples. right in and can we help the police department, the chief within the police department, create systems of accountability so we're not all demonized and brushed with this broad stroke? >> yes there's a role for the police unions to do that. if you go back and look at the history of the d.c. police union, can't speak to the

activity of any other police union but we have been up front and progressive in demanding accountability top quality internal affairs very, very good review. we want more robust reviewing. just recently there was huge debate in washington about our body camera program. way there is with the chief when we rolled it out but the new mayor doesn't want 80 and wants to make access through foia not permitted. what is the purpose of spending $5.5 million to buy body worn cameras put them on my members record all of their interactions with the public because this is for accountability and then turn around and not let anybody access the film. it would defeat the purpose because it's the members of the union i represent and other police officers around the country have gone vilified right now and it's absolutely incomprehend able that --

incomprehensiblible our mayor would do that. good unions understand we're partners with the manager of the police department. one thing i want ills always to have the betts. not just the best candidates, the best officers, the best leadship, the best equipment and in order to do that we have to cooperate. always interact there try to make the police department -- because aim a policeman. identity knock just union lead lead are. i'm a policeman. >> let me comment because at least in my experience the police unions were an impediments to finding out what happened on the street. there were cases being made of what what called obstruction of justice in which police union representatives were encouraging officers to get together with a story and explain what was there, to give them something that would stand internal affairs scrutiny so it does vary from department to department.

but clearly any system that results in a failed or inaccurate investigative result needs to be changed. >> but there's -- there's this deep perceptual problem. the institutional issue of police unions and i understand you don't want to speak to other ones. i've been covering this. they're 100% an obstacle in other places -- >> no 100% of anything there may be some police departments -- excuse me -- some police unions they may be obstructionist in their view, but this is what happens. you either grow and move with the paradigm shift or you'll get overrun. laboring this done temperature few 0 lang time was a big part of the private sector. they didn't adapt and change as things in the country changed. progressive police unions do. and i think what is disenginous -- let me finish this point -- with when we characterize all unions and public sector unions as obstructionists to the process

when hi my job just like walters job when he defends someone is to ensure their due process rights are not violated indiana mr.tive contention that's the role of the union so to, whichize them as obstructionis that's a disservice when we're here at the american suspensional sew identity convention to talk about people's rights. please. >> let me say this. the tone of statements that havecome from police unions have been remarkable to me. >> we're talking about new york. >> no. >> i think he is talking about the nypd. >> no. time actually talking bat statement that was released by the police benevolence associate two days ago in cleveland that said -- that referred to the eight people whoa filed an affidavit to bring the case before the judge there to find a probable cause in the shooting death of 12-year-old tamir rice, state built the police association that referred to the people who did that as having miserable lives.

the statement -- >> i can't support that statement. >> i'm not asking you. to let me finish my point please. the unions, it strikes me, are an emnation of the way that a lot of police officers feel, which is a lot of police officers feel at this moment embattled. they feel picked upon. they feel vilified and second-guessed. they feel like every single thing they do is now going to be subject to criticism by people watching a 30 second videotape who have no idea what happened before hand, they feel like they don't have political -- i even talking to police officers for nine months off the record and on the record and they have been telling me over and over again they feel like they're on the wrong -- they feel persecuted. right? and so the point is that there is a perceptual gap right now profound one. people may watch the video and say we have a problem.

police feel like we have a problem which is that we're being picked on, like there's not an agreement. we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking there is an agreement between these two. >> i want to join the conversation by saying they may embattledded from won't ends because in my case would one that thing was that was a problem for though police they would be brothered for hitting a certain number of stops. there were quota goals and they did not like that and forcing them into bad police work and they opposed those average but to return to an earlier topic racial balance of the police force and how the police force should reflect in fact the community that they police, in our cities, the police force is becoming more and more minority in percentage. ours is getting toward 50% and doesn't do air with the problem if say what about the surveysry levels to policy setters. while the bottom line living racial makeup is changing those

setting policy may not a be changing and that's still a problem. very important -- >> policing isn't always about race. >> that's right. >> just because i'm a black man policing west baltimore done necessarily mean that i connect with the community of west baltimore. african-americans and minorities aren't monolithic folks like any other demographic. right? i think it's critically important because when we look at the police force remember all the national news in freddie gray kept saying what's the makeup of the officers. race is always the underlying driver of how we look at a situation. right? but at the end of the day the institutionalized type of view and the normalization that has been generated in these bodies has absolutely nothing do with race but to do with that particular individual. that's what i mean about having visiteds who directly connect with the comment. you could have a white over who knows west baltimore and is a great community police officer

