essentially as we look at policing we have to expand our framework in terms of how we deal with this particular matter. frankly i don't use the term don't use a term for peace that much anymore. i use public safety because if you haven't read it, sir robert peel led nine principles -- officers in here know what i'm talking about, nine principles of policing started in the london metropolitan police department in 1829. she said people are the police and the police or the people. .. big mama back in the equation. you have to make sure that we resolve these things ourselves. we have to make sure that we have strong in resolving that we are as a strong in resolving our conflicts as the police are

shooting us. we have a case with a kid that was killed. taser international does virtually all of the video in relation to the weapons, and they are getting rich in major lobbying. when were talking about body thinknd hands-on guns, about dealing with a multibillion-dollar industry. look for some black folks, otherwise, that do the same thing that have a more progressive agenda. odbye, but i go say good luck in your communities with oversight. you must h because you must have oversight. if you don't have that, i mean more than a review board. i'm not disagreeing but more than a review board.

the late mayor of the city of detroit started the police commission. it has subpoena power. it deals with hiring. it deals with the facts that our problem is we are underdeveloped economically. and so, therefore, when jon jones in the rich suburb wind, like in bloomfield hills, i kid walks down the street with a gun, and because he is open carry rights, they don't shoot the kid, white kid. they don't taken to jail. he wins it. why? because of jon jones parents live on lone pine road and they've got some money. and if that cop goes up and does anything he won't have a job. we need to get to that economic point that booker t. washington said. the bottom of everything is economics. if we control our economics, we control our community. [applause]

>> so we have some questions. >> the title of the book is how do -- how to end police brutality. >> with some questions for our testing which brain trust and panel. i will start with one for deray announced for hilary and director davis to respond as well. if we imagine that there is racism in policing, and i think in this room we don't necessarily have to imagine, then why would also imagine there isn't racism in housing, in education, in health care and in employment? if there's racism in all of these things that happen upstream, many before any contact with law enforcement, how is it that they have avoided the spotlight as we've been talking about police reform?

i ask this question first to deray and then hilary and in director davis. how do we widen the lens to include the broader language of the history of racial oppression and racial accountability in the country? >> in ferguson it was mike's body length industry that got people out industry. there was something about the physical presence of the oppression of the police was like a catalyst for us. i think the issue of police violence is often a proxy for the other way the state is violent with people and it's such additional reminder. you see the police and they are in communities in ways that education is amorphous to people. lord knows please are touching and feeling people which is sort of the crisis. i think this is an entry point to a larger conversation. i don't think people are ignoring it at all but this is like a place to start. i mindful of the fact it was a pair of the place to get people

into streets. i think would use this moment as an entrance to talk about broader understands of violence. like you said before, police violence is the more than broken bodies. it's about broken futures and about broken homes. so please take more than just bodies. you have to talk about that. the conversation in the movement is not as complex as it could be when we talk about the range of violence by the police unlike an entrance to because they are the physical reminders about the state of crisis people. -- this role reminders. >> first, the issue of police and racial profiling has been going on for sign -- sometime. under the clinton administrati administration, bringing together major conference with law enforcement come with civil rights organizations, community organizations and others. it was under that emphasis that i spoke to janet reno who was the attorney general for the first time.

janet reno made it loud and clear as we talk about policing went to address this issue of racial bias in policing. that was the '90s, y'all. what she said then was policing and effective the we don't of the establishment of the trust ever session of integrity a law-enforcement officials. these men and women you are seeing before you personify that trust and integrity necessary for effectiveness. but to go on with the question you asked, it does expand all other areas. it's not an extraordinary thing that secretary castro was at the naacp national convention this summer to talk about affirmative and for the for housing. database be collected there as well. they played a game of effect and not intent. it's racial to commission. what that means is what they're saying is if you can't show intent to discriminate, if you can't read someone's mind, that is not discrimination. that's the argument they make.

because of the work done by the previous secretary of housing and now castro, the issue of but the fact carries the day. no matter what you say your intent was, if it is discriminatory from its discrimination and it has to stop and people have to be held accountable. into department of education we talk about the same issues we talk about our children being arrested in high numbers. those resource officers put in local school have an effect quite frankly of columbine. the challenge is not a columbine problem. our children get shot on their way to and from school. the issue in school -- that has to happen and start on the outside. we talk about education, move the depreciating budgets, that assistant principal participant was taken out of the equation. that was one of the first jobs cut because no money from the federal government for resource

officers. except they're not take effect kind of counseling. they are addressed -- they're trying to dress the issues of criminality. we asked the group of resource officers, what's the number one reason you a rest a kid? what's the number one reason you put them in handcuffs and put them county jail? they said the number one reason we do that is actually crimes of defiance. crimes of defiance. that kids who are going through puberty when opened her mouth into the wrong thing at the wrong time and a criminal offense. the issues of discrimination are very much with us and we're very delighted that assistant secretary education did one of the constant reports on issue we utilize. the issue of employment. appointments a major role in these issues as well. it is no surprise as we talk about employment discrimination that so happens in some new levels in our society that we do have right now for as long as

visitors it is in part a secretary of labor who gets it. tom perez have sat down with us time and time again to talk about issues of been able to more forcefully enforce anti-discrimination policies in employment. it plays a major role. it is a confidence issue. i can tell you they are all tied together. the challenges with racial and ethnic discrimination is still unfortunate in the 21st century alive and well and causing havoc. [applause] >> so i agree with deray. i don't think it's forgotten. we look at fighting crime and crime reduction, want to talk about the root causes i think that's where the split comes. if we keep trying to arrest a way out of companies where respond to the symptoms of versus the root causes. we look at the root cause of the current window education does

not appear if a a child doesn't read by third grade at a likely of incarceration grows exponentially. we know future prisons are determined based in third grade reading levels. we know what's such a suspended the likelihood of incarceration grows. these are the root causes and we look at crime reduction then it can't simply be taking people to jail as to disrupt those who causes or change those. window job for a person out of prison would reduce recidivism more so than anything else. i think we'll look at the systems with to make sure, i think it might've been deray has said is that it's too often we focus on individual officers. officers need to be held accountable and that a higher standard. i say that as a 30 year veteran. we have systems in place that even though you could officers they left out outcomes because of the system was designed of the outcome anyway. we need to take a look at the system. assistance on education. quite frankly to the sheriff napoleons point, the chief of police of today can be the

loudest voice not just on policing issue but a public safety issues. advocating for education so that you're focusing on kids and their environment, advocating for jobs and for social justice and making sure the community has the resources needed. we would hot spot policing, put the cops were the crimes that were some imagine, it shouldn't be the cops. it should be the resources. instead of putting 100 cops, how about 100 jobs, 100 teachers? right? [applause] that is community policing. if we do that i would also been community policing cannot be done in isolation. it must be a subset of community-based governance. the entire city governance is tied to public safety from the council, the mayor, public works, recreation. everyone has something to do with public safety. if we do that tha then we realie police reform is about criminal justice reform. we have to take a look at the sentencing reform, how we are putting people in jail for how

long and why. take a look at our incarceration rates. take a look at what happens when you take a young person to jail with as a loss of voting rights come economic power. a lot of devastation that comes with existing policies and practices, it was sometimes given your focus on just the police we may lose focus of a much larger challenge although the police are the most visible form of government. never forget this, also vigorous exertion of government power would be the police use of force. it must be held in check and must be held accountable. [applause] >> next question is for sheriff napoleons and chief hite. people are innovators and leaders in getting the police department to shift its culture to a culture that recognizes the importance of the human dignity of communities they police. and you talk about concrete things that police departments can do and community activists can ask for, can demand that will incentivize the right kind of behavior, the right kind of

mindset for our officers enter most vulnerable communities? >> one of the first things as i talked about early on as we have to focus on who we bring into law enforcement. that has to be the absolute fundamental first focus. we have got solid recruiting efforts, recruiting people into agencies that have the right temperament and down and understand the kind of commitment they need to the community. we have to do that. if you bring back people into the agency, you're going to have that people in the agency. so recruiting is where i believe we really need to sort focus. would also have to focus on the training and the mindset of the people who trained. because the people who are training it, if your reporting and your advocating a certain type of conduct and support a certain type of conduct, i can tell you any of us who have led a police agency especially in

detroit, i had 5200 people. now i have over 1000. that is a difficult thing. as dollars become scarce, they cut back on the most fundamental things that we're trying to do. don't give you the type of time you need to make sure your recruiting the right people. don't give you the time to make sure your training the right people. not getting a proper supervision. and even, unfortunately i've had people who control my budget say things like well, kennedy outreach isn't important. i'm not talking 1 10 years ago o a document in light of what's going on in the country today. i said before commissioners who said, outreach to which is another money for the. but yet they want you to try to become a par part of the commun. you to focus on those things. >> i could say ditto because i think you're right. and training starting to get it starts with understanding that we have the responsibility as a

committee talk about the training. on of the visit training academy? how many of you are part of the training? we made it clear in our administration that we need you to help teach police officers how to police. i learned how to police from the committee. one quarter was learned in the academy. that three quarters were hard working with you. [applause] argonne we have committee conversation. i've done close to 200 where we of conversations about policing in neighborhoods. we have very distinct policing methods, but same time we have a different community. the normal click is different and every community. our population is a change. in indianapolis we have -- we have a suburban style, and urban and then we have the boutique policing. which is specialization of those who live downtown who expect to pay the high rents, who expect police to get her at the drop of a dime. so the question becomes what do

you want in terms of the cabinet of your police officers? can we bring children over we greater detention centers for juveniles. it's okay to put a young person in a car and bring them home? what are the policies? i talked about earlier, cannot talk to your children without interfering you sang don't talk about police officer, we don't snitch, or can we talk to them about the fact i want you to be a good young man, i want you to grow bigger and larger and stronger i don't want you to be afraid of me so i will finish as a 12 year old with a gun in your hand. i want you to understand i care about you. i want you to grow up. i want to get you to make sure you understand i do. can have a conversation with your young people? and lastly in the end of the process are you there to make sure the process is completed? we started in the '60s down this pathway when we saw that policing. we stopped. we can't do that again. we have to people like hilary and others pushing and getting a

nudge to make sure we do it. that has to happen. >> if i can just amplify something. i don't believe that a person who is willing to come into a community and police it should be unwilling to live in that the same community. [applause] >> too many shows, talk shows show this spirit of adventure. that's not reality, folks. not in our world. most of it is monday and. we have to talk about service to you, not just adventure. >> it is now my distinct pleasure to introduce the 83rd attorney general of the united states, came in on april 27, 2013. for those of you who watched the nomination process, it seemed like she was nominated april 27,

1915. she's a former u.s. attorney, a twice over harvard graduate. and for me personally i do think most importantly, the daughter of a north carolina librarian. as an i. she has inherited a department of justice that has done historic things and its imposition to take this country in brand-new directions that will heal sentries all damages. please join me in welcoming attorney general loretta lynch. [applause] please, please, please. any second now. [laughter] i know she felt that in spirit.

>> [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [applause] >> all right. that fellow daughter of a north carolina in librarian, attorney general loretta lynch. [applause]

>> thank you. thank you, thank you. [applause] well, thank you all so much. thank you so much for that warm welcome, thank you for your patience. i'm not usually running this late. but i understand that you have had some excellent presentations before me. i see a number of old friends, and hopefully new friends on this panel. great voices all, in our common struggle. and so i think you have had excellent presentations and i'm just sorry that i had to miss so many of them. i am so looking forward to hearing the recap of this because there are so many important issues here. dr. goff, such a pleasure to meet you, your leadership at ucla on the center for policing equity is something that is not only vital, in terms of what we need today, it really is the key to a lot of the issues that we

face. when i'm looking at the agenda for the entire cbc foundation events, i see so many different panels on so many different issues, but they all come together in regards to the central issue of our community's relationships with law enforcement and with our government writ large. so many of the issues that you all are tackling all this week come back to that essential issue. and so i thank you so much for giving me a few minutes to talk to you this afternoon about what the department of justice is doing in this important area because i will tell you that i view it as one of my main priorities as attorney general of the united states. i know that congressman conyers had to go and vote. vote. is also pulled in many different directions by want to thank him and his staff for the invitation to this event as well as for setting up this particular panel and, of course, the congressman's lifetime of service to these issues.

he has been in this fight for a long time. a long time. [applause] as have many of you. not just here on the panel and on the podium next to me but out here in the audience. i see a lot of fighters. i see a lot of people who have walked a lot of lines, and walked across a lot of bridges, and so i thank you for that as well. [applause] whether you have been in the struggle for years, or whether you are new to it and part of the new and exciting and dynamic young voices that we need to tell us the truth, i commend you and i am so so glad to hear from you. your commitment is important, your ideas are important, your energy and your passion. and now is the time that we have to all come together around these important issues. because while we have made just extraordinary progress since the

cbc was founded over 40 years ago, it is clear that we have so much more work to do. in the recent weeks and months we've seen these reminders, you know there's not just the overall philosophy that we always say there's more work to do, we have to keep marching. we've seen it. we've seen it played out in a very, very stark and very painful reality captured for the world to see. tragedies that make it clear that this fight for our common welfare goes on. and i will tell you that what hurts me so much in my current role, is that we have seen the mistrust between our law enforcement officers and our communities also deepen at a time when, not that it hasn't always been the case, but at a time when our communities need, perhaps more than at any other time, the protection and the resources that law enforcement is committed and sworn to bring to bear.

it has always been my view that the essential role, not just of government, but of law enforcement in particular is the protection of people who don't have anyone else to call on. you know those times in the middle of the night when people are cold and afraid and they know that someone is out there who means them harm, we have to have someone on whom to call. and we have to be able to trust and rely upon those individuals to come when we call and to also look out for us when they do arrive. now this is an issue that i know you're talking about today, not just on this panel but so many others, but on this panel in particular you've got the voices to do it. you've got the experience and you've got the people who also provide you the perspective of what it feels like to be left out of that dynamic of protection; to be left out of that umbrella and that circle of guardianship that every american is entitled to.

and that is such an important voice today. now it's also not a new issue, although it's an issue that's very deep and very personal for me. as some of you may know, i'm fortunate enough to have my father here with me this week. [applause] but this issue is generations old and when i was a young girl i remember, the things i remember my father telling me about, you know you all talk about your grandparents and your aunts and your uncle, and the family lore that's what makes you who you are. you know that's how you know what the lynches are like and you know what the harrises are like, and they're both stubborn just so you know. [laughter] but i remember my father telling me about his father, about my grandfather. a minister, third grade education, no money, eight children, dirt poor, living in rural north carolina in the 1930s when my father was born. and even with all those things stacked against him, built his

own church beside his house, ainst him, built his own church beside his house, called it lynch's chapel. that's what you can do when you build a church yourself. and one of the things that my father remembers is that there were times when he was a young boy in the '30s, when people in the community, black people in the community were in trouble. as my grandfather used to say, caught up in the clutches of the law, and didn't have anywhere to go. and they would come to my grandfather and he would actually help hide them until they could leave the community. and sometimes the sheriff would come by the house and ask my grandfather, you know, gus, have you seen so-and-so? my grandfather would say well, not lately. so-and-so is hiding in the closet or hiding under the floorboards because in those days, 1930s north carolina, there was no justice in the dark of night on a rural road.

no miranda warnings, no procedural protections, none of the things that we take for granted today. and so despite what had happened with these individuals, my grandfather knew that sometimes in order to preserve the fight for justice into the future, you had to take action in the moment. you had to take action in the moment. [applause] now of course, things are much better now, and we all get reminded of that whenever we bring up these issues, you notice that when you talk about these issues, whether they are of race in general or police issues in particular, when you talk about the current pain that the minority community is feeling and it is, we are feeling it very, very deeply, people say, well you know things are actually much better now. and they are. they are. you know, in addition for giving you my apologies for being late today, i can tell you that i was late today because i had a meeting with the president that ran over. i would never have been able to say that even five years ago. the fact that my grandfather who fought so hard for justice in

his own way would never have conceived. that his granddaughter, the little girl he used to take out in the fields and you know, show what tobacco looked like, you know would actually be sitting in a meeting with the president of the united states. we have come so far, but we still have so far to go and these issues of fundamental fairness and the relationship that the minority community has with government writ large, and with those of us in law enforcement in particular are still with us. they are still important today. and we all understand on a personal level the frustration that comes up when we are treated unfairly because of race. but this is really about more than just that. s is really about more than just that. this is really about being treated unfairly because of race by those who are sworn to protect you. by those who wear the uniform of protection. this is really a deeper issue than just the individual

discrimination many of us have seen in whether or not we didn't get the job, or get an opportunity or someone didn't speak to us. we are talking about the pain that comes up when these deeply rooted injustices get shrugged off, and they get ignored. now we are in a different time and things are much better, even if they may not seem that way. even if this seems like a very painful time because we are seeing these issues so much more clearly, i have to tell you that this takes me back to the early days of the civil rights movement. and you all remember those days when people were marching and protesting and talking about conditions. you couldn't vote, couldn't get a job, couldn't sit into a store and just have a break and have a cup of coffee. and no one wanted to believe that that was the case until the advent of television. remember the televise marches and the protests, and when the world saw what was happening,

that police dogs were put on little children, that fire hoses were used against young men and women, that galvanized the conscience of the world and gave the movement a momentum to make changes. to give us a civil rights act, to give us a voting rights act, to give us desegregation, to help us craft those strategies that our lawyers use before the supreme court. and now we are in a similar moment, when so many of the images that we see are so painful. but they are being used to show the world what people in the minority community have known for years about the different levels of interaction and the different levels of both respect and participation in the system that african-americans have and that african-americans feel. and as painful as it is to watch someone suffering or possibly even dying, the result has been an opening of the discussion in ways that we have not had in

significant years. and so the onus is on us to seize this moment. the onus is on us to continue this discussion, to continue this debate. because now the world knows what we always knew. that people in ferguson were being taxed for walking down the street and being the wrong color. the world knows what we always knew that young men of color's interactions with the police are fundamentally different than other children's. and that as parents, and as siblings, and as family members that we have a responsibility to point this out and talk about it as well as educate our children. but we also have to acknowledge or than just the actions, because there's something that goes on as well, something that the deeper when we had these situations. we have to acknowledge the anger and despair, the feelings that

develop. people come to our stock of wanting us to handle things in a certain way, and that's true, and this country was built on peaceful protest. it is a fundamental right of our state it can achieve a great deal of change. but we also have to acknowledge the anger and the despair that develops when these concerns that we now see on tape are still pushed aside by so many people as if they don't exist. you have to acknowledge the kind of pain that develops. you have to acknowledge that feeling, thinking what people say, well, i don't think it was that day. i don't think they meant it that way. or even, that just didn't happen. you know, it just didn't even happen. and so when that happens to people, to of people, to our people time and time again, you have to have within our community a sense of disconnection and despair that

is as dangerous as any bullet or any billy club. it absolutely is. [applause] but, of course, i'm not the first to note that, and honestly i would refer you back to that work of art by ralph ellison, invisible man. invisible man. and you will see all of that there. you see the consequences of it as well. and, of course, the reason why we have to face this and deal with these issues is of course because as always, as with the movement 50 years ago and issues now, it's our children who are bearing the brunt of these issues. it's our children are growing up without that sense of connection, without a sense of protection and security that they are entitled to have. and that we want them to have. want to do things i'm doing is i'm doing a six city community

policing toward her i'm going to different jurisdictions that have had very, very troubled and very challenging relationships between the police and the community between five or 10 years ago. either a lawsuit, shooting incident, a consent decree, with the department of justice has had to come in concert a certain amount of the actual persuasion or litigation in order to manage unconstitutional policing practices. but there are jurisdictions that have turned that corner. and i'm talking to different people about how and why that is the case. and, of course, things are still not perfect. there still are people who feel on the fringes of what we're trying to achieve for them, and those are the voices that i want to hear the most because those are the voices i have to address. when i was in pittsburgh, talking to a group of young people, high school students, because able to be what is happening in their daily lives and tell you what they see and more importantly how it makes them feel. i was talking to a young man who told me he was afraid to walk in

this particular pittsburgh neighborhood. he described as a fairly rough neighborhood. and so he felt threatened by forces around in who had other agendas, who are trying to draw him into gaming life or tried to draw them into files or possibly even put them in the way being accidentally caught in crossfire. what he told me that was the most painful thing was that it wasn't just the other residents who frightened him included were not on the path that he was on, he was excelling in school and moving ahead with a bright future. he was also afraid to call the police when he felt that way. because he didn't know if they could tell the difference between him and the people who are trying to do him harm. and what i sa said is we have to acknowledge is that no one should feel that way. not in america. not today. not our children. and for those of us who have had

a career in law enforcement, even when a law-enforcement you hear is that should say i do not want that feeling in a child of mine. because they are all our children. they all have to be. and this has to be the starting point for our work. do our children feel safe? and if they did not, what are we doing to change that dynamic for them? what are we doing, not only to make them safe but jamaican few other people and forces that look out for them, that are supporting them, and that are coming into the communities to protect them. now, not only does the department of justice recognize this issue, we're determined to do our part to prevent the unequal application of the law and to try to end violence and conflict, and to heal the divisions in our neighborhoods that have resulted in stolen lives and broken communities. i very much view our role as working to amplify the voices

that are here in this room. community, resident, law enforcement, activists all like. we are working to deliver essential solutions and to cultivate the opportunities to let people come together. not just have these discussions but to do the real work, the hard work of the result in safer communities and a more just society. but we know that our work is not done and that we have to do more. whaone of the things as a nation we're working on, one of my top priorities as attorney general is dealing with the breakdown in trust between the law enforcement and the communities that we are sworn to serve. i spent a lot of time talking to both sides of this debate and i spent a lot of time talking to people who have had these experiences with law enforcement and who share them with me. it is a gift when someone shares their pain with you. you have to understand it really is a gift they are giving you the ability to understand what

happened to them and understand what they need. i've also talked to law enforcement officers who say to me, what i wanted is protect people. i became a cop because someone help me, or i became a cop because i saw people in my community going the wrong way and i want to prevent that. i think recently i became a cop because i simply things are going to want to make a better. so bringing those voices together, setting them find a place in which to talk and interact is a very, very key part of what the department of justice is looking to do. because at the end of the day we are all part of the community. and it is from the community that our responsibility to it grows, and should of course blossom. there are a number of things we are doing by way of initiatives. i'll take a few minutes and talk about that. just last year we launched the national initiative for building community trust and justice. this is a comprehensive approach to training and to policy and

research intended to advanced procedural justice and turbo racial reconciliation and eliminate implicit biases. trying to go to the root of some the problems that we are seeing. our civil rights division continues to work with the police department's across the country to ensure constitutional policing in their jurisdiction. and i've been so hard on the fact that a number of police departments have told us that they're making the ferguson report required reading for their entire department. required reading for their entire department. because they know that in order to prevent the problems of ferguson or something of our communities, you have to not only acknowledged them but look at the root causes of them and move away from those root causes. our office of justice programs is partnering with law enforcement agencies at the state and local levels. and through them we provide

grants and training and technical assistance compact to our office of community oriented policing services, and ron davis, is here. we're helping to higher officers to train officers took about officer safety and wellness, and to support the state and local and tribal law enforcement agencies as the implement the recommendations of president obama's task force on 21st century policing. which carries within it many of the maxims of community policing that we have seen be effective over the years. those of us who are from new york know about noblee and its organization. but also the impact of a cadre of devoted and dedicated african-american officers, lloyd sealy who pioneered the concept of knowing the people whom you were sworn to protect becoming a part of the community, it is

your obligation to serve and thereby providing real service and real protection. and this is task force we are seeking to extend these principles across the country. we have been hearing from extraordinary individuals and exceptional organizations like the ones that are represented on this panel. but they keycome and i will say the biggest lesson surmising in my own community policing to her is that i think i don't know but i think this panel will tell you and i think people in this room know, it's about the real solutions come from the places that are seeing the problems. it's not a problem that will be solved by washington imposing some policy from on high. it will be solved by thus empowering people who are living in these areas where these problems are occurring to work through these issues, but as providing resources and assistance for people to come to the solution that lead to better days. i was talking with my father

this morning as we were driving in asking how the conference was going and how the panels were going. and what was the best part. and what he said to me did not surprise me. he said, the best part is that on everything he had seen, and i'm sure it was true of today's, people are talking about their real lives and real issues. not just a study being brought to bear. you're talking about the real problems and find solutions for them. that's what our community policing roundtables are so important. i've been doing number of cities already. i'm looking forward to going out to the west coast next week and also extended his tour to look at the best practices, the ways in which people have found a way out of these challenging situations. not to a perfect solution but to a working solution. we are looking for to be able to share these with all communities. now with course we do more than at the justice department.

we also have to bolster trust in the institutions that make up our criminal justice system. we are doing that in part under the smart on crime and initiative. this is an initiative that was launched two years ago by my predecessor and your great friend, attorney general eric holder. [applause] who took the visionary approach across the criminal justice system and look at ways in which we may have had a well-meaning program 20 years ago but looked at the consequences of the actions that we took been on our communities now. of course i talk about the overincarceration of mostly minority young men, young men of color for the nonviolent drug offenses. that has so decimated our communities. not just a problem of the drugs themselves but the removal of

these young men from communities and from families has been a whole that has been created. and so the issue for the department of justice under eric holder and under myself is how can we, using our power and authority, what can we do to go about filling that hole? and, frankly, we feel that we do that in a way that protects the public safety but also takes into account these important issues. and a smart on crime initiative has been one of those rare points a bipartisan accord as we talk about the overincarceration rate in this country, whether it's from a financial perspective or from a human capital and cost perspective. federal prosecutors are now using their resources to still bring the most serious wrongdoers to justice, but using their discretion to find more effective ways, drug courts, focusing on alternatives to incarceration. for those and other methods will

still provide personal accountability without the devastating consequences that we have seen in the past. and, of course, the benefit has been as the overall crime rate has declined for the first time in four decades, this policy continued strong and will continue. we are also focusing on reentry because as we work out ways -- [applause] as we work out ways for these young people to return home, some of them will not be so young when they get out, but as we work out ways for them to return home, we have to also work out ways for them to rebuild a home. went to work at ways for them to return to not just their families and their communities but to society. whether that is through education programs in prison. just a month ago i stood with secretary of education party duncan as he announced a pilot

program to allow colleges to utilize pell grants for those who are currently in cars rated. because we know, we have seen that one of the greatest inventions of recidivism or someone being pulled back into that life is to provide them with an education while they are incarcerated and opportunities once they are released. [applause] but, of course, it's not just participating in your family, not just participating in your community, not just participating in your society. the ultimate participation in the american experiment called democracy is of course the right to vote. and that is why the department of justice -- [applause] -- continues to call for all states to revisit the issue of felon disenfranchisement. let them vote. let them vote the. [applause]

we are talking about our country's most sacred right. and the protection of the voting right calls for our most sacred engagement. and in voting rights cases in particular, i'm proud to say that the justice department has participated in more than 100 voting cases over the course of the obama administration. we are all aware of the supreme court's 2013 decision shelby county that took away a key provision of the voting rights act, an act that had stood for 50 years, and that worked come an act that allowed police to provision that allowed the department to look at statues before they were enacted and determine the impact on the minority communities voting rights, whether they be a dilution or diminution thereof and with that we are able to prevent the rollback of this important right. well, all right, the supreme court has spoken. and we have lost part but only part of the voting rights act. we have kept up the charge.

and we have not been idle. just recently we successfully challenged texas strict photo id law. [applause] in a separate action we sued to block to a texas statewide redistricting plans. and in my home state of north carolina, we are challenging several provisions of a state law that occurred early voting and restricts same-day registration. as the president has said, why do we want to restrict the right to vote, the right that makes us free and independent? the right to make it is frankly the envy of other countries. when they talk about the benefits and the values of america, want to thank you here when outside this country is frankly they are all at the fact that we can have a peaceful transition of power that we have every four or eight years.

and that is because we invest in this democracy. so why do we want to do anything to curtail anyone's participation in what has been an example to the world, and has to be the beacon that were used to ensure freedom in this country? the message from the department of justice is clear. we will not stop in these efforts. we will not be deterred, and we will not rest until we have secured the right to vote for every eligible american. [applause] and, of course, that extends beyond the courtroom and actions that we bring. working with many of the members who are sponsoring this wonderful weekend and other members of congress as well, we have promoted legislative proposal to restore the voting rights act to its full and proper and intended purpose. [applause] we've also proposed legislation

that would expand access to polling places for those living on indian reservations and alaska native villages and other tribal lands. we cannot have a situation in this country with the original americans are kept out of the participation in the bounties of this land. [applause] we cannot have that. we do this also through our monitoring program. we monitor federal elections and we've actually enforced a national registration act to protect those who are registering to vote, as well as of the rights of our uniformed members of the military, and overseas citizens who seek to vote as well. keeping onto what makes them quintessentially american. we will always protect their rights as well. and, of course, the right to vote follows from one of our nation's most fundamental promises, that no one should have to endure in discrimination for unfair treatment based on

who they are, where they live and what they look like. the justice department is pakistan on the front lines of the fight against hatred and intolerance come and we're working to combat violence. we have tools that been effective. the matthew shepard and james byrd hate crimes prevention act signed into law by our president, president obama in 2009. [applause] with islam we've enhanced our ability to hold accountable those who victimize their fellow americans because of who they are. and we've worked with our state and local partners to make sure that hate crimes are identified and investigated, and with continued to bring and will continue to bring federal hate crime charges. including our current prosecution of dylan roof for the murders of nine, nine people of faith --

[applause] -- nine people of god in south carolina just a few months ago. now for many of us, as we sat and watched the event every watch the aftermath they took us back to a time that we thought was over. this is a new day. look who's in the white house. lucas in the department of justice. we thought we had moved past those stark reminders that there are people there who live in a world of hate and will seek to act on it. we thought we had moved past this history of bigotry and brutality. without we left behind a pure intimidation and cruelty of the night writers. you know, those who come in the net and tried to keep you. we thought we' we had moved away from that. for many of us it took us back to another time that we thought we had the raced away forever. that time when just 52 years ago this week, for little girls went to church one morning.

they went to sunday school one weekend, and they with their attendant a sermon entitled the love that forgives. and it didn't come home that day. they didn't come home to those for families who live on with the loss of their children, who suffered the bomb at the 16th street baptist church in birmingham. in the days after that bombing, 52 years ago, i was four years old, and my father, like all parents, looked at me and my two brothers and wondered, how do i protect my children? how do i keep them safe? not just from the enemy next door but from the world that wants to kill them that they are less than. it will do once you tell them that they're different to a world that wants to tell them that they don't matter and that they are simply can't fodder. and he like all who are committed to the cause decided what he had to do is keep

working, keep marching, keep pushing, keep advancing. there were no guarantees 52 years ago when for little bodies did not come home. people did not know if we're going to get a voting rights act. didn't know if they're going to get the civil rights act. nothing was guaranteed. but with a deep faith and commitment, people pushed forward. we are at that same point again. in the days just after that bombing, more than 8000 people, people of all colors, people of all creeds the backgrounds, races and religions, attended a memorial service for the young victims. one of the individuals who gave one of the many storied eulogies and remembrances of the day was the reverend dr. martin luther king, jr. and, of course, he was familiar not just with the town or what the church can not just with the church but with the families and not just the families but the for little girls of themselves. and in his address at a time of great tragedy and great

challenge, he urged his fellow citizens to channel their grief, to harness the energy. he said, we have to work passionately and under that leslie for the realization of the american dream. that the people sitting in the pews on that dark day 52 years ago, as my father looked at his children and wondered how he would keep us safe, could hardly have imagined the progress that we've made, thanks to their the efforts and the work that would follow. they could hardly have imagined this group, the congressional black caucus itself, in size and strength i. they could have imagined this weekend of over 40 years of comments, thoughts, philosophy, teaching. they couldn't have seen it would be sitting in the white house today. sitting in a meeting with an attorney general who was that little girl whose father looked after 52 years ago and sent i have to protect. but they knew that there were

better days coming. they knew that if they push forward they could move past the pain of a bomb that were part of a church. and they knew that they work wasn't over just as ours is not also. and we have more work to do and we're here today to get started. and by that i mean people have been here working or going to continue, those people who are younger, new to the cause will join in and we will keep pushing ahead. because every american is the right to grow up in a community and a world that offers not just responsibilities to uphold also opportunities to succeed. because every american has the right to live in a country that will support them and that will protect them no matter where they live, with a look-alike or who they are. and every american, every american has the right to a justice system that gives them a fair opportunity to grow, to learn, to improve.

[applause] and to contribute. and every american has the right to make his or her voice heard. this isn't just what i believe in what you believe. it is what this country believes. it is what this country means. it is what this society believes. and it is what america has always promised to every man, woman and child in every community across this nation. and i'm here to pledge to you today that neither i gaza department that i am so proud to lead will ever abandon our work to make that promise real. but we need your help and your partnership. just as we have in decades past, to bring our country closer to its highest ideals. and we do look out and we see dark days of the times. as people did 52 years ago, but just as they did then, they looked around and they saw strength. they saw support.

they saw fellowship. they saw commitment. they saw what i see when i look out over this extraordinary gathering today. and they saw what i see, which is a people that will not be stopped. i people that will not be silenced. [applause] of people that will not be held back, and the people that will always, always reach back and lend a hand and pull someone along with them. because that is what we do. that is how we have made america great today. that is how we make america live up to its promises to all of us, and that is how we will go forward in all of the challenges that we have to face. thank you for your time. thank you for your attention. thank you for your commitment to this important day. [applause]

>> [inaudible conversations] >> there is nothing that should follow that. i'm glad the panel is dominated by men. we're doing to leaders other am doing to leaders other am also glad to make a doctor to doctor introduction. doctor melissa of the coming up to lead the next session. thanthank you so much. >> while the house is out until thursday the senate returns today to begin debate on legislation that would ban abortions after five months. live coverage begins at 2 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> the pope's upcoming visit to the u.s. c-span has live coverage from washington, the first stop on the popes to work. on wednesday pope francis will visit the white house starting with a welcoming ceremony on the south lawn followed by a meeting with president obama. then on thursday the pope makes history on capitol hill becoming the first pontiff to address both the house of

representatives and the senate during a joint meeting. file all of c-span's live coverage of the pope's historic visit to washington. watch live on tv or online at c-span.org. >> on thursday the senate commerce, science and transportation committee held a confirmation hearing for sarah feinberg, the acting administrator of the federal railroad administration. a major focus of the hearing was on the upcoming deadline to implement positive train control on the nation's railways. this is one hour and a half. >> want to welcome our nominee here this morning and get his confirmation and whether kerry we will consider the nomination of sarah feinberg ethnic administered a failure railroad administration. their mission is to oversee the safer level and efficient movement of people and goods to our nation's rail network. that rail network is a vital to the nation's economy. so it's important that those who

directly oversee the safety and efficiency of this network have the requisite skills and experience. ms. feinberg is inserted as the acting fra administrator since january. prior to her current assignment to serve as chief of staff transportation secretary anthony foxx from 2013-2014. from 2011-2013 she was the policy and crisis communications director at facebook iphone 2009-20 she served as special assistant to the president. before that she served as mr. emanuel's communications director for the house democratic caucus. ..

>> stopping a train as not being operated safely. the safety improvement act mandated implementation of ptc systems, however, complex and interrelated challenges have prevented railroads from meeting meeting this deadlines which are rapidly approaching. yesterday the independent government accountability office issued a report and the vast majority of railroads would need one to five years to complete implementation. even small railroads will face

testing, certification and operatability issues. the gao attributed implementation difficulties for first-generation components, complex system integration testing among other challenges. some of the issues have been government created gao pointed out that as a result of review issues the federal communication communications halted communication tower for a year effectively delaying implementation. gao ultimately found that railroads pushing to meet the current deadline installing components addressed could be counterproductive.

these findings should not come as a surprise. fra itself issued a report that informed issues such as spectrum availability, installation and engineering challenges and technical capacity. it is said for years the vast majority of railroads will not meet the current deadline. railroads have spent billions of dollars working through challenges. csf testified that the freight railroad has spent and expect to spend 9 billion to make operational nationwide. the reality is that, if only a few railroads could not meet the deadline, perhaps we could conclude there's an issue with those railroads. if every railroad in the country will not meet the deadline, we

will acknowledge there's issue with deadline. that's why legislative is needed to expand implementation while still motivating compliance and enhancing safety. the reauthorization bill which passed includes a bipartisan proposal to extend the ptc deadline on a case-by-case basis and common sense safety requirements such as cameras and speed action plans. i believe that failing to extend the ptc deadline will result in large scale disruptions to a nation's economy that would make the west port disruption or the 2013-2015 railroad problems that impacted large portion of the country look small in comparison. that's why letters and all commuter railroads inquiring

about extend ptc deadline. response to my letters recommend tremendous risk of disruption, passenger rail traffic, including the inability to ship critical chemical like chlorine. mta, new york responsible for metro north and long island railroad, collectively provide 180 million rides annually stated, railroad phase serious exposure to unacceptable risk that from critical task of speeding if i of implementation of union pacific, it will embargo all passenger and toxic

traffic, this includes chemicals essential for clean drinking water and crops. the transportation board stated in his respond to me that railroads may not be obligated to ship chemicals which could redirect them to other modes that are less safe. we cannot wait until the last minute to act. i believe absent congressional action. we will begin to see effects of the deadline 4-6 weeks as railroads begin to cycle traffic off their lines. this is a looming economic and safety disaster that is completely avoidable. now more than ever, i believe that ms. feinberg has the ability to work in congress. the time to anyone to play

politics with ptc deadline has past and we as policymakers must work together to avoid disrupting the nation's economy. having said all this, i want to thank ms. feinberg, despite some of the credit -- criticisms, ms. feinberg will receive if she's concerned. i would like to let him make any remarks before we turn to -- >> what i am going to do is insert into the record my opening statement. let me say at a critical time a time in which there are questions of safety, the

millions of people that use commuter rail at a time of essential to the economy of this country that we have healthy railroads that they can be competitive, they can operate safely, reliably and safety be central to the fra's commission. indeed, we've seen train accidents decline and fatalities decline, but then we have huge incidents of fatalities that bring it back to the floor, and so ms. feinberg for you to be willing to step in to the breech and try to offer the leadership that is so des -- desperately

needed of the federal administration which oversees the safety and development of the nation's freight and intercity passenger rail networks, so it's a critical aappointment. it's a critical time. it's a time that the fra cannot let anything be slack and drop. so aisle insert my opening statement in the record. >> thank you, senator nelson, we will make sure that's included in the record. we have can us today one of our very distinguished colleagues and a member, a very active member of this committee, i might add and the home state senator of ms. feinberg. we want to welcome to the other panel. our colleague from west virginia. >> first of all, to my colleague and for you mr. chairman to allowing me the opportunity to introduce the most

accomplished. it's really an honor to introduce federal railroad administration and a friend of mine. as you know, she's from west virginia. nonpartisan state, if you will. among our congressional delegation every day, it doesn't matter whether you're republican or democrat, you have to get something done. people except you to do your job. i want to tell you when i first introduced this young lady. her daddy that was in the state legislature, he brought this little girl, he brought kids and you all bring them, here comes this little girl jumping around and running around the chamber and everything, that was my first introduction. i watched her grow up into a young lady and accomplished young woman and has done a

fantastic. she's cut from the same cloth as we have a west virginia native, pragmatic and responsive to all of us. over the past nine months i believe she has proven herself to be effective and engaged leader with courage to make tough decisions and character to accept criticism that they offer. she's baptized after being appointed in this position january 9 of this year. on february the third, people were killed in new york. on february 4th, 14 tank cars carrying ethonol derailed just north. three of them caught fire. on 2016, 20 tank cars derailed

in west virginia, on february 24th the commuter train in oxnard, california hit truck. five of them caught on fire. i'm a firm behavior that elected officials need to be on the ground emergency situations supporting first responders and assisting those in needs. i was impressed bizarra's response in vest virginia which i witnessed firsthand. one of the best i had before seen and my experience has been through many tragedies in the state. there are a lot of smart policy people here in washington, d.c., the best policy the world doesn't mean a thing if it doesn't translate into the real

world. sarah's response gave me faith in her ability fot just to lead but the people that we are here to serve. it has been an engine of economic growth and the energy information administration predicts that growth to continue through 2020. from 2009-2014 crude oil production in the united states increased by more than 62% up from 5.35 million barrels and the majority of this product is moved by rail. in 2008, 900 tank cars carrying crude oil. last year, the number of grew to 500 tank cars. 500,000 from less than 10,000 over 5,000% increase. new challenges come along with

new economic opportunities presented by the growth and domestic energy production. mrs. feinberg's experience makes her unique and qualified to lead. as chief staff, she helped the department transportation develop a whole list and security crude by rail between model administrations within the department. the regulation that is were finalized in may were fend on collaboration and material safety. safety administration. sarah's experience in secretary office and existing relationships allowed her to cut red tape and get the right people in the room to get the job done. that's what it's about. putting people together if you want to get something done. they represent a major step in the right direction. they satisfy all or part of the ten outstanding national transportation safe boards recommendation including all four recommendations that were

made in april of this year. i've been impressed with ms. feinberg's willing to tackle issues and realistic solutions, taking politics out of the equation completely. opportunities for the fra to help railroads, meet the 2015 deadline and become a real partner in the process. her proactive approach to problem solving would be an asset and to all of us sitting here responsible for the safety of citizens and representative states. i want to introduce not only a young accomplished professional, and she inherited that in her genes and bones and bipartisan to get things moving forward, my friend ms. feinberg. >> let me underscore how old you

are. [laughs] >> thank you for being that. thank you for that introduction and we now look forward from hearing from our nominee, ms. feinberg please proceed. >> thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. senator thank you for your kind introduction. i'm greatful -- grateful for our friendship and strong support. i'm pleased with my brother matthew is here today and other members of my family are here in spirit. it's been an honored to to be named by president obama. it's also a great responsibility and one that i take seriously. just one month after i became administrator a train traveling out of new york city six people

were killed doing what americans do every day, traveling home from work or on the way to see their family. days later, a mile and a half train carrying 109 tank cars loaded with crude derailed near the town of montgomery and a fire burned for days. anyone who visited the scene would agree that we got lucky. the horrific accident took the lives of eight people. these accidents are reminders that millions of americans depend on railroad and oversight to transport them safely to their job each morning, to their homes and families each night and deliver goods and products safely every day. next year fia will turn a half century old. the agency has a proud history and a long list of

accomplishments most not bli -- notably contributions. derailments are down. those decreases are a testament of the work of men and women in the fra. improvement are generally not as dramatic as they used to be and occasionally you see spikes in the wrong direction and that calls for action. the american people expect every federal agency to adapt to new conditions and realities to be willing to change, to be open to criticism. over the last eight months, i have seen fra do justice, they've shared willingness to adapt, change, we head new direction and brought new think to go old challenges. we tried new solutions aimed at addressing the old challenges incidents. we partnered with police around the country to step up enforcement and in june google agreed to integrate our crossing

data to add crossing roads to google maps. when i arrived in january more than 70 recommendations awaiting action. we've taken action on more than half of them. reducing the number of outstanding recommendations by nearly 15% and we await word on another 30 from the ntsb. some of these recommendations have been sitting for more than five years. fra listened to the frustrations that members that this committee expressed and we've acted. this year we've completed two loans and accept to complete two more shortly. the risk program is very much open for business. while working to try to bring new solutions to old challenges, men and women of fra have stayed focused on ongoing safety priorities and have delivered cig ífic -- significant

results. the united states has seen a dozen crude derailments. we completed the hazardous train rule that aims to prevent these types of accidents and lesson if they do occur. we prioritize impleltation -- implementation. we're also proud to work with many here today and in the greater new york city region to provide nearly 1 billion-dollar loan to implement ptc on mta's system. both administration's budget and america act have funded and ranging member nelson, i want to thank you you for the recently past legislation that seek to leverage $2 million to cover some of the costs and expenses railroads have been taken out to

implement ptc. all of this activity is in addition to our continued focus by making sure agencies partners deliver high-speed interpassenger. none of the success would have been possible for the public servants dedicate today rail safety. i am pushing fra each day to be diligent in the pursuit of safety, open to passive innovation from any source, the agency has -- is engaged because we know the gravity of responsibilities and the size of opportunities. this confirms, i would eagerly work with members of the committee and congress to build a stronger and safer rail system and one we can all be proud of. thank you and i look forward to taking your questions. >> mr., -- thank you,

ms. feinberg. we will go around with five-minute questions. the committee has conducted extensive outreach to understand the effects of failing to implement deadline. it's clear there will be widespread if congress fails to add. there's a strong possibility that it will cease service all together. a concerned that is echoed by long island, metro north in new york and connecticut, and so i want to get a couple of numbers on the record. based on your outreach to railroads, approximately how many have informed the fra that they may suspend or reduce service? >> senator, i think that you have the most recent numbers because they've been responding to your most recent later.

i have not had a conversation with a railroad that they do intend to operate on january 1st. so i believe you have the most recent numbers, but we are well into the 20's at this point. >> okay. have you or dot evaluated the extent to which there will be increase in congestion or people taking alternative modes of transportation? >> we have not looked at the evenings of january 1st or january 2nd. i do have significant concerns about the consequences of railroads choosing not to operate on january the first. >> if you had any discussions with fta to determine whether transit buss have the capacity to carry displaced riders who

might otherwise be on commuted railroads? >> they are in constant communication about issues. i don't think we had the specific bus conversation, i don't think there's an expectation that buses would be able to take that load. >> how about the smaller railroads, class twos and class threes? some of those are frequently overlooked at the mandate that also applies to them and they happen to use in many cases class-one railroad track. roughly how many of these small railroads would be equipped as a result of ptc requirements and are you hearing of any difficulties these railroads maybe experiencing? >> certainly, and we have heard generally through the association and short lines and from other individual entities and we can get you specific numbers if you need it, but it's significant that most are watching the congress and

keeping an eye on what is likely to come out of here. >> the -- our colleague on the community which i'm sure you'll here -- hear in a moment, dot should not be subject to penalties by making good-faith efforts even though it will not imcomplement -- implement. if connecticut dot and metro north are considering to be making a good-faith effort, are there others that are as well? >> well, there are many railroads that are making a good-faith effort and have -- we believe have been working diligently toward ptc implementation. the law and the statute, the deadline is very black and white and does not give in our read does not give flexibility to railroads that are working

diligently versus ones that are not. >> if a line is not currently handling toxic materials or passenger, does ptc apply? >> it depends on where in the country we are talking about. but it is aimed at lines that are handling hazardous materials and passenger service. >> would the fra consider continued movement of nonpih, nonpassenger traffic over such lines after december 31st of 2015 in violation of the statute? >> yes. >> does the fra intend to impose fines or related after deerve 31st of 2015? >> we will enforce the law as of the deadline on december 31st. we will enforce the deadline and the law. >> how does fra carry obligation that carriers have under

existing law? let me ask it this way. do you believe the common carrier requirement is in conflict with the ptc deadline? >> i would refer to stb on that and i have read their recent leader and i think you have seen as well in which they defer to us on safety, and so-duh -- so it's a partnership between the organizations. >> my time has expired. i will send it to senator from florida, senator nelson for questions. >> you heard about the old saying we are by the devil and the sea. if we don't expand control, most wants to get positive control, install as fast as possible, but under the law you have to impose fines but railroads say they

can't comply and, therefore, they will not carry certain traffic. so what do we do if ptc is not extended? >> well, sir, we've said that we feel that it's our obligation to enforce the ptc deadline and so on january 1st if railroads that have not implemented ptc choose to operate, we will take enforcement actions. >> you formed a task force on this and it's getting information to be used to monitor the progress and guide enforcement efforts. tell us about that. >> yes, sir, we've had a number of fra's staff members working on ptc for years, but more recently i have formed a task force that is working on ptc

across the board. they are in close touch with railroads. they are offering technical assist ands, they are monitoring testing, one of the things they are also doing is complecting data -- collecting data so we follow process regularly. >> if congress extends deadline for ptc, what would your recommendation be, how long of an extension? >> sir, i don't think it's appropriate for me to recommend a certain amount of time. i would be differential on the congress on what they believe the right action would be in terms of deadline, as we have in the past offered as much technical assistance and expertise as we possibly can and be helpful to the congress if they contempt late --

contemplate moving the deadline. >> now, it'd be nice ptc installed sooner. i want to thank the chairman for this so how would you go about the use of this funding? >> we would want to coordinate with committee and take guidance from you. the $199 million would be used as an off-set for premium for commuter, railroads applying for ptc loans or used for the grant program for the same computer -- commuter railroads. >> it's a problem all over the

country. can you talk about your efforts to partner with local law enforcement and technology companies on this great crossing issue? >> yes, senator, thank you for the question. following the metro crossing incident, fra launched a crossing campaign which would seek to try to bring new thinking to this old problem and one of the first things we did was partner with law enforcement to ask for increased enforcement at great crossings, so ticketing in an effort to prevent people from beating the train, if you will. we've also reached out to tech companies to take our great crossing data, location of more than 2,450,000 crossings across the country and integrate in the map so when passengers and

drivers are within a mapping application they'll be alerting that they are approaching a great crossing. >> so back to the pregnant question before us, do you have a recommendation on what we do an extension of ptc? >> i don't have a specific recommendation for a length of time. i'm grateful to this committee and leadership of this committee for being so focused on the problem. i am worried about the consequences that come on january 1st and i'm grateful to your attention. i don't have a specific amount of time that i would recommend. we would continue to work with the committee to offer technical assist ands, expertise and any assistance that we can to be helpful as you were on this. >> thank you, senator nelson. up next you get the double team. [laughs] >> there you go.

there you go. we're glad you're here. i appreciate the discussion this morning. it's not been about who is at fault, whether the government is at fault. we are not going to make this deadline. you mentioned, ms. feinberg over 20 railroads have told you that they would not operating on january the first, some of those railroads also obviously commuter traffic run over those rails as well, burlington northern, their contract requires them to have their rail system in compliance with federal law. your view that commuter traffic could not use those rails as well? do you have a view of that? is that what you think? >> that's correct. they are right to thinking about

computer service that functions on their track and to be clear, the commuters are thinking about that as well. >> and do you think it's reasonable these 20 railroads have told you they -- they might not be able to function, do you think it's -- on one function do you think it's reasonable that they cannot function if they're not in compliance with the ptc standard? >> to be clear, they've actually communicated to senator but -- >> right. >> copied us on the communications as well. it's reasonable for railroads to take a close look at how and if to operate on a date when they will become -- when they will be operating in violation of the law. i think that's an appropriate thing to look at and frankly, that's something that we would expect them to look at regularly. >> it's reasonable to assert that they cannot or should not and no -- knowing violation of

deadline? >> each railroad will have to make decision individually. it's reasonable to to be contemplating whether to operate that day. >> of course, with that freight along with other freights isn't part of the commerce system, there are major problems in commerce for water treatment, for plastic, for whatever else, those chemicals go into, anybody doing the study of the economic impact if railroads aren't operating in january 1? >> we have not done a study on the economic impact. i can't speak for the stb. we have not done that specifically, but and our obligation is in terms of thinking of safety.

>> and -- >> likely move by truck. they don't use by rail. >> so that creates safety concerns in another -- not only the traffic, advanced traffic, but you just move that same problem to another place. >> that's right. >> the same concern to another place. in terms of the passenger rail, do you know of any discussion they have having whether they think they should be able to operate on lines that don't meet the standard? >> it is an active conversation that's happening across the industry. it's not just the freight that the commuters are having conversation. we are close with them and they have very anxious and keeping a close eye on this body to see what happens next.

>> and have you been thoughtful of not giving indication of how long an extension would be. do you think -- is it your view that there needs to be some sort of extension beyond january 1? >> i mean, to echo the ranking member, i think he said between the devil and the deep blue sea. i think we are between a rock and a hard place. the deadline is not going to be met. that is disappointing to me and i think that has safety consequences that i'm concerned about. the railroad is not operating, and also has consequences. i would -- we would want to work very closely with this committee to try to assist in any way we can and offer technical assistance and expertise if you look at the deadline. >> thank you, chairman. >> you are here to -- for us to ask question to be the boss.

i'm going to ask you boss questions. this was issued yesterday on the ptc implementation. i'm going to read a photograph. provided with grant extensions on case-by-case basis would provide flexibility and help railroads mitigate risks and ensure ptc is implemented in a safe and reliable manner, do you agree with that? >> we are willing -- >> that's not my question. i want to know whether you agree with that statement providing fra with the authority to grant extension on the case-by-case will provide flexibility and could also assist fra with limited staff resources? >> it would certainly give us flexibility. i am less worried about the staff resources because we have plans in place with contractors and we've had plans in place for

quite sometime. i am anxious about the prospect of entering into negotiations with 40 different railroads on a case-by-case basis which result in deadline back and forth. >> okay, so you're not comfort only with a case-by-case basis approach rather have a set deadline? >> we have to be aware of the consequences with entering into negotiations with 40 entities. >> that's what i'm trying to figure out. you have to make that decision potentially. >> ultimately fra doesn't have the authority to make the decision. >> you have authority on this subject. we know that they will not be compliant by the end of the year, correct? >> correct. >> no question. >> most will not. >> a few will be but most will not. they're not going to operate,

but really what they want to know is what you're going to do. if you know they're not going to be compliant by the end of the year, can you tell the committee what you are going to do on january 1? you gave us a memo that gave the enforcement options. >> right. >> why is it you will not say -- the railroads are trying to decide what to do, if congress will not face the reality that an extension is necessary, they have to make a tough decision and so do you. the sooner you make your decision, the more informed their decision will be. when you will make the decision on what you're going to do when they are not compliant. what is that? >> if the december 31st deadline remains in place and railroads chose to operate we will take enforcement actions. we will issue fines and impose

additional requirements on the railroads that will raise the bar and safety if they chose to operate without ptc implemented. >> have you discussed what the fines will be? you know this is going to happen. what i'm trying to figure out, we are going to have a huge mess if nobody operates on january 1. we don't know any other way to put it other than a huge mess. it's going to be dangerous and damaging to the economy. it's going to cost jobs, it's going to be exhibit a of why congress is so unpopular because we can't manage to do something simple than recognize the obvious here. so we know what the situation is going to be. why can't you be more specific so the railroads can make an analysis about the cost benefit of the penalties they might incur versus operating? >> so let me try to explain it this way. the railroad continue to make progress every day, so we're

currently about three and a half months out from the deadline. some railroads make progress every day. they are testing ptc, they are getting additional equipment, they are obtaining spectrums and so to give a railroad a specific amount that we will fine them today has -- may have nothing to do with where they are three months from now. what we said the fines will be significant. $25,000 per day. you are choosing to operate past the january 1st without implemented ptc, that would be multiple violations. so we've said is we believe the fines will be very significant and we will on top of that impose additional requirements on the railroad, whether that's additional crew members, requiring to communicate, potential speed restrictions. we've been as clear as we can

be. i believe the railroads do deserve transparency and clarity on what will happen on january 1st we tried to be clear on that. >> i think if you tell them what it's going to be, that'll slow them down. you think more specific on significant fines and, you know, i think also what i would appreciate analysis of which is going to be more dangerous than not operating on january 1 or continuing to operate without fully implementing ptc because i think there's a real question which is going to be more dangerous and it sure would be a shame that the analysis wasn't made transparent. >> thank you, let me just point out too, i think the administration did put an extension, and the other point i want to make is an important one. everyone is focused on january 1, which, of course, is

the deadline, but the effects will be sooner than that. probably november time frame, so the sense of urgency attached to doing something on this is very apparent and i think we have to recognize that we don't have a will the of time to work with and the senator of missouri is exactly right. you look at what could happen, the potential effect. this is a huge disaster in the making which as i said before is totally avoidable. so senator fisher is up next. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to follow up on the fine that is you were talking about and the penalties. you mentioned that they're going to be significant. before that you said the railroads are making progress every day but we all know they are not going to get there. they have been very open about it. they have given us quite a bit of information on the problems that we're going to be seeing

all across this country and as senator said the tremendous &ous impact we are going to see on our country's economy and the safety of our citizens by a shutdown basically from our railroads. when we're looking at the significant fines, what system have you established that will determine what the fines are? does that offer any clarity to the railroads or to us on this committee? do you have a system in place? >> we do have a system in place. we have a long standing system for enforcement for railroads that has been in place for many years, we are specifically following the 2008 legislation, we finalized rule-making in 2010. we can certainly get it to you, it's several pages and details

the various enforcement actions that we will take. >> what are a couple of the specific actions that would happen? >> there many. they involve failure to equip -- >> what's the penalty? >> 15,000, but it depends if it's a willful violation, they're like enforcement agency. >> that leads me to the idea that there are companies that are working in a good-faith effort and they've invested billions of dollars in trying to meet the deadlines that they are not able to meet. are you going to be looking at those companies differently? i think earlier you said you wouldn't. >> that may have been a reference between freight and commuters. i believe, if i understand your

question, we certainly do not want to disincentvise progress and finish railroads that are making progress and working hard each day to reach the deadlines. it's also important for the enforcement mechanisms to be fair. >> would you be looking with -- with that comment i would think you look at treating companies differently and making accommodations for them individually, and not as a group. >> so we -- to give you an example, some railroads have been unable to obtain the spectrum that they needed in order to implement ptc. my point is that as we look at enforcement actions, we want to prioritize both the ones that

are the largest impact on safety but also the ones that railroads have control over versus something that was out of their control. >> okay. i'd like to switch gears here and talk about the ecp breaking requirements and that would also cost billions of dollars, but two class-one railroads, union pacific and northern southern, they tried those systems, they abandoned and didn't feel there was benefit to safety. when you look at crude by rail and the rule making there, it's my understanding that the fra did not conduct a world study? >> we used a modeling for the ecp for the impact of ecp brakes we do. you're correct that braking systems are in place in some railroads that are actually being used each day, but to

actually take one train equipped with ecp and one train not equipped and even testing is not something that we did. >> so no hard science was really used at all in determining those regulations? >> well, i do think there's hard science involved and math involved we'll, but we did not actually go out and involve trains in a real-world incident. >> i understand that maps used in modeling, don't you think that hoard science would be more helpful specially when you had two class-one railroads that did have information on it? >> well, we would be more than happy to do testing like that. we have said to this committee that while funding is important for testing like that, we are always anxious to collect more data on braking systems. you know, i understand that the railroads are concerned about the costs of implementing this

braking system. i would also note that prior to the rule being finalized some advertised that they were using it. i'm aware that they are unhappy with the cost and we want to collect more data about braking systems, but we are very foe yoused -- focused on whether the braking system works. >> i would say that we're concerned if it works, we're concerned about the safety, we want to make sure that investments have a return that will keep our population, our citizens safe, so to imply that this is all based on costs, i think is a comment that did not need to be made. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator.

senator fisher, and we have up next, he's ready. you want to go -- okay. senator peters next. >> thank you, thank you, mr. chairman. you are putting a great deal of good effort putting in and working hard and i appreciate your effort and i appreciate the opportunity to meet earlier and talk about some issues. before i get into the freight control which i have questions relate today that, i would like to first mention a personal incident that i had with a good friend and an accident that you mentioned and some of the follow-up related to the accident. you mentioned the inceddent outside of philadelphia in 188. i have personal contact with that. i have very good friends that lost their daughter in the very tragic accident.

the first contact with amtrack was a cold call from a claims adjustor of some sort who said that they would be willing to pay reasonable funeral costs, that was amtrack's response which did not suit well with the company, as you can imagine. amtrack is to have family assistance plans and i inserted an amendment, which is part of the comprehensive transportation bill, which hopefully will pass. i know my colleagues seem to be concerned if that's going to pass, but an amendment that is part of that. i require your agency to and others to take a hard look at family assistance and determine whether or not they were followed. i would like to hear from you, if anyone else at fra have

looked into amtrac's response of both the victims of the derailment and the families to determine whether or not they complied with statutory requirements and your assessment of it? >> and that will certainly all be part of the investigation into the incident. i know that you know, senator, ftnb is investigator, it has guidelines and i know that they will take a close look at that and we will as well. >> have you had an opportunity to do that? >> we have had some conversations about the accident and the response. i have reiterated the importance that i put on making sure that families are communicated to quickly and -- and

appropriately. but it will ultimately be party of the investigation. i can't get ahead of them. >> i hope you take a strong interest in this and understand the seriousness of it and i look forward to working with you in the months and years ahead as we take a look at that and make improvement, things like that do not happen again. now to the possible train control, go report that came out yesterday, and if we are able to pass the comprehensive transportation bill or we do a separate bill that allows us to move forward and push back some of the time requirements for ptc, you will have to oversee some of the implementation of their work and their plans in the future, but in the go report they neated that there -- noted that there were deficiencies. in fact, they said they lack any

meaningful effort. the reports they are providing are deficient, what do you plan to do to make the reports more and how do you plan to fix it? >> we have agreed with the recommendations and agree they are important recommendations. most of them were being integrated ptc implementation prior to the report. we take their recommendation seriously and we will take action on them. the gao report registered some concerns about the amount of data that we were collecting from the railroads and the kind of data that we were collecting from the railroads. i believe that over the last search months we have ramped up our efforts on that front, which are not necessarily reflected on the gao report. a much better sense of how

railroads are doing and the progress that they are making. on their safety plans for implementing ptc, we have try today give significant guidance for what we are looking for and how we can go back and forth with them so plans are efficient as possible. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> mr. chairman, i appreciate you very much and i hope they've been kind to you. [laughs] >> anyway, ms. feinberg, everything that i read about the amtrack train, it sounds to me that that's just -- as a pilot, you know, you have to be where you are at all the times and report that. i went over and was able to go over to look at some of the new est locomotives just to get a

better understanding of what was happening in the cockpit. i was amazed that we are still using technology, 50, 80, 100 years old. in our cars we have more information, in our front-seat of driver's car we have more. can't we at least -- they were telling how much costly it was and how much time it would take. i said, just to have a situation awareness would be something. knowing where you are at is pretty easy and simple technology. did you find that to be -- i don't know -- i don't think anybody, i don't care on what side of the fence people maybe whether it's the railroad companies themselves, we all want them to be safe, everybody does, if you're not moving to new technology, why would we not be using some of the easiest

latest greatest technologies for train track? >> we could not be more supported that that improve safety and lives. you can take that back to our encouragement to tech companies so that we're communicating both, you know, engineers but also with drivers who are approaching a great crossing. >> are they looking at -- i don't know. i was asking the questions and they were very kind over there to show me everything and look through the whole scenario. i did not get the feeling they are moving in that direction. we call it a glass panel, glasscock pit, -- >> well, there's also a beauty

of the cab, but i think probably the most important technology that railroads can integrate at this moment is ptc, which is incredibly complicated, well worth the complication. >> you're working through the deadlines and industry making sure that we are doing everything. you understand the time consuming. >> yes, sir, we have tried to do as much as we can to be helpful as railroads are tempting to implement this technology, so we have offered technical assistance. ..