assessment, this was a couple weeks. i am telling you what i heard about excuses for them not deploying. >> the shelter at home program is a state plan but it is underwritten. >> by the federal government. they have to have your plan. the excuses they gave me, my job to hammer you. it is to hammer the fed. they tell me the state had not responded in timely fashion. >> i would like to comment on that. we have developed that program jointly. it was with administered a few gate's first visit that we first discussed doing something like shelter. ..

when you get someone there, they have a contact that can't make a decision. we have to be essential we get with the community leaders in these programs in a disaster and identify a contact immediately. that did not happen, did it? >> sir, we put people in the office, the parish office of emergency preparedness office. >> maryland dry, how long was it before you got contact? you held the slip up in the paper and name of individual and you had just gotten that? >> in excess of two weeks t was a contact assigned, supposed to be assigned to me. one conversation on a sunday

afternoon and yet to heard back from that person since. >> yet to hear back from him. mayor sheldon, how long did it take you? >> 21 days. let me state this being with contact with the parish officials does not drill it down into the local municipality. >> right. and again and you described the destruction of your community. then maryland dry and mayor shelton told me we had no disaster recovery center. you had no disaster recovery center two weeks afterwards? did you finally get one? >> we did. >> you did. but he had none. then i went back to the field where this picture doesn't show it. there were multiple portable ones. that we need a portable unit in

denham springs. that is not acceptable. they're sitting in fields not deployed. >> sir, there was two-week discussion whether or not we could have a drc because we're in a flood zone. >> again we have a portable unit that was, portable units sitting again next to the trailers, or the modular units saw them. water, okay, housing, then water in florida and other disaster areas we were prestaging water, one of the essentials to get to people is shelter and water. i was told it was four or five days before fema water, is that right, mayor ramsey. >> is that right, mayor shelton? >> i can't give you a date. had not been for congressman graves we would not have water. >> people in the "cajun navy"

and cajun people were delivering and helping people get water, i was told days before fema's water which is supposed to be prestaged ever got there. what was the problem? they said communications. mr. robinson, why can't we get, why couldn't we get the water to them, that fema has prestaged? >> sir, as i stated we staged water and meals ready to eat in camp beauregard, the state plan and national guard dribbles to -- >> what happened not being able to get it to the communities? they told me it was a communications problem. are you familiar with it? >> i'm not. i will check that out. >> we need to find out what went wrong. >> yes. i would like to point out at no time did anyone from fema contact me that water was even available. i had to go through congressman graves office to get it. >> again, these are the basics, housing and water are not there.

we've got shelter which we're paying $60,000 a unit or more, and $20,000 to erent them and they don't fit at 95% of the sites. we have a handful of them deployed. this is the pitiful federal response by any measure. got the federal regs, little circle going around about raising the houses now. something's got to be resolved with that i don't know if a waiver can be done. i talked to ranking member. we'll talk to mr. richmond and others, but people are left in limbo because they don't know if they can rebuild their homes. people are walking away from their homes. i met at dinner with a young man who, his wife had just bought two years ago. that young people mortgaged the house up to the hilt because they're trying to get their own home. he doesn't know whether to walk

to turn the keys over to the mortgage company. he was not in a floodplain. has no insurance. it is a pitiful situation. they relied on federal floodplain maps and now, economic impact in this region is going to be devastating. not only have they lost their homes, they're going turn keys in. the financing of houses, probably the depreciation, 25, 30% of every home there because of what's happened. so homes will be not only, have, not only been underwater. now they will be under water and people walking away and jobs. recovery like in denham springs, they will, 50% of those businesses will never come back. it is almost impossible. they lot their stock. they lost their location. and there are no customers because people don't have jobs.

well, you can tell, this is frustrating. we do have mr. graves, and i think mr. richmond, we, we have a -- going down to look at that. governor edwards, mr. fugate said he could handle that within existing budgets. i don't know about the cdgb grants but that's what he told me. i don't know whether we'll need that. there is lots of money available i'm told. we'll have to sort that out. i'm not certain. and the cdgb grants is probably the fastest way to get some action because it comes to the local communities. and they can eliminate the red tape and go for it. >> and i would like to respond to that. the administrator told me the same thing. with the budget authority that he had pursuant to the previous appropriation or the agency, he

can absorb the costs that are fema's costs even at the 90% share. but cdbg, that is not contemplated as being, coming out of that. >> right. they are different fund here. we have some sba issues. and i'm concerned about, i've gotten reports of possible fraud in some of the claims for food stamps and assistance, how that's being monitored and cooperation, even between state agencies is not what it should be but we rely on the state for accessibility to some of those public assistance programs. that's got to be addressed. we'll have some more questions on that. let me yield now to miss duckworth. >> thank you, mr. chairman, like to start off recognizing former senator mary landrieu who joined us. welcome, senator, thank you.

i would like to sort of look at some of the issues. it sounds to me like fema has policies, much of it specified by congress as to what you can do, what you can not do, and i'm just trying to figure out if there are specific challenges affecting this particular recovery operations, what we in congress can do to help you be able to do that. let me, i would like to start off with the food and water issue here. mr. robinson said prepositioning stockpiles of food and water are prepositioned in conjunction with the state and then louisiana national guard actually is who deploys them. so did that happen? were those stockpiles here? were those stockpiles deployed? >> yes. we had meals and water in the state. typically the way that occurs is the parish office of emergency preparedness receives through us. they put in automated system, web eoc, and goes through the

emergency state operations center. if they have those resources locally, think task force. task the guard to deliver resources. if they do not they ask us to provide additional assistance. >> governor. did the national forward deliver food and water? >> yes. i'm not going to quarrel with the mayors if they didn't receive waters as timely as they wanted to. there was not a request came from parish office of emergency preparedness that was not responded in timely to deliver the water to the parish if we asked to. if it was a problem, not lack of water, but it was lack of communication where the water needed to go. that was one of the primary visits to each of those parishes while we were still responding to get face-to-face both with the parish president and the director of the office of emergency preparedness in the parish make sure the requests coming to us through web eoc

were fulfilled. never in one time honestly did at the tell me anything contrary. i can't tell you that they got water. i can only we met every request we got at the governor's office homeland security for waters and for meals. >> mayor shelton, did the parish leadership contact you and let you know that you could make the request for water and mres? >> let me address that because, i have only been mayor two years. during this process we have discovered that once the administration changed from the prior mayor to this mayor, i was to be contacted by someone from fema to kind of give me an update about what to expect in cares of an emergency. that was never done. i had no contact with fema until 21 days into this thing. so what i'm saying is, i was not given the procedures prior to any event that would take place. so i had no idea that we could make those requests through the parish. i did call congressman graves.

we did get water. >> i think congressman graves should be applauded for helping. >> absolutely. >> absolutely. but i'm still worried about breakdown in communications and fema didn't come to you and parish leadership didn't know either you could put in the request, right? it goes through the parish leadership. >> i had been given a call by joanne morrow in the parish office say anything we needed, let me know. that's fine. that covers a broad variety of things. by that time i already congressman graves and it was on its way. >> okay. sounds like breakdowns both with the fema not briefing you and then also with the local, state and parish leadership as well because you didn't get that information specifically that you could, that you could request it. i do also want to touch on one other thing before we return to this discussion. mayor ramsey, just i'm going to

give you a chance in just a second but i want to give you an opportunity to think about what you said because in the passion of the moment, in the frustration that you said, yes, you've heard fema has improved since katrina but this isn't katrina. these are blue-collar working folks, who just want to get their jobs not like in katrina. i don't think you meant to say the victims in katrina were knot hard-working blue-collar families? >> no, ma'am, i meant this is sash ban community which this is a versus a city community, totally different individual traveling to their work. they don't walk to their work. they don't have issues. i would like to comment, though, if i may on the last statement. >> sure. >> on the one of the biggest problems that we had was there was no communication. at&t failed completely through livingston parish. there was no cell phone communication. verizon was sketchy. at&t was out.

getting into our parish communications center was very difficult to say the least. they were overwhelmed. i know that when i finally got the national guard to deliver water and mres to walker, they delivered it to a staging area four miles from where the disaster actually was. and when people have no transportation, it makes it impossible for them to get to that area to get the supplies that they need. i even tried to deliver, but then going back into fema regulations, they would not allow me to load up a city car with cases of water and mres to take to the area. they said they had to be broken into individual bottles, individual mre packets and counted for each one they put into my vehicle before i could take it out of their staging center and into the area where people needed it. >> mr. robinson, are these fema

policies, regulations, manuals, sops, same thing, do you need something from congress that you can put an mhu in flood area to put these people into housing? or that your staging center can actually break down cases of water, or don't have to? >> obviously on any disaster there are lessoned learned. i think one of the things, we worked closely with governor's office and homeland security emergency preparedness. we have each of the people in the parishes. what you heard today how we typically see the process, parish makes request, state sources that. points of distribution here, typically run by the national guard. we don't typically run those operations. we'll certainly circle back to make sure we communicate, that there is not regulations we impose upon them. >> okay. governor, do you have in your national guard mobile deployed communication units, these teams that go out because they have been deployed all around the

nation now, these mobile teams that go out and actually provide the communication nodes throughout a disaster? do you have one of those in louisiana? you should have, i don't know if you do or not but i would -- >> i don't know that we deployed any communications teams. we have a lwin system with 135 units. we never had less than 134 working throughout. there were problems talking about i cell phone and i know that is, i show the sell phones out on the table now, the emergency folks, first-responders never had communication problem. but i will tell you when the at&t cell service went down, it impacted everybody. and it made things much more difficult than it would have been otherwise, but the emergency communications network performed very, very well. in fact we probably have the best in the country because of

upgrades after katrina we continue to invest in and to update every year. so, i will, i don't know that we ever deployed any national guard communications units but i, i don't know that that it would have helped us in any way to do that. >> there units the national guard has and they have been deployed over 18 months nation, actually longer than that, they come out and set up a satellite truck and provide mobile services, wireless both for internet and also for cell phones so those in the local area, if louisiana does not have one of those you might want to take a look at requesting that. >> yes, ma'am. >> i just think there seems to be breakdowns in procedures and, again, mr. robinson, you haven't really answered my question, are there things that we in congress can do to give you the authority, whether it is exceptions to policy, whether it is us asking the administration, the white house, give you exceptions so that you can do

things like placing an mhu in a flood zone so that those folks who are affected can actually have a place to say while trying to fix up their houses? or is that something fema can actually review its own procedures and do yourselves? >> to answer your question, obviously the post-caterpillar reform act, sandy reform recovery act, to help with more assistance and be more proactive. we'll meet today, the flares and ourselves, the associate administrator roy wright. we can place mhus in a floodplain, not a playedaway. we'll talk -- flood way, to make sure we communicate what we need to do there. >> are you going to have meetings with the mayors in the parish? seems like there is breakdown between the munition pallets and parish and fema. fema and state working very well. you got kudos, mayor health done said which there were more of you out there.

once you make the connection it works but he didn't know that he needed to send his water can request up to the parish leadership. that is failure at fema representative and also failure of parish leadership that didn't let him know either. i sort of feel like somebody needs to come in here, all right, we'll sit down at the table and figure out how we do this better. is that happening? >> yes, ma'am. we have weekly calls that we're establishing with our mayors now. we have robust intergovernmental affairs to provide a point of contact where we can work through things and we'll continue to have the liaison a the parish office to make sure they reach out to talk to the mayors on a frequent basis. >> thank you. i've run over time. i yield back, thank you. >> thank you. recognize myself. mr. robinson, let me ask you a question. every other person sitting at that table and probably you as well could introduce you to hundreds of people in their communities that will tell you a story that goes something like this.

i have a home that is worth $200,000 before the flood. it is flooded and gutted right now. so that home, flooded and gutted pick a number, worth $100,000. it is going to cost me $80,000 to get it back in shape again. i lost all my clothes. that is going to cost me $10,000. i lost both my cars. that is going to cost me $40,000. add these things up. throw in elevated home, whatever you want to do. without question you're getting into six figures. individual assistance cap on stafford act is $33,000, is that correct? whatwhat do we tell those peopl? is the stafford act sufficient to respond to this disaster? >> so, congressman i'd say, that assistance in disasters is multifaceted. small business administration assistance. they may provide insurance, whether flood insurance, homeowner insurance you all

those things come together to make someone whole. >> small business is, small business is a loan, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> okay, so, you're going to take on another liability. you see, people, you know, congressman richmond said it very well, they have lost it all. it is not debris but their lives on the street. they lost everything and take on another liability? is this sufficient to respond to this disaster for this community to recover? >> the continuum of assistance includes many things and it could be faith based volunteer organizations or we've, implemented our national disaster recovery framework to look at philanthropic to help organizations with as well. >> donate and charity and volunteer our way out of fourth moist costly disaster flood diss is tear in united states history. that is what you're saying? >> what i'm saying a large event and take whole community effort

to help citizens recover. >> i mentioned, an this is statistic coming from you, the from the fema nfip program, projecting this to be the fourth most costly flood disaster in united states history. the others would be sandy, katrina and ike. in those other three instances, was anything, were there supplemental appropriations requested? >> i'd have to get back to you. >> i can answer that. it is yes. it is hell yes. you don't have a disaster like this and not step in and taylor the response. there is this unbelievable perception out there that cost of inaction is free. mr. robinson, say it again. i'm very frustrated right now, not at you, i'm frustrated that administrator fugate is not here or someone even higher to talk about the recovery here. i mean this is absurd that we're trying to use something that was created for preschool, to try to

address a college situation. this side boards have been blown off the stafford act for this disaster. they have been blown off. this is entirely insufficient situation. what are you going to tell that person that is sitting there, that doesn't have the money in the bank and facing a six figure liability, to get themselves back to where they were the day before the storm? what are you going to tell them? they have got their lives and they have got god. what are you going to tell them? >> sir, we'll work together with the state, whole community to try and help them in road to recovery. >> governor's indicated that he believe there was $8.7 billion, is that ballpark, gov? >> not including public instruction infrastructure damage. >> in excess of 8.7 billion. we'll depend on volunteers and fill than proppic organizations the volunteers in louisiana and other states have been unbelievable what happened so far.

the value of their work, i would know that folks in the state are looking at this, tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars in, if you valued the work that's been done on rescues and recovery work so far, unbelievable what they have done. it is, it is absolutely unacceptable to think that we're going to find a way to charity ourself out of this thing. it is not happening. i will say it again. the cost of inaction is not free. we have two choices. we can get in front of this to design a recovery package tailored to this disaster help provide hand up to community that didn't ever want a hand out or we can sit her and let mass foreclosures, bankruptcies. you heard talk, two of the mayors mentioned 90% of their community is flooded. mr. robinson, let me ask you another question. fema as i recall over in north sherwood where you have some mhus set up over there, staged

over there, i think there is an adjacent area that appears to have some other trailers and mobile homes. can you tell me what that is? >> some rv units you're talking about? >> yes, sir. >> those could be mobile communication platforms. they may be mobile unit we use for disaster recovery centers that are mobile as well. >> is there fema personnel or live that stay on that compound anywhere? >> there's not. >> there are no fema -- where are all the fema personnel staying? >> stay throughout the impacted areas. >> in a tent? >> most of them are in a hotel. most of our staff are staying in new orleans or lafayette. >> where are their meals coming from? >> excuse me where their meals come from? >> where do their meals come from? >> from the local community. >> who pays for that? >> they receive a per deem. >> okay.

so, we have, we have hotels that are set up, let's keep in mind, hotel rooms are not available for general public. pretty much all the hotels are booked. so we have fema personnel staying in hotels. they get a per deem for their meals that are covered. all their stuff is set. those guys are taken care of. that is not a worry that they have. let me tell you about conversations with livingston parish sheriff. and ascension parish sheriff jeff wiley. their deputies are peeling off left and right because they don't have stability. these are the law enforcement community that are foundational to the recovery of these communities. their deputies are leaving because they don't have that stability that your employees have. they don't have that. so we've asked if they could simply have a compound that they pay for, that by the way will save significant dollars as compared to other fema solutions. if they could have a compound

where they set up trailers and other housing opportunities for their deputies, and fema has been all over the place. i think i've talked to everybody from homeland security secretary to some random person from puerto rico about it, nobody can seem to give an answer. the law enforcement community needs same stability. keep in mind, they have lost everything, they flooded unlike your employees. they don't have the stability. they're peeling off to try to find it because they can't stay in these communities. they need that stability. to continue to drag these guys around, not give them answers and not give them what they want when it is more cost effective, helps establish rule of law, mr. robinson, say it again, completely unacceptable. i know i'm going over time. congressman richmond, just one more question, yield to you. i want to ask one other question. based on some of the calculations we've seen on mhus, these trailer units. you buy them. you transport them. you stage them. you set them up.

you break them down. i appreciate the cost per unit when you add up all the costs you're approaching $100,000. $100,000. the governor's program sheltered home which, gov, i have said before i love the concept of that program. i think it is complimentary to long-term recovery. the concept is great. under the governor's program they're capped at $15,000 per house. let's compare that. $15,000 per help to help shelter at home. you will have $100,000 in a unit, in a manufactured housing unit. that is a lot of ocean. $85,000 in costs per household between those two. why would you not give the shelter at home program more flexibility to help get these homes in better shape toward the long-term recovery? give them $50,000. you save $50,000.

it's a cost effective solution for taxpayers? why wouldn't more flexibility not be provided there? why would you not let some people go to home depot or stein's or homes or lowe's, say 50 products are approved products to rebid the home, let them do it? i remind you. cajun army, "cajun navy," cajun chefs, all did this on their own. would you not provide more flexibility to them, more dollars and more flexibility? it compliments the long-term recovery. >> so we agree with you, i state home program is innovative solution. what we're trying to do here is create $15,000 in addition to somebody's repair money so the governor's program can make the home secure an repair money extended to make permanent repairs to their home. >> yield to congressman richmond >> mr. robinson, let me, is

there a prohibition from fema that prevents money from being spent on permanent repairs in permanent housing? >> so we have several authorities. one is for temporary sheltering which some of our programs have been done now. the other is our temporary repair program, which provides funding for homeowner to make permanent repairs to their home. >> right. my understanding is we had to be very creative with shelter in place program because that there are strict guidelines that you all can't spend resources towards a person's permanent housing needs. for example, why we use travel trailers in trailer communities. because you couldn't spend money on them having a permanent trailer for the rest of their life. so i'm asking, does it come from congress, does it come from you all, this rule that you can't spend money on permanent

housing? >> so under the authorities for the governor's program that is a sheltering program. so that is temporary in nature. must be sheltering in nature. there are other programs that allow housing up to 18 months. >> you missed my question. is there a prohibition that prevents money towards going to a permanent housing solution, not temporary, permanent? so for example, if shelter in place also meant putting back some sheetrock and some flooring, would that be prohibited because it goes towards permanent housing? >> that would be allowed under the repair money we provide to the individuals. >> under their 33,000? >> correct. >> now let's get to that 33,000. why is it, looking at all the damage that we have, why is the average coming out somewhere around $8,000? so tell me what qualifies? because what the constituents

are saying that you all are coming in, we'll only pay for essential needs. we'll pay for the master bedroom. if you have a kid, we pay for the kid's bedroom, but won't pay for guess bedroom not essential. we'll pay for one bathroom because it is essential. won't pay for the second bathroom because it is not essential. with all the needs out there how do we get to an average of $8,000 per structure? or per person? >> so under our programs we're authorized to do emergency measures to make the home safe and secure and habitable. minimal repairs. >> no, i'm talking about the need, the fema assistance of the 33, what, what costs can be included in that? what can you cover in there? >> as i was saying those are for the emergency repairs to make the home safe and secure and inhabitable.

>> that is it? >> not for the replacing everything that is in the home. >> well, see, now we're having problems then. this is what i don't understand. if the governor has shelter in place where they will make it safe and inhabitable and do all the things, so that person then does not qualify for any of the 33,000? what about clothing, what about all the other losses? i'm asking what losses can be covered by the 33,000? >> personal property can be covered. one of the things we done allowing governor's program to maximize the dollars under 33, to make repairs to the sheetrock, to make the home liveable on a more permanent fashion. >> why is the average 8,000? everyone lost clothing. everyone lost bedroom sets and tvs, all of these other things? how can we realistically say we have $8,000 average if we're going in and truly evaluating their home? and at some point i would like fema to just adopt a common sense test that, the 1000

inspectors we have on the ground, that we're sending out to everybody's home, even state form at some point during katrina, you know what, we'll look at picture. if we see water to the roof line, we'll assume it's a total loss. so why can't fema, instead of spending the housing, money, on 1000 inspectors, make some very common sense conclusions that if you lost your house, and the governor is going to gut it, you're going to need that much clothing and all those things and that cost well over $8,000. we're spending $33,000 to give someone eight. the question becomes how do we get a common sense test so that you all would have the flexibility? now if you tell me you have the flexibility and you all are just not doing it, then that is a big problem for me. how do we get a common sense

test to quickly get money out to people? because you're at 8,000. how do i get -- let me make my question very clear. how do i get people $33,000 very fast? that is what authority you have from congress to give to people. how do i get to 33,000? how do you give it out faster? >> sir, we are looking at those emergency repairs. our inspectors look at verified loss to dot emergency repairs. our programs are supplemental in nature to homeowners and flood insurance. >> okay, so if i don't have flood insurance -- look, i know there is some standard answers you have to give but just work with me here. if i know there's a home and i know they don't have home, flood insurance because they're not required to have it, then let's just agree that the wind and hail policy will not cover anything, correct? >> yes, sir. >> so if they don't have flood insurance and got eight feet of

water, let's, can we just agree that they have at least $33,000 of damage? >> each case is an individual case and so all i say we pet back to you walk through you the process how we get to inspections and the amount. >> and that's i think the problem that most people are having because they lived through it. i lived through katrina. i lived through hurricane isaac in st. john parish, and now we're dealing with baton rouge. and the surrounding areas which is a very massive area. the question just becomes, we need to be able to sit down in the room and figure out a way to expedite the funding and maximize -- i mean the frustration i think from people is that the federal government is trying to figure out a way to give as little as possible and through katrina and mayor ramsey, i would just have to differ with you. i think these are the exact same storms.

i think it is exact same damage. i think it is water in a house, eight feet is water in a house, eight feet. people in new orleans walk to work or drive to work, i think it is the same. my frustration is that we just won't -- we assume, we're assuming that people are trying to scam the system. these are homeowners, hard-working people who have made the most responsible decision to purchase a home and we're trying to figure out a way to give them the least amount as possible. they're not asking for an additional nugget at mcdonald's. they're asking to be made whole because they fine themselves in predictment, find themselves in a predictment out of their control, that they had no fault in finding themselves in this predictment. we as government have the obligation to help. part of it is, if you and i have to go on case-by-case basis to figure out a neighborhood where

every house got $8,000, i mean eight feet of water, and we're trying to decide since they didn't have flood insurance whether they have $33,000 worth of damage, why can't we just sit down with a pen and pad, say take appliances at 4,000. take per bedroom, another 2,000. let's take flooring, let's take air-conditioning, let's take mold remediation. and at some point we get to a number that is probably in excess of 33,000. at some point we ought to be able to look at the house, send an inspector out and say, ding, no flood insurance this one qualifies and move on to the next one. that's what's hampering recovery. without knowing that people are in this limbo. now we have work to do in congress. we have to get a supplemental done. without a supplemental the governor will never have thible to set up a program to match the

unmet need that people are going to have. that unmet need is calculated by what fema gives, what insurance gives and what it actually costs to get back in your home. i lived it. i still do case work from katrina. what i'm telling you is, we know that there is going to be an unmet need. so whether we give it through the 33,000 that we can give right now, we're going to have to give it through cdbg later to answer the same unmet need. give 33. it only reduces what we give out when we get supplemental. we have to go work in a bipartisan fashion and get another $2 billion plus for louisiana. and, the question is, we would like to partner with fema and figure out a way that we can work to get people the money they need. if state farm, that is driven on a profit basis could devise a plan where they look at area

photos and determine payouts or whether you have hit a max policy, and their profit organization, i think government that, our purpose is actually purpose. i think we should be able to do the same thing without people calling in to question all of those things. last thing, congressman graves, and i close, what troubles me, we even heard it today, what troubles me is the question about food stamps and fraud. if our first thought is always that american citizens are looking for a way to beat the system, then we're never going to make any progress. and if we try to devise a program that is fraud-proof, then you're going to see a program with some hurdles that hard-working honest people decide, it is not worth my time. and administrator fugate should

be, and there should be a full committee hearing and not a subcommittee with every member here too. as we talk about responses, i just want us to be fair and try to work in a way to just get people what we can give them right now. then we will take our task of working in a bipartisan fashion to get the state the money it needs to make people whole. thank you. >> thank you, mr. richmond. actually go to round two. governor, let me ask you a question. give your magic wand and let's put funding on the side for a minute. give you a magic wand and three policy issues as you see impediments to the recovery, what are some of those things you would identify. >> first of all, i know three things i would change. i don't know if it's policy or whether, because i have had continuous communications between myself and fema, whether

it is administrative fugate, whether it is tony or jerry stoler. i don't know quite often there is a issue because of limitation to form the agency by law which they have no discretion to wave, or fema policy they could waive. >> let's include laws then. policy and laws. what are some of the things you see -- >> s amentioned earlier i think manufactured housing unit program is too slow. it hasn't been responsive where the units can be placed, i still don't know whether that's a function of law or whether he have this the discretion to place those in more locations. you know, i would tell you that i believe the shelter at home program, which, i understand the chairman, was talking about how long it took to stand it up. i will tell you, it is the fastest it has ever been done. and by a long shot. so you have got an obligation to

get it as done as timely as you can and make it as responsive as you can make it but we had serious discussions what habitable means and for example, at the end of the day because of concern about duplication of benefits which i think is probably statutory driven i wasn't able to get a full stove and oven and refrigerator. so we settled on a mini fridge rate tore and microwave. that will be habitable, not what i want for the individuals but it will be habitable. but we were able to get there and we were meeting. i appreciate the effort they made but i thought the result could be a little bit better. thirdly, you know, i will tell you what i'm going to have to work on because quite frankly, and i'm not here to defend fema. i'm not here for any other purpose. but some concerns directed to fema by the mayors at table, if

there were problems quite honestly should have been directed at me and your parish odb directors. i can not imagine a system where fema deliver as water to a mayor. i don't think that can work that way. they brought the water and the food to the state when we asked for it, in the quantities to ask for it. it is my job using national guard and web eoc request format to make that happen. and if it didn't happen, that really is on me but i would suspect it's a coordination in the communication problem because again there was not a single request that came to us from the parish oeps that we did not fulfill in timely way but we obviously have some work to do to make sure we know how to go about getting those resource. >> governor, thank you. i do want to make one personal note in regard to the framework. on saturday night, just one quick personal story. saturday night, i was out helping rescue folks.

had been out there for, probably about 16 hours straight doing rescues, and we had a guy i'm fairly certain wasn't old enough to have a drivers license, driving a school bus i'm pretty sure he didn't have the keys to. i told the guy thank you, a thousand times. he was shuttling people we were evacuating after we brought them out of the boat somewhere. and but he disappeared. i don't know where he came from. he disappeared. he stopped running the shuttle. we got to the point where we had, i guess 30 people up on the road, up on greenville street. the road was flooded to east. it started flooding to our west. we didn't have anything. i'm calling folks, look, i need a bus. i don't know if we can hire another bus. we need something legitimate but need something to get the people out of here because the water is starting to flood on the other side of us as well. i'm told, go on the web eoc system. i was about to take this thing

chunk it as far as i could. tell you right now. these guys are in the same boat. they don't want to hear about web eoc. look, i was in ucj. i've been in the situation before where i wanted to take eoc and shove it somewhere, but i do think we need to talk about a more adaptable framework for people that are on the ground in waist-deep water and that have needs in some cases. so i just want to make that note. >> congressman, can i make one more comment? >> please, please. >> it will be brief. you're exactly right the stafford exact is insufficient. the amount of assistance that we're able to obtain -- >> see that, tony, he can say it. >> that's why i'm in washington this week to ask for additional help. we need the river die version. we need eliminate backlog of is $24 million in department of transportation. we need block grant for the mental illness problems we're

talking about to get those addressed. most essentially we need the $2 billion community development block grant program so we can try to go in and convince these people that the right thing to do is stay in their communities, stay in their homes. not simply walk away, leaving their employers, without employees, leaving businesses without customers, leaving schools without students, leaving churches with empty puce. we have to do that. quicker we give them peace of mind is on the way even if the help itself doesn't arrive for several months, sooner we give them peace of mind help is on the way, they will start making decisions they really want to make and that we want them to make. so that is why i'm here asking for your assistance and i appreciate the help of congressman richmond and congressman scalise. >> he hadn't done anything. mayor shelton, let me ask you a question. we talked about ad valorem tax districts. you have fire departments.

you have sheriffs offices. you have levy districts. drainage districts all have their entire revenue stream based on ad valorem tax. can you briefly describe the situation this situation has caused for the revenue stream and predictment many of these entities will be in? >> i think it is obvious the assessors in the area will have to reassess properties. we heard numbers anywhere 75%, to 50% reductions. that will be devastating to agencies, school boards, fire, police. any agency that depends on ad valorem taxes. as a city we're fortunate that we do not rely upon ad valorem taxes but i know other cities do. when you start taking that type of money out of those systems, we have problems for years, because it will take a while for those values to rise back up to an acceptable level before the storm.

so it is not an issue just an one-time assessment. it will last for years. >> mr. robinson, i want to make note of this, compounding the problems these folks are already facing, lost their homes, families don't have anywhere to go. many cases schools are closed and flooded. on top of it losing their entire revenue stream or major chunk of it because of reduction in value in homes. mayor landry, let me ask you going back to what i mentioned before, question to the governor with the magic wand. you and i talked about a lot of problems. i actually, you know, spoon feed you one issue. these manufactured housing units are larger units. they're not the katrina trailers, smaller units that can fit -- you represent a city and these units, tell you what, it wouldn't fit in my yard. we don't have big enough piece of property. nowhere to put it. if you had the magic wand what are few things you would do? like you to specifically address the mhu issue and compatibility

with your city. >> i understand the mhus are eight feet wide, 42 feet long, which is probably one. smaller units. you're right, most folks, especially older part of town, where most of the flooding was, have a 50-foot wide lot. so it won't just fit. you don't want it long ways across the front of the home but whatever we need to do we can do. travel trailer is probably one of the better solutions. i was told by one of our fema partners there are several hundred out there. they could be hauled without permit or escort service on interstates. have them backing in someone's driveway and have them hooked up in matter of hours. that was week ago. i called her again yesterday, while we were up there, where are the travel trailers. this is what she says. listen to congressman graves 10

mayor's show we participate every week we'll have answers for you. that was ten minutes before the meeting. we still have no answers. we still have no travel trailers. still have no place for our folks to go live period. one of my fema friends showed up a week after the flood. mayor, i need a block of 10 rooms in hotel so i can bring fema folks over here to go to work. man i wish i had 10 rooms to give you. i wish i had a hotel to even send you to. i had nine. all of them are underwater. where have you been? were you not paying any attention going on national media. you drive into my city and want block of 10 rooms. that is how ridiculous and broken the entire system is. no compassion. no common sense. about two days later, three days later, another gentleman calls. mayor, i need a place, i need 15,000 square feet of air-conditioned space to put a fema drc. i wish i had 15,000 feet of air-conditioned space that i

would give you. you can set up in parking lot somewhere. i can find you a spot. no, mayor, too hot outside. yes, sir, it is. how will do i know. but there is young guy, mark wilson, i think he is. he and i got together last week. in matter of 48 hours, made the right contact, got a drc, bass pro parking lot. one phone call to store manager, one phone call to headquarters, done, just like that. so you do have some good people. but the system is postively broken. no sense. no common sense, and very little compassion when you get on the street. >> thank you. >> mayor ramsey, ask you briefly answer the same question? >> i would, with your permission, prior to that, since the katrina comment issued a nerve, i want to make sure they understand, the context that was made in, i was told by fema that they had learned many lessons since katrina. this was in my statement, that

you can't use a cookie cutter approach. you can not use one method to make everything work. katrina was different because the city flooded and everybody was evacuated and it was weeks, if not months before people were allowed back. the people in our area came back two to three days later. fema was trying to treat it the same way. they had days, weeks, months for some. response to the homes in new orleans. they don't have that in livingston parish, because people are there gutting their homes two days after water went down. mr. richmond, in all due respect not reflection on people of new orleans versus people of livingston, that was comment made by fema representatives said they learned some lessons since katrina. i want to make sure that statement is straight. there is no misunderstanding. yes, part of it is in the heat of the moment sometimes things are said not taken directly in context. i will confirm what mayor landry said.

mark wilson has been very good to help us out. he has been frustrated. i didn't even get an assistance until i read on facebook they were putting one in livingston. >> how many homes did livingston flood, do you know? >> maybe three or four. i went over to the assistance center set up in livingston. i walked in the room. there were 10 fema people helping one person. i said what the heck are you guys doing here? why aren't you in walker? i know you can't get to denham yet. why can't you get to walker? we don't have a place set up. you can use my courtroom. in noon they were there. they helped 300 people next few days, backed out until 7:00, 8:00, at night every night after that. my drc only went up sunday. three weeks ago, 2 1/2 weeksing a i they asked me if you i wanted drc. yes, sir, you find me a location. i found all the dry warehouse space we had in walker on

burgess or florida. i didn't hear back from them a week. a week later, i called, mark, what happened to my drc? they're having trouble figuring out if these are usable. i said that is not acceptable. they sent somebody out, we reviewed each place, rejected all of them. so they set up drc in hutchinson park on asphalt lot with portable air conditions, but four to five miles from where the disaster hit. it is hard for people to get out there. that is my issue, locations seem to be convenient for people fema, not what works best for area you're in. >> thank you, mayor. we're joined by senator landrieu who has been in this exact situation in the past and worked tirelessly on recovery of hurricane katrina. certainly has some insight for many of us here today. thank you for being here. i want to yield to our distinguished majority whip, congressman scalise. congressman, obviously my

earlier comments were in jest. i appreciate what you're doing. i yield to the congressman from louisiana. >> thank you, congressman graves and other panelists being here. obviously last few weeks we've been working number one to make sure that the federal agencies involved are doing everything they can. i think it is important to hear from the mayors on the ground about the challenges and you know, like every major disaster each one's different. clearly this is a lot different than katrina. i went through a lot of those issues as a state representative but working on a lot of different problems. you just ultimately, our jobs ought to be finding out what the problems are and breaking through the red tape and there's been some red tape identified we got to keep breaking through. we've been meeting as a delegation on number of those issues with the governor and our main objective is going to be making sure that the response that has to come from washington

especially, any congressional action that's required, something we come together on. focus it on making sure it helps people get back in their homes. that has to be top priority. as we've been having our conversations, both going out in the field and every time i've been out there, you learn new things. you find out other things that we can do to help break through the red tape. we've got to make sure that our response from washington is targeted on responding to this storm in the most effective way, learning from other mistakes which obviously over decades of disasters, including what we've experienced first-hand in louisiana, that we don't make those mistakes again. so, appreciate what y'all are doing, let us know how you can resolve the problems. the problems are real. many of these problems are solvable. and if agencies aren't operating in the most effective way to help you get the relief you need, we're all going to be

united in making sure that gets fixed and it has got to get fixed quickly. as you said, this isn't a case where maybe somebody waited two or three weeks and couldn't get back in their community. people already have been gutting their houses for weeks trying to get back in. so the response will have to be targeted to this disaster in different way and direct way. so i appreciate what y'all are doing. continue to work with us. let us know what we can do to help. governor we continue meeting. we'll meet with you as delegation in the next few days, and we will continue to be talking to our colleagues up here. the good news is, as you see a disaster that shows the worst of mother nature it also shows the best of people and we've an incredible response. i have just in the last few days, we've been back up here, heard from so many members of congress from all across the country, from both parties, that want to help us. and they sincerely understand

what's happened, want to help. they don't completely understand the gaffety but they definitely understand that there was major devastation and want to offer any help they can. believe me, we've been making a list, but this is something we'll all have to continuework on and make sure we get it right. we'll continue to work with you. let's get together to get it done the right way. yield back. >> yield to the gentleman from louisiana, mr. richmond for questions. >> let me just try to summarize where i think we are and where i think it would be helpful if we could go. the three problems or areas that i see are the most frustrating, one is speed. the speed in which things are getting done. two, people having decision-making authority being in the places they need to be, and three, deference to our local officials that they

actually know what they're talking about. you know, we're not actually part of the problem. we're actually part of the solution. when a mayor says, hey, you can have my courtroom or this spot would be very good for a drc, it is because he knows it is accessible. he knows that people will go there. he knows he can get it up and standing tomorrow. if i have seen the way that fema has worked with our governor and it has been very good. but you can't run everything through the governor. i think that's unfair to him. and i think that's unfair to our local mayors who are the closest to the people on the ground. . .

let's actually give them the ability to make decisions so that we don't have to talk about three weeks of where the drc is going to be. that at least of those little problems can be resolved. the other thing is, mr. robinson, module units could be effective in this particular storm. i know that fema has approved modular units before. i think you call them cottages and other things. and fema approved modular units for this disaster? >> speaking other than the manufactured housing units? i will have to get back to you on that.

>> module units i think we'll get there faster. they can be part of a permanent solution. sometimes. and they make a lot more sense when they are all done and we offer the homeowner the ability to purchase them. because then all of a sudden in the backyard they become a man or woman gave on to become their stance, whatever we can do. we can get in there quickly and they can be part of a long-term recovery. the second thing is, i'm told and our research tells us that fema has utilized the practice that i talked about that state farm utilized it was called you all use gps and flood in addition estimates to come up with damage assessment. why can we do this in this case in the areas where the people didn't have flood insurance and we can tell by gps and estimates

and pictures about how much water they received? >> we use that to express some of the assistance. we expedite flood insurance claims based on looking at some of that data. >> right, but not the homeowner damage or -- i guess in getting back to the same thing and i don't want to keep doing it publicly. i'd love to have this conversation in private so we can really delve into all of the things that we know houses that received all that water have to do and how do we get the money to them quickly, and then congress working with our governor to do it. what i think i want to make clear for the record because our mayor has doctor razing homes and all those things which come under mitigation. we are missing we don't want to mitigate. what we're seeing is want to mitigate in a very smart way,

which is if we do our project and other things, we will manage water that we receive so that even 1000 year storm, we can survive. but that makes a lot more sense to manage water and create flood management areas that are than just coming and saying the simply to mitigate is everybody raise your house. in new orleans we build, and the court and congress appropriated the money come with a lot of the mayors help. they came in and built a flood protection system and that work. so what i'm saying is we are not afraid of mitigate and we're not asking for y'all to treat us into carefully and not mitigate. what we are seeing is with some of the best engineers and we know that if we do in some of

the things we will mitigate the some happening again. we just don't think you put the onus on the homeowner to raise their homes and do all those other things. and with that, congressman grace, i would you back but i'm interested in having a long discussion about the average payout and that we can expect some of that. >> i will do one more brief round. request unanimous consent for representatives school uses comments to be entered into the record. without objection. mayor shelton, let me ask a question. we've all heard about the salvation of home issue that may be required for folks there in the floodplains that have expressed significant damage. what happens when we elevate homes and businesses all over the place but we have a flood? >> you have a worst flood. you have little islands in these neighborhoods.

>> what happens to their cart? >> they will lose their corsican. corsican. >> what happens when we need to go to the grocery store or to their jobs because can't get there. >> you have an alternative solution speak with yes. let them build back where they are. like congressman richmond said, this is the one in the thousand year flood, and we're going to do other things to mitigate flooding issues. to put this on the homeowner is, it's sad. it's said. they built their homes according to the plans at the time. now we have one storm is going to change everything that may never happen again in lifetimes to come. it's just not right thing to do. >> so i assume build back where the art and build the project -- >> that's what i'm saying. listen, i could realize we're going to get into the river diversion to but i can talk all day about that. i have stated time and time again that i latest flood and

what is happening to it and the damage at the feet of the people that are dragging their feet to get the canal built. >> to more questions. mr. robinson, i want to go back to the shared housing issue. can you tell to win this issue is going to be resolved and approved? >> so i'm working with the governor's office. we had a discussion last night. where to begin today speed but let's be clear i don't want you to pull together and to step into this thing. this is other decision. this is fema decision, correct? >> we will work closely with -- >> is the state holding up anything? >> it's not. >> i just want to make it clear could you please enter? >> we will identify the need, right now we have a contract for those deputies to stay in a hotel that is paid for by the state which fema is reversing us through september 30, 2016. we will work together resolution of this as quickly as possible.

>> if you can save money, if you can save money, providing more stable, preferable if i but for the law enforcement team unity, why would you not do that? why we do not honor the request? >> to work to identify what the needs are. one of the things -- >> they've already identified a plan. they have identified the plan. they proffered that to you. we been talking about for over a week. >> saw want to make sure the individuals that go in there would be eligible to receive our assistance so we don't end up with a recruitment issue that may come back later spirit so we will continue to have a bleeding of deputies, deputies leaving the forces, law enforcement community, how this instability in their lives on the committee to plow through this. you don't think the sheriff is in touch with his deputies and is aware of the situation at it and fema? >> will continue to work with the sheriff, the state, and we will update you on where we are.

>> can you tell me went in and will be made? >> i will have to get back to you on that. >> i think it's ridiculous. i do. i think it's ridiculous. this is why people get so frustrated and why there are t-shirts that use alternative acronym for fema on bourbon street. this is why. let me check and see. i want to make mention that this whole rotating. >> officials and cover but rotating answers from fema officials is unacceptable. the mayor of zachary told me that he is on his 70th fema official that is his contact since hurricane i think gustaf, 70th. it's just ridiculous what goes on in the inconsistency of answers, the inconsistency of treatment, folks are already in a crisis situation. i want to recognize mr. richmond for closing remarks.

or questions or closing remarks. >> well, i might be able to help you with the last one. give my federal workers a raise, we might be able to keep them around a little longer. let me add just a couple things, and part of what we find is that fema is terrified to do things because there were about what the ig is going to come back later and say. congressman graves, i think we need to figure out a way to rein in the ig entrance of decisions that are made by fema and emergency. senator landrieu will know, that we have to give fema the benefit of the doubt that the decisions they make during a storm are

right and proper, and in that way when our sheriffs are asking for a trailer park or any other things so they can put the first responders, we don't need the ig coming back two years later saying we look at every office and this office was damage, didn't quite meet the criteria, so we need you to go we took the money. mr. robinson, those types of things, you are the person that can tell us that. you are the only person that can really tell us where your red tape is space on reluctance to take a chance because you may get spanked by the ig three or four years later your senator landrieu and i had to pass legislation so that the ig and fema it didn't come back years later to recoup money from louisiana citizens who, through no fault of their own, didn't provide one false document,

didn't answer any questions correctly but receive benefits because of fema determination. the ig asked fema to go back and recoup all that money from louisiana citizens. and those, we cannot be paralyzed by the fear of the ig coming back a couple years later. if there is something we can do to help with that, please let us know because i am willing to take it on. it's not about fraud and abuse but it's about getting fema the discretion to make decisions without fear. because fear is holding up this process. governor, let me just to you a chance to close. is there anything we talked about today that you need that you didn't get a chance to more fully go into, besides the cdbg, social service block grant, comite river funding, and the

transportation backlog? let's be clear about the 740 million. we are not asking for that for louisiana. the problem is that is a backlog all around the country, and we are now at the end of that trained. so by helping us you are going to all the other states that are ahead of us in order to get to us, correct? >> i appreciate the opportunity to say this again. we want the assistance that we need to the community develop block grant program and at times you just mentioned to fully recover as soon as possible, but also to get to the people of louisiana the peace the peace of mind to make decisions now, knowing that help is on the way. and the longer we procrastinate in moving a supplement appropriation for this community develop block grant program, for example, the more people, for surely you're going to make decisions that just isn't a worthwhile to stay in the communities, to stay in their houses. and we will see a much longer

harder road to recovery and we should appreciate the opportunity. >> and for all of the mayor's, because i think of course i'm right when i say you're the closest to the people, because you live in the communities, you beat to the committees and to talk with everybody and to go to church with the. do you agree with the governor's assessment that inaction by congress or slow determination of the supplemental of cdbg is going to damage the long-term recovery of denham springs, central and walker? >> absolutely. >> absolutely. >> yes. we can't stand any delays. we need things spent a. people need some reassurance that there is a hope, that is a future. they needed no. >> thank you. i'm glad that chairman is that because of what you publicly again thank you not only for having this hearing but thank you for actually coming down to view the damage while,

unfortunately when the storm happened the world was paying attention to the olympics and to contest a presidential debate and you took the time to come down and your visit highlighted it and this committee hearing will also highlight it to the country that this was the fourth largest event, and there are over 100,000 people that are truly affected by this incident, who but for a 1000 year storm would not find themselves in the place. so thank you again, mr. chairman. >> i think you and mr. graves for your leadership on the ground. i can't imagine as a member of congress having this level of devastation in my district. again, what i saw was people not whining, people the stepped up to the plate. it was the local citizens, the local leaders to put this

together. they had learned some from katrina, and they went in and they guided their houses. of course, they lost their possessions and their dreams and hopes. everything that you work your life for. and they are so stoic. they join together helping each other. they saved the shell of those homes but we have no program in place to help them really with housing. that's still huge deficit. what we saw the federal response was just unacceptable with housing. we've got to learn from again the staging of water and other essential -- i can't believe that that went south on us in this instance. the other thing, let me just say this, too, mr. robinson. i talk to administrator fugate also about this.

there are 143,000 claims, but people cannot find out where they stand. now, in this day of electronics most of them have mobile phones. they survived. some of them don't have access to a computer but can get to one. but they can't find the status of the claims or talk to any buddy. you dial the numbers that are given, and you find someone and they are manned by people who don't have a clue of where their case is. so for them to get their home and their act together and their lives back together, they've got to know the status. they got to get an answer. they are not getting the answers, okay? and i don't know why we can't have an app that does exactly the status of the case, the information that is being imported. we have the case descriptions. ici see mr. matthews out there,

the staff director of the economic development public buildings, emergency management subcommittee on transportation. but we need a requirement almost for the agency to have some means that people finding out where they stand. they can't go to a bank. they can't remortgage. should be put them on in the house to repair it under the plan that is being provided? they just don't know and we don't communicate. getting those disaster relief centers also to the shelters, they finally i think some of them came, but we were transporting people to some, transport them to some locations. they get no decisions they are back and forth. this is a three ring circus trying to get answers, and no one had the answers. so in this age of electronics we can get some of that data up to

a better management of their cases. and then the flexibility. i don't know will a way for work, mr. robinson, to assist these people on this unique basis. will a way for work? do you have the capability of waiting some of the requirements of mr. richmond talked about changing the stafford act. do you need, and i discussed with ms. duckworth. and we send you a letter saying that we would request waivers on this? do you have had a building under the law? >> we have made so many changes allowing governors program. witwe've expedite assistance unr the flood insurance program to expedite -- >> well, i want by monday a list of any changes you see that the law does not allow you to deal

with this unique type of disaster, okay? by monday, close of business. i want to see from fema what's missing. do you know and does it appear that shut information, but does it appear that under the reserves that we have for fema for disasters if the size disaster can be handled with the programs that you have with existing reserves? >> based on the commission to date we have the funding that we need. >> okay, that's what the administrator fugate had told me. now, that does not include cdbg, which is under hud. our subcommittee has authority under hud and i direct staff to look at the cdbg, the reserves that they have and the ability to shift funds india cdbg to me

that on an immediate need. we are struggling to find the new fiscal year which starts october 1. it will be unfortunately couple weeks before we get it in place, a cr. mr. graves and mr. richmond and the louisiana delegation need to immediately address the leadership. i know they're working on this, and the appropriators to make certain that those funds are available immediately, if not sooner. either in a transfer from existing accounts. i don't know what they're reserves are, but i would help with the cdbg grant which is probably the fastest thing. and these local eaters can get that -- local theaters. we do need to look at all the things that went wrong. the modular units, mr. matthews, the staff director, we need to

have a roundtable as soon as possible and find out how it could go so wrong to wind up with a thousand or more of these units, which is just, you know, it's nothing to do with the size and scope of this problem. and then the cost in applicability of the location of these units. and then the staging, what do we have, five-17 units. is absolutely pitiful. so those are some issues that have been raised. while we may seem critical, yes, we are critical because we are entrusted with the people to help the people who need our need and time of a natural disaster. and it hasn't worked that way. we've got to work to get it right. and, finally, mr. graves and i

flew over the canal -- what's the name of the canal? comite river. i call it a canal. that's 123 million or whatever it is, million dollar project which would probably prevent this happening again if we spent the money. it's a decade that the project has sat there. so it's a corps of engineers project. mr. graves, mr. richmond, i think that needs to be addressed through transportation appropriations, which is underneath that is a corps of engineers, water resources subcommittee. talk to chairman shuster, mr. gibbs and others, but then we also to go to the appropriators because they are authorizers to make certain that the funds are available so that this natural disaster doesn't occur in the future. i think that might be benefici beneficial. so there are a host of issues

that have been raised today. this is again one of the greatest human disasters to befall the united states in a generation or more. we need a better response. we still have people without homes. we still of people in need. we still have a huge challenge before us. i can't thank the mayors enough for their leadership. what you get on the ground long before the federal government was a better, -- was they are and working with you citizens, your communities. thank the governor for coming today to be a big part of this. and i challenge fema the got to do a better job in meeting our federal responsibility. mr. richmond, any comment? mr. graves? again, i think everyone for being with us today for your

testimony, and again your participation. i just our vice chairman jamie. we apologize also. the remembrance ceremony for the victims of 9/11 took place on the capital steps a few minutes ago. so we've had a disruption in the regular order of business. we will not be here on nine 9/11, and that's part of the reason that members have come and gone. mr. vice chairman, did you have any closing comments? >> no. i just like to thank the witnesses for appearing and certainly very helpful. >> thank you. again, i thank ms. duckworth and the minority for working with us. this isn't a partisan issue. anyway, this is an issue that has affected hundreds of thousands of great americans.

i think you again for being with us and coming, we've got some work ahead of us. we will all pledged to work together. there being no further business before the subcommittee, this hearing is adjourned. thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> if you missed any of this program we will have it available for you to view online shortly at c-span.org. and we have more like program to tell you about. joined us a little after 2 p.m. eastern as we take you to the family research council's values voter summit. this afternoon speakers include republican presidential candidate donald trump. is expected to take the stage around 3:30 p.m. eastern, and you can see that live right here on c-span2. some news, the u.s. house is in today, and is in the midst of considering a bill allowing 9/11

related lawsuits against foreign countries and nationals. you can watch the house live on c-span. also the house republican conference met. our capitol hill producer was there and tweets this picture of congressman ryan leaving the meeting. and saying that the consensus of the republican caucus is to fund zika research and national defense programs, followed by a quote minibus, the shortest continuing resolution possible. for campaign 2016, c-span continues on the road to the white house. >> i will be a president for democrats, republicans and independents. >> we are going to win with education. we are going to win with the second amendment. we are going to win. >> live coverage of the presidential vice presidential debates on c-span, c-span radio

app and c-span.org. monday september 26 is the first presidential debate live from hofstra university in hempstead, new york. on tuesday october 4 vice presidential candidates debate at longwood university in farmville, virginia. and on sunday october 19 washington university in st. louis hosts the second presidential debate leading up to the third and final debate between hillary clinton and donald trump taking place at the university of nevada las vegas on october 19. live coverage of the presidential vice presidential debates o on on c-span listen ln the free c-span radio app or watch live or anytime on-demand at c-span.org. >> this weekend booktv brings you 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors. you are some of our programs for this coming weekend.

>> there've been several memoirs written, people's perspectives have been out there and i thought it might be important to add mine for my sake. white house that has been a lot written and said about me. some of the true, some of it not true and i wanted my son to get my perspective about the events that shaped me and really affected their lives as well.

go to booktv.org for the complete weekend schedule. >> now, connecticut democratic senator chris murphy talks about gun violence bridges at the national press club earlier this week. this runs about 15 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> -- 50 minutes. [inaudible conversations]

>> welcome to the national press club. my name is thomas burr giunta washington correspondent for "the salt lake tribune" and the 109th president of the national press club. our guest today is senator chris murphy of connecticut. i would like to welcome our public radio and c-span audiences and i would like her leg you can follow the action on twitter using the hashtag npc live. now it's time to introduce a head table guests. i'd ask each of you to stand briefly as your name is announced. please hold your applause until he finished introducing the entire table. from your right, tammy, freelance reporter and former press club president. john welch, senior account supervisor. and editor at "the associated press." mary, director of federal affairs and partnerships for the americans for responsible solutions. dan friedman of the hearst newspapers washington bureau.

clay summers, a fellow and survived engagement leader for every town new hampshire. market shut, senior reporter at investment news. skipping over the speaker for just a moment. jonathan, washington correspondent, a former press club president and speakers committee member who organized today's luncheon. thank you. kate, national spokesperson for moms in an action for gun since the americans. jason day, deputy editor at cq roll call. peter, a former connecticut post reporter and a freelance journalist. and a freelance editor and command of the american legion post 20 here at the national press club. thank you all. [applause] taking a moment of personal privilege, i would also like to welcome in our audience today and in barbara parker, the parents of alison parker, reporter in roanoke were shot

and killed along with the cameraman a little over a year ago during a live shot. mr. and mrs. parker i know members. would you please stand and be recognized? [applause] thank you for being here. a senate filibuster is usually designed to block a vote on a piece of legislation. but connecticut democrat chris murphy had a difficult we orchestrated a 15 hour filibuster in june. his objective was to give senate republicans to allow votes on measures to prevent suspected terrorists are buying guns and require all gun purchasers to be subject to background checks. weapons buyers candidate background checks by making purchases at gun shows and online. eventually the republican leadership agreed in the filibuster into. while the loss of those votes, murphy had made his point. and murphy has continued to make

a point. in philadelphia he spoke on gun control at the democratic national convention and his promise to raise the issue again and again this fall with the white house and congress at stake. murphy has emerged as a vocal supporter of gun control. he had not even taking a senate seat when a gunman began shooting at sandy hook elementary school in his home state december 2012 killing 20 children and six adults. murphy served in the state legislature before winning election to the house in 2006 ousting longtime republican nancy johnson. when joe lieberman retired in 2012, murphy won the seat. let's welcome to the national press club senator chris murphy. [applause] >> thank you, thomas. thank you, everyone. thank you very much. thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you, mr. president.

thank you to the national press club for hosting this really wonderful lunch here today. as i wrote in the guestbook, i feel like i finally made it. my first and maiden trip as speaker of the national press club. i want to join in your acknowledgment of the parkers, want to add an acknowledgment to mark barton of sandy hook, a great friend and leader on this issue. i want to thank those that are part of this head table today, clay engaged and married for all the work they have done with me and others to try to move forward, this issue of gun violence. i want to ask your forgiveness as i delve into some prepared remarks that he thinks are important, and then really look forward to answering your questions here today.

december 14, 2012, a day that everybody recognizes, it's a day for me that forced my political career, which at that point was 14 years old, to change course. that morning i was standing on a train platform in bridgeport, connecticut, getting ready to take my then four year old and one year old boys head to new york city to see the rockefeller plaza christmas tree. i got a call third been a shooting at sandy hook elementary school. and i got another call telling me that there had been kids involved. a few hours later i was there at the firehouse adjacent to the school as 20 sets of parents, including the pardons come were told that their children were lying dead on the floor of their first grade classrooms. sometimes in this business you get to pick the issues that you were going. and then there are other times when the issues a few. before that date quite frankly

working on this issue of gun violence it just was not at the top of my political produce. as a congressman i didn't represent any of the cities in connecticut with epidemic rates of gun violence that it's become my singular focus that as attorney senator. in the wake of sandy hook my eyes have been opened to the catastrophe of gun violence in america. and the inability to explain our exceptionally high levels of homicide with any data points but our gun ownership rates at our lax gun laws. in nearly four years since sandy hook, the carnage in our streets has not abated. the mass shootings from roseburg to san bernardino to orlando have continued. gun homicides remain as regular as raindrops in our urban cores and there was or decisions see the assault weapon rather than a hijacked airplane or the improvised explosive devices, their primary opportunity for

mass slaughter in america. stopping dangerous to a military assault weapons from flooding our streets is now one of the most effective tools we have to combat terrorism. that's what drove me to make the decision to stand on the floor of the united states senate for 15 hours to demand change. i was furious. i'm still furious that in three years and sandy hook, in three years of almost daily bloodshed in our cities, congress has done absolutely nothing to prevent the next massacre. think about that. as our airwaves are flooded with news of horrific levels of gun violence in chicago, ms shooting aftermath shooting, congress hasn't done a single thing. but i also understand that my fury, or the fruit of others over this in action, it's not going to make progress. we need passion but we also need to understand the reasons why the two sides on this debate are

talking past each other. that's what i want to spend time talking about here today. here's the essential problem. from the center to left of the political spectrum, the conversation about guns in america is largely about the mechanics of how good the regulated, how they flow into the hands of law-abiding citizens, and criminals, which weapons and should be legal and which ones should be illegal, what the data tells us about the best rules to reduce the number of crimes that are committed with guns. on the left our debate starts and ends with a concrete details of gun laws. the dysfunction in our dialogue over guns largely results from this conversation being totally foreign to those that inhabit the center to right half of the political spectrum. they are having a completely different conversation that has nothing to do with gun laws and everything to do with abstract concepts. of liberty and freedom and revolution.

and how the discussion over guns is simply a prism through which to discuss the founding principles of our nation. on the right that debate starts and ends in abstract of these big ideas. put another way, the debate within the right is in the clouds. the debate and the left is down in the weeds. so it's no wonder the democrats and republicans have a hard time finding common ground. if we are starting on different planets, then it's hard to find a room that we could all sit down together in. and so i break this problem when it comes to the right things about guns into to modern realities. one, i want to spend some time talking about both. one is the increasingly antigovernment i call it neo-and darkest bit of the republican party. the second is this the economic model of the gun industry in america where a smaller number of people are buying guns. bubut in much larger quantities. let's take the first. the modern republican party

especially since the election of america's first african-american president barack obama has become increasingly hostile to government. not hostile to inefficient government. not hostile to overreaching government. just government. you can see why frankly because in an era where cable news covers politics as soap operas, there's a lot not to like about politics. bashing government is big money these days. and republicans are just picking up the dominant media narrative. second in an era of unprecedented economic anxiety many americans are looking for somebody to blame for the plight of the republicans not terribly excited to find the private sector offer government of as the culprit. this combination of the media just simply covering the dysfunctional storylines out of washington at the natural tendency of economic hard times to flow towards scapegoats, it pushes the right further and

further toward hardline antigovernment rhetoric. that's how we get to guns. because as kids in school we were taught that no one hated the government, or at least their government, more than the founding fathers. they hated their government so much that they took up arms against it. they were willing to die for the antigovernment beliefs and after casting off their oppressors, they carried their antigovernment beliefs into the drafting room of this founding document of this new nation. the storyline goes that the wrote a section of this document that they would assume the oppression would return. and that take your tour of people's right to cast off the second coming of autocracy was a private right of gun ownership. that's not an unseemly storyline to a lot of americans. if you want to prove your bona fides as an anti-action government as republican, for the people to take up arms against their government is kind

of the coin of the realm. so in it there were anti-government position is the hallmark of the modern right, it shouldn't surprise anyone that increasingly republicans are absolutists in their views on the right of citizens to own guns. they want to preserve the right of revolution as a means of showing how much they truly hate the current government administered by president barack obama. and, of course, to be honest, guns court anyways at the core of american mythology, beginning with that story of the rag bunch of patriots running through romanticized ideals about the freedom of the wild west. even if it is subconscious the rights argument does have a seductive ring too many americans who may not endorse the idea of armed insurrection against government but nonetheless find this appeal to our founding ethos compelling. anti-because the founders were concerned with defending against tierney and yes enshrined the

right to bear arms as an important element. but an equally important defense against tierney are perhaps more given its pride of place is the first amendment with its protections up free speech and freedom of the press and freedom of assembly. but to show you how far our second amendment debate has drifted from the rest of our rights talk, there's no movement amongst first amendment purists insisting that laws banning child pornography or yelling fire in a crowded theater are a slippery slope to tierney. and whether it's hulk hogan's lawsuit against doctor archer was ordered to reveal anonymous sources, or our understanding of first and then again she's got a continues to evolve amid new technology and changing social norms. or take the fourth and its protection is unlawful search and seizure. and the tension between privacy and security that played out

between the fbi at apple. these are difficult questions that have commenced during of the potential reach of government into our everyday lives. members of both republican and democratic parties can and often do come down on either side of this question. but that's not true of the debate over the second amendment. i did five town halls on guns in connecticut