in his post in west baltimore and do a very effective job as opposed to someone who is african-american from idaho who just cannot connect with that community. >> let that white officer have one controversial issue and becomes a totally racial divide. he notice being evaluated based on the good work he did in west baltimore, and to back to the behavior the judge was referring to the unsuspensional pressure that the leadership placed on the members of the nypd to get these numbers. in washington, dc, i don't know if you remember, we had the trinidad checkpoints. the people that objected to it the most and screamed the loudest were our members can union was screaming you can that do this, inle the federal court in d.c. told the police department and the chief that this was illegal. so going back to the fact that unions are obstructionists to the point of getting to constitutional policing is just inaccurate and we should be very very careful how we use language and characterize one

group of people just like the council member said as being monolithic police departments in specifically 18,000 different iterations of the police departments in the united states. >> think we can own this -- i'm happy to acknowledge there are some progressive police unions, sounds like your union may be month them. but councilman mosby might be able to speak to this better than itening but in the state of maryland theirs a certain bill of rights the police have? >> law enforcement -- >> so there are institutional mechanisms built into the law which protect the police at the behest of the police union. if there is a excessive use of force, the police don't have to speak to investigators right away. there's a win dove of time in which -- >> what about a fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. that is a criminal offense and that life doesn't have to say a thing. the law enforcement bill of rights does not come in at all. >> that's fair. but say if i was just a cash year at a local convenience

store hi and boss came to me and said hey nick, did you take money out our of the cash register and i say i don't have to tell you've because i don't want to dish just say i'm not going to talk to you until i get a lawyer. there's a good chance i'm going to be fired. so we can't talk about -- [applause] >> go ahead. >> but it's a police came to him and asked him that same question what right does he have not say anything in the same one the police does. apples to cherries comparison. >> i'm saying my boss and my boss being either the mayor or the -- >> the point is we're talking about constitutional rights, not where you work. i don't check my constitutional rights at the door when i been a policeman. it's not about the constitution. it's about the -- >> wait. wait. >> you do with a some rights in the police department for internal investigations. you can refuse to answer and also be let go. wow wave waived the right agreed you will cooperate in an investigation as part of the job

so you can waive -- >> i can waive -- if we're talking about something with criminal overtones or potential christian charges if the police department wants to compel know answer the question they give me a guarantee garretty warning i must answer the question and i'm kole of compelled. until they do it i could face calendar i criminal charges, my constitutional rights attach and there's nothing you can do to make me answer that question. >> they cannot then use that -- >> correct. >> i want to return to body cameras. somebody findly raised this -- >> i want to turn to body cameras and then take questions. >> a big topic of body cameras. some police departments supports the idea because actually it's kind of protective of the police officer. there is a contemporaneous recording. this helps the he said-she said world that the judge live inside. we weren't there, we don't have a video. one side says this happened, one

side said it didn't. other police departments are completely opposed and won't listen to reason. they think it's another way to spy on the police officer. so the whole issue where we're heading with today's technology, going to be there anyway. the citizens are all talking the have had yous so the malmight as well get on board so there's videos from both directions. the citizens focusing on the cop. the cops could focus on the so-called perpetrator. i don't see why the police department doesn't see it in their interests to be wearing them. now, that said, there are lot of issues. a great article in your materials i read this morning about what we are going to do other with the videos, how we store them, who gets access to them. when can the police officer turn it on and off. used in a home? there's private issues so it's not easy. not a panacea like everybody puts on body cams and then there will be no more actions. won't bet that simple but we

need to talk about why police departments are opposed. >> they've haven't recognize the paradigm shift if they don't sit down and be part have the solution, the decisions will be made and they'll be slide emfrom -- and forced, whether they like it or not to use those systems. so my advice to them, if any are watching is to be at the table and city discussions and inform e forming the policy so you can protect your members. it's happening anyway. we went to pear dime shifts in policing, we written from revolve erred to semi automatic pistols to wearing body arm you're radios ins in the car computers in the cars, dash movement cams. all those oppose evidence dash minuted cam rad make the similar, aments behalf body worn cameras. the big issue we have to worry about is storage access, foia, and other than that, you can work out the policy in your

agency. >> let me state that it enlightened department will take the view that there is no data they don't want in terms of assessing what is the right investigative result. they religion take it from anywhere any source, they'll analyze it, determine. so basically if what your goal is evaluating police performance, you want all data that is available and sently data that the police officer himself can control in terms of proper training. >> the goal no, sir. just to protect the police. it's to protect the public. >> correct. >> protect to public. >> protecting the public is the denting protecting the public this department coming out correctly on an investigative issue even if that is -- >> protects both sides. it's a win-win. protects both sides. you have a real record that you wouldn't otherwise have. >> i understand that but i guess -- i was responding to sergeant burton's point that the body cameras protect the police but the oren attention we should -- it's obviously your job is to protect your members

and also about protecting the peace and safety of the public, on the public's behavioral. >> what we sound in our discussessed be body warn cameras the original propose sal or premise was police accountability. once we said, yes we'll have the body-worn cameras the law of unintended consequences kicks in. advocacy groups say should provisioner with a sexual assault victim, turn the camera off and should domestic violence be interviewed while the cam race -- camera is rolling. the we want that part to be private but the initial encounter with the patrolmen contacting the victim, should be recorded. >> i'll take a few questions hereby. maybe you -- what are your

thoughts on the role of implicit bias? >> there's a tremendous amount of research coming out phillip goth as harvard research about implies sis buyways in policing and what we know is implicit vie bias is a problem we all have it and in a context of policing it becomes a real problem because it informs again who is perceived as a suspect who is perceived to be suspicious. i know there are training mechanisms that are available. i can't speak to them specific live but it's an issue we have to address. >> sergeant burton, how about this one. can you address police adopting disproportionate military equipment and tactics such as the overreliance on s.w.a.t. something that gotten a lot of attention recently, and i think particularly coming out of ferguson. >> you know, we have had riots for a whole -- for decades and i've heard some people say that

the riots started because of the military equipment. i think militarized equipment for example armored personnel carriers. we used them in washington dc. in baltimore, for example the only vehicle that could go into certain places why hill rioting was going on and safely extract one somewhats some of the armored personnel vehicles because they can withstand the bricks and everything being thrown. the idea that police departments have become militarized i disagree with the whichization, i think some of the uniforms we wear may look military but the police department themselves have not become militarized because the mission of the military and the mission of the police department is completely different. now, like walter, having spent time in the marine keir corps and our mission to close with -- seek out, close and destroy the enemy. my community is not any enemy.

in policing my job is to help people mitchell job is to arrest viely laters of the law protect property, and do it in a way that i don't treat people disrespectfully. it's not always easy, and i'm not here to tell you've that police officers don't make mistakes and don't screw it up but i think them characterization that our police forces have become like the military is a mischaracterization. >> a detail i always think about the cleveland -- the department of justice patterns and practice investigations of the cleveland police department, which is one of the things knosted by investigators is that in a vehicle bay in a particularly impoverished neighborhood in police department a sign up called forward operating base, which is a term taken straight from the military of forward operating bases being lightly

protected. bases in the middle of sort of enemy territory and it stuck with me. this was opinioned out by investigators exactly what the sergeant is saying about the wrong kind of thinking -- >> a sign like that send as me yang. one of my biggest struggles is facebook and social media. because they have a tendency to post things that if one -- the brilliant attorneys in the room was defending someone could use to just hang them out to dry on the stand. i'll give you an example. when the shooterring in aurora, colorado, happened i had a member post on the facebook pitch i don't to what is with you who it boys shooting up the place itch got on the phone have you lost your mind? take that down now. because five years from now you won't remember that you posted that and someone that is brilliant, doing research on you will find it. you'll be in court and testifying and you'll get asked the question if you have bias against whites and you'll say

no and, book there it is. you postie's it. we're trying to get people to understand that imagery and words are important the way you use them. >> judge, will courts be more willing to revisit the constitutionallivity of pretextual stops in the right of the recent police brutality and illegal seizure cases. >> i don't know how to answer that to speak for all the courts across the country federal and state. some courts will. we just got the indictment from the judge bases on the citizen's complain that bypassed the prosecutor. other judges will. some judges would have ruled as i did. some wouldn't. we have suppression issues all the time. we know that suppression rate is low. some judges are willing to suppress some aren't. it's not a question that can be answered. i do think everybody's sensitivities aring are heightened. i want to talk about the question of military. if you arm people to the teague they'll use the arms. i think as it is they're

carrying too many arms. you have a taser and gun and available, the tendency is to pull it out and use it. one of the worst ones in new york was a stairwell inspect their gurley case. and these cops -- new cops, brand new cops, no supervisors kids essentially are doing a stairway patrol but with they're hands on the gun and they bump into a couple and they're so nervous they shoot the couple. didn't make a bit of sense that couple did nothing to deserve being shot but you're carrying it it's there it's available you're nor obvious you use it. i thought you dean even need to have a gun in a vertical patrol. go up and down with the baton and do your patrol. shouldn't be violence. i do think if you're armed the danger of overuse of those weapons is there. [applause] >> i don't know how we get past the second amendment and i don't know -- number one i don't know

how we get past the second amendment. i don't know how you ask police officers to police when the second amendment exists without being armed. number three the -- >> the second amendment. >> the use of equipment like tasers is a response and a request from from the community to use less than lethal force. so we have police officers carrying a lot of things and having to make decisions which leslie that once to use. the gurley case is tragic. >> if i had a quick comment on that is as i think i answer almost all questions it's a leadership issue. there are going to be times when al qaeda is backed into a building somewhere in new york city where you're going to want to have military equipment. how often does that happen? we see roving patrols of pegasus all over new york city but the reality is 95-96% of your policing should have nothing to do with all that gear and there is training you do not take your weapon out of the holster. proper firearms training, unless you intend to use the weapon.

so that young -- no longer with the department -- was acting inconsistently with his firearms training. >> maybe not. maybe the thought he was in fear of his life. bet why did he feel that because he bumped into a down in the stairway? that's the racial aspect of the thing. what made him so scared? >> basically who he bumped in. >> the light was out in the stairwell. he had his weapon out. >> that's right. >> again, disregarding his training finger on the trigger had a negligent discharge. it's not accidental. the bullet ricocheted off the wall and struck the young plan coming down the stairway. that is what happened. a tragic set of events because he did not follow the training in terms of keep your finger out of the trigger well unless you intend to shoot something. that is consistently all firearms training. >> it's a tragedy that man lost his life and i hear you acknowledging that, butter i also think that the judge's point is let's look at the set of rules, the weapons that we

allow the police to carry under circumstances where they may not be needed that lead to those kinds of incidents happening and candidly, it disturbs me a little bit to hear an invocation of the second amendment right. what about the due process rights of the man who was gunned down in the stairwell? >> my point was in answer to the question -- >> i understand your -- >> the point about the second amendment about sending the police officer in the well without a weapon. america is armed to the teeth. it's impossible to send police officers touts face the kind threats 0 then streets and the kinds of peeps that people can legal he carry without having the police officer being armed. >> we need a lot more gun control in this country. we really do. [applause] >> councilman, maybe you can

address this. i'm interested to hear the panelists comment ton the role over fear in causing encounters to excavate. -- escalate. >> a natural disconnect of the individuals who are called to police these communities. and when you have unfortunately incidents we have seen play out owl throughout america because of the role of social media and because of access to cameras that chas champ is wydening and we have to be sure to provide an opportunity for folks to eventually patrol the communities, and i think that is one of the biggest disconnects. you look at a mace like baltimore city, we have some law officers coming as far as pennsylvania, west virginia, to work every single day. not to say you can't be in pennsylvania or weapons and work in baltimore city but you look

at it and you have close to 30% of the officers living in baltimore city and the other 70 or 60 plus percent living elsewhere. it's critically important again, that you provide folks with the opportunity to manage and police their own neighborhoods. >> talk about fear for a second. it assault always strikes me -- the point you made about guns. it would be very different to police in tokyo or belgium than it would be in america because the oddded of anyone you encount their tokyo being armed are essentially vanishingly small. and that is not true in america. there is a real genuine chance the person you're encountering being harmed. >> how much does that affect police psychology? >> i think it affects some people. you hear any police officer say they went through the spire career without being afraid they're not tellogy the truth there are instances when fear plays a factor in setter

circumstances and the metrics to decide what level of fear a person is experiencing is individual, and it all depends on how comfortable you are with where you are and so i think to the council member's point if you're not from that community your level of fear may be higher and this is not a white or black issue. if you're black and group the suburbs and now policing in west baltimore, that's not an environment you're accustomed to. so there is a level of fear and it's individualized and i'm sure it plays a part somewhere in some of these encounters. >> your assumption may be wrong about everybody being armed. of the 4.4 million stops over anyone years there was 19.5% were guns were seized. a small number of 4.4 million stops so not everybody is walking around with a gun. >> 1.5 percent. that's the number. >> yes. >> so, if you're a police

officer, if you do -- if one and a half of out every hundred stops yields a gun and you do enough stops in the a month you'll enencounter a gun. >> that's my point. the concern is not only gun. the concerns are knives, screwdrivers anything can be a weapon if someone intends to harm you. i can take this pen or my keys or anything else as a weapon. i think in terms of protecting yourself as a police officer against weapons equipment is very important. tactics is very important. i just had the good fortune of talking to a bunch of kindergarteners, and fifth graders about police work. two days ago. and i asked all of them what they thought my biggs tool was? and none of them -- actually the kindergartensers government it writing mitchell brain. all the stuff 0 on my belt. the biggest tool is my brain. the next motor post tool is the law and the way i apply and

enfor this law and if i do it properly i leave that encounter with not always a happy citizen but a safe citizen. >> the human element the skills and the common sense you bring to that encounter you would agree with you say somebody had a pen or maybe a knife that the first response should not be to shoot that person. the first response should be to de-escalate -- not inert he de-escalate or to shoot. if the person has a knife and the encounter is calm, it's, let me have and it put that down while we talk and i'll give you your knife back if the notify is legal. if you have the knife in your hand -- some people pooh-pooh the 21-foot rule but look at the film out of philadelphia that was taken this week with the gentleman had the knife out already the officer was as close as this and hey had to back up and back up and back up. fortunately he had a police to retreat because he would have been severely harmed. thing too about knives and edged weapons, our bullet resistant

vests are designed to stop bullets. don't do very well against edge weapons else that's why police officers are concerned about edge weapons and the distance. distance is our friend. one thing they teach in the police academy the more distance you have from a subject the more options its allows you to employ. you always bring the gun to the encounter. >> are there any alternatives to arrest such as citation and summonses, viable as a way to russ conflict and cost? >> i would say sure. arrest should be the last thing. arrest leads to bail and i don't know if you saw the article about the protesters in your city baltimore city, the protesters' bail was being set as high as the cop who did the murder. these bails were being set at $250,000 which these folks don't have so they spend a month or ten months in pretrial incarceration without being

convict. this can't bereft. to arrest is a terrible thing if you can do something less such as a desk appearance ticket or a summons, and i think the police department know that and is trying to not do arrests if they could -- >> a study right now going on about summons enforcement being handled in the city with recognizing that the summons program, which is short of arrest has been a complete failure in the city. the numbers are staggering as the stop and frisk in many respects and the idea of the broken windows concept that people talk about ex-think lean itsen police takes the view there are minor riding a bike and rung into somebody and killing them, as happened in central park three months ago there are situations where an arrest is necessary or severe commons is required. but just riding on the sidewalk or some of the other -- they can be addressed by much left intruce stiff means. >> the republican national convention protests in new york

result net hundreds of arrests. the bottom line result of that was millions of dollars in settlements. that didn't do any good for inner. >> we can look at arrests but there's also the interaction. right? so if you are a young african-american man growing up in urban america the likelihood you'll have a consistent interaction with police, whether you are arrested or not is much higher than other folks and it's that arrest that we get back to that chasm of the citizens and the police department and that's what we have to try to bridge the gap. develop ways that the police officers being the to protect and serve and being accountable and friendly and in a good relationship with the mind. now, if i'm doing something wrong i understand for us to have that type of interaction but some things are disproportionate yeley applied in urban areas to folks just walking down the street. that's the root of the issue. >> but the -- >> but talk about collateral consequences to an arrest you an

arrest record. you have to disclose that on an employment application lot of collateral consequences to being arrested that are desdisproportion and a halfly born with the -- >> summons in lieu of arrest in terms of de-escalating the situation. it's not always going to be. if the person believes they didn't do anything wrong they can't believe you're going to irthe summonses and some montana equal arrest. you have be to booked and fingerprinted so is there is no difference other thanout don't go to jail. in terms of the bay your honor the issue is a legislative fix inch the district of culp ya you can only be detained if you commit a crime of violence as define nets the code. where is is where the state let you goes city councils and congressmen make a determinationing are we going to use bail for the intend to ensure you show up at trial or use bail to keep people in jail. so that is something that the maryland state legislature needs to fix because in washington dc unless it's a crime of violence you're notes going to

be held or unless you have a conviction or on probation and violating pronation some way you're going to be released. so the encounter and the successful conclusion of the encounter all depends on the demeanor and behavior of the police officer determine and behavior of the citizens to make sure when we leave the citizen we leech them in a better place than we found them. it's not always easy because if if leave we you four tickets you won't be happy with me. other than i'm going to give you a washing then you might be happier with me. >> all right. final question here. is there an obligation on part of leadership to distinguish between negligence and criminality in access force cases. >> -- excess force cases. >> i think it is absolutely a requirement of leadership to have within the department a mechanism that can on a timely, thorough and professional way analyze every encounter and come

to a conclusion as to what was the conduct of the officer does it go in the criminal context is it a criminal way? and if the conduct is such that there are violations of administrative firearms rules and what have you that there can be a con current administrative function to remove that officer in a prompt and effective way. very frequently the public focuses on what is the public prosecutor doing without a real meaningful ability to assess whether the department is actinged and dishesly within to hold the officer accountable for conduct. >> seems like a black box to those of us -- >> a black box that at times within the new york was close to solution you have eight prosecutors in new york, two federal and narcotics narcotics and and you have to get them to agree because they're always of a view their criminal case should trump anything the department is

doing. the commissioner has to say look i cannot afford have on my streets of new york an officer who is acting inappropriately unprofessionally or doing that and i have an obligation to the public to remove that officer from the streets or put him in a situation where i can remove him from my department and it's possible but difficult. >> on that note a round of applause for our panelists. >> on c-span2's road to the white house, more presidential hopefuls announces their candidacy for president. live saturday on c-span. former secretary of state hillary clinton kicks off her caminiti pain with a- -- campaign from -- on monday afternoon at 3:00 on c-span3 we're live at miami-dade college where former florida governor jeb bush will officially announce his candidacy. and on tuesday on c-span.org, businessman don indiana trump announces whether or not he'll make a bid for the preside si

and you can watch all events online anytime toot c-span.org. the rhoads to the white house 2016. >> director of clinical cardiology at brigham and women's hospital the boston, on the advances in heart surgery and the progress being made in the understanding of heart health. >> this actually is a valve that has been crimped on to this catheter being now positioned into the diseased valve and it will be deployed here in just a second with the balloon being inflated and a new valve will be inserted inside the old calcified stenotic involve and as you can see here the delivery system is being withtehran and then the wire will be withdrawn and walt we have seen is replacement of a disease aortic

involve in a manner that does not require open heart surgery. we're trying to become smarter about predict who will get disease and trying to become smarter as to identifying most effective means to prevent or attenuate the disease and then smarter about following up over a long period -- longer period of time. so we're currently in an era where we're trying to harness the promise of the human genome research project in existence for more than a decade. with all of the infomatics driven by the giants of the industry like google, for example, and information about sociology, geography demographics, where you live, where the railroad tracks are what is your likelihood to get diabetes on the basis of your educational blonds and your likelihood of developing something like diabetes or hypertension if you live in a certain part of the city where

you have less access to the right kind of food or even the right kinds of instructions about sodium consumption little things like that, that could have enormous impact's population health. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's q & a. >> the environmental protection agency has proposed stricter limits on ground level ozone. the regulations would force more local governments to adopt plans for improving aerate. an epa official testified about the new standard at a house hearing. this is two hours. [inaudible conversations] >> like to bring the hearing to order.

even epa admits it is no not fully known in some areas how to achieve full compliance. in other words have to use unknown controls to do it. to meet the standards. the marginal cost of ratcheting down the existing standard goes through the roof and the epa estimates that a 65 to 70 parts per billion standard would cost 3.9 to 15 billion annually annually and that a 60 parts would cost

39 billion annually. independent estimates are much higher including a national association of manufacturer ares study that puts the costs of a 65 parts per billion standard at 140 billion a year. which would make the -- this the agency's most expensive regulation ever. this study also estimates 1.4 million fewer jobs and household costs averaging $830 per year. these costs come on top of all of the other rules we have seen from this administration, many of which also impact the energy and manufacturing sectors. moreover, this rule is yet another chapter in the administration's effort to force more extreme climate policies on the american people. i might also -- i like to just name a few of them. we have done the utilitying

math the boiler math, the cement math, the air pollution rule the pm, the 111d, the 111b the tier 3 all on top of this proposed ozone rule. i would also like to point out that in today in america there are 230 counties not in compliance with the 2008 standard. and i might also add that epa is just now getting around to providing implementing guidance for the states for the 2008 rule. now, these counties not needing the new standard -- meeting the new standard would be death nateed as nonattainment there are 230 counties today in nonattain around the country. epa estimates that fully 358 counties that currently have monitors would be a nonattainment if they go to 70 parts per billion and 558

counties would be a noncompliance at 65 parts per billion based on recent data. now, this does not include counties nearby or without ozone monitors that may also be designated by epa to be in nonattainment. now, nonattain. designation is like a self imposed recession for some areas. ... . he becomes extremely difficult to obtain a new permit to build a factory to expand the factory of powerplant landed in and permits for existing facilities would be impacted. just last week the manufacturers, over half of them, 53 percent if located

in a nonattainment area. the same permitting challenges apply for roads and other large of a structure projects in effect almost all the major job communities, economic activities jeopardize the attainment area. designation is a nonattainment is enough to scare off employers. the major parts the san joaquin valley may never be in compliance. and they are certainly not in compliance today and have been out of compliance is

the beginning of the clean air act. so it's not working very well. this time i like to recognize the gentleman for his opening statement. >> thank you, chairman. for holding for holding this hearing on the epa proposed ozone standard. also want to welcome the assisting administrator and thank you for testifying before the subcommittee. since 1970 the cornerstone of the clean air act has helped keep air quality standards. each air quality standard based on science and medical evidence to the standards as the is the level of pollution, the structure has been extraordinarily effective and cleaning the

air and protecting public health my including the including the health of children and seniors. the current standard is falling short. it's been weaker than the law would allow command such the scientific advisory committee made crystal-clear that in order to adequately protect someone's health epa must strengthen the ozone standard to ensure an adequate margin of safety for individuals but these recommendations were ignored by the bush and ministration the the flagrant disregard for the fact is yet another exhaustive review. to revise the standard to fall within the range of 65 to 70 parts per billion as recommended, the epa decision is fully consistent with the law and the litany of adverse health effects. nearly 1 million asthma attacks for children result in the school is of thousands of premature

deaths. these are meaningful real-world benefits benefits, but i have little doubt today we will hear much. in kansas united states supreme court opinion written by justice scalia medically the epa approach for determining the safe level of air pollution and cause may not be considered. the best way to implement the standard. if you're in all the epa may not consider this when setting the standard. nevertheless worked with the office of management and budget for careful analysis of projected cost and benefit associated with reducing use of. they estimate the benefits would range from 13 to $38 billion annually outweighing the cost by approximately three to one.

industry is prepared dubious and grossly inflated estimates but failed to consider. the completely one-sided picture ignores the real cost especially for children whose light of the fully developed. the epa proposed ozone standard would have dire consequences for economic growth. these doomsday claims the history of the clean air act is the history of exaggerated claims that it never come true. over the over the past 30 years the clean air act is reduced -- -- for all americans. i yield back the

balance of my time. >> the german yields back. i recognize the german from texas for five minutes. >> is that why hours going over comments about the ozone rule. it was a common theme. members of the chamber with a greater partnership members mom-and-pop store this is a quote. when you to search.

epa says you please then you can have more please. the words came from the epa workforce the state agencies and make this will work but have no clue over the health impact. these voices come from all america. >> the gentleman yields back

>> i want to thank you, mr. chairman, for holding this hearing today on epa proposed ozone rule. i i also want to welcome back mr. mccain, the acting assistant administrator. she's always give us and support forthright right testimony. mr. chairman today is is been duly noted. we're here to assess the proposed national ambient air quality standards for the ozone the cpa legally mandated to put forth -- the epa mandated quality standards.

concentration levels sufficient to shape public health with an adequate margin of safety for certain pollutants that endanger public health and the environment. we know we know that the epa establishes new standards based upon medical and scientific

>> a a scientific advisor to the assessment of epa not

adequate to protect the public health. she proposed to strengthen to better protect itself. the agency about it it's in all aspects including alternative level will be held in. update the air quality index to reflect your revised standard. the a q why is the tool that gives americans real-time information about air quality each day so that they can make informed choices to protect themselves and their families. ozone seasons a lasting longer than they used to so epa proposed to lengthen the monitoring season to max the season when ozone levels can be elevated. to protect the environment from damaging levels of ground-level ozone the epa

has proposed to revise the secondary standard based upon these studies that add to the evidence that repeated exposure to ozone reduces growth and has other harmful effects on planted trees. he ministered just for the secondary standard within the range of 65 to 75 ppb, the same as the primary standard proposal to protect the public welfare particularly against trees plants, and ecosystems. in addition we propose to plants, and ecosystems. in addition we propose to make updates to monitoring and permitting requirements, smooth the transition maximize effectiveness and give areas new flexibility to meet local needs for monitoring ozone precursors. all these updates are designed to ensure americans are alerted when ozone approaches levels that may be a healthy especially for

sensitive people. the administrator proposals to strengthen the standard is designed to better protect children and families from the health effects of ozone pollution's. we estimate the level in the range of 65 to 70 ppb would prevent an estimated 330,000 to 1,000,000 missed school days, 320,000 to 960,000 asthma attacks to days, 320,000 to 960,000 asthma attacks to children and 710 to 4300 or more premature deaths per year. implementing an act has always been and will continue to be a federal, state, a federal, state and travel partnership. epa stands ready to do our part. local communities, states, tribes have already shown its we can reduce ground-level ozone where our economy continues to thrive. we have reduced we have reduced or pollution by nearly 70 percent in our economy has tripled since i to 70. we fully expect this progress to continue.

existing and proposed measures like vehicle standards and powerplant rules will help improve air quality in many areas me revise standards really received over 430,000 comments during the 90 day public comment and are viewing knows as we work toward completing the final standards by october 1 of this 1st of this year. thank you, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, ms. mccabe. many of us believe it's the clean air act is to be changed. i say that because just as mr. rush mentioned in you mentioned, the epa looks at the impact of healthcare by making it more stringent's. you eliminate premature deaths which is important.

you don't have responsibility look at those pockets of the country that are in noncompliance and the impact that the stringent controls several jobs. that economist after economist, and talk about loss of jobs and the impact that has on healthcare for children, infants. and yet epa is all about the benefits. it's binary is noncompliant they can build a new client. they can build infrastructure projects command it has an effect on jobs. fortunately areas like los angeles they rely on the entertainment industry so

they don't have to worry about manufacturing jobs. how do you account for the fact that los angeles is still noncompliant and your own rule states that some of these areas the only way they will ever be in compliance is they have to use unknown controls' to my controls that we don't know what it is. it's whether a 70 or 65 and even president obama try to read the invitation to have

a role to play that they are driving epa because there always going in the court and under the strict structure of the language's sometimes it's quite nebulous. video as a frustrated's. so hope you get a sense of the frustration. one by you concerned after all this time areas like los

angeles and san joaquin still can't me feel standard? >> there's a lot in your question. i'll try to address is much as i can. there are parts of the country where it has been extremely challenging due to a variety of factors for particularly the means billions of people who live in those areas are exposed to healthier air quality has improved in southern california. >> are still in noncompliance. the areas making progress in a way that still provides a vital local economy.

>> los angeles is in the extreme category. if the standard is revised they would have until 2037 to meet 2037 to meet the standard. what that means is the area has a lot of time to bring reductions in the place. >> they been working on it for 1518 years. >> there is still not healthy. >> my time is expired. still very strongly. you should just continue to implement this existing rule for a while and give the country time to catch up. the implementing guidance is not been issued until recently. i recognize the gentleman from illinois for five minutes. >> mr. chairman in your

written testimony nationally since 1980 ozone levels of fallen. 90 percent is originally identified is not meeting the ozone standards now meeting those standards. what do you say to the argument that we have already reduced its our average ozone levels enough and furthering going to standards from 75 to 70 465 we will not give us the additional health benefits and post of the cost.

>> make a determination about whether the current level is adequate to protect the public health. based on all of that review and an open process based on all of the science we have seen it shows that people suffer the effects of air pollution, ozone air pollution at levels below 75 parts per billion. that is her job to do under the clean air act and what our proposal is all about. >> since 1980 we have reduced or pollution epa has not considered a cost of implementing the primary or

secondary but only can consider the health benefits cost-benefit analysis' by the epa or any other agency before during, or after the proposed rule. >> ranking member, your correct to.out that there is something laid out in between deciding what they say is important in deciding how to meet the standard it's there air quality, sources with considerable help from the federal government. we don't no exactly how states go about meeting the standards. they have cost-effective ways to do that with the help of rules provided by

the federal government. we do we do provide as part of the rulemaking process regulatory impact analysis to show illustrative costs. those economic reviews. >> the chairman los angeles and other places command in what direction is the epa bringing in more into compliance. it's it's obviously a populous area.

makes it very challenging. as a result epa as well as really progressive and smart and innovative agencies and businesses in california have led the way in figuring out how to reduce emissions and cost-effective ways to protect the citizens and improve air quality. epa has provided significant support and assistance to grant programs, technology over the years and will continue to do that in order to bring the kinds of programs that need to be in place there. one of the advantages of that bringing new ideas and approaches in the use and

way that can benefit the rest of the country and benefit the economy. >> i yield back its. >> i recognize the dillman from texas for five minutes. >> i think the chair. welcome back. much of the ozone america is beyond our control. epa calls this background is on. some of this ozone is natural. those mother countries. this was houston. some of that is not our ozone. some allies to mexico's. we did it because emmanuel crop burnings. another poster. i showed her this map of

ozone pointing to america from china and asia. in your proposal you admit that natural ozone and ozone from china should be a huge problem. your rule says there are times where ozone levels approach or see the concentration levels that the proposed in large part due to the background sources'. more than one half of the ozone america's you naturally are comes from overseas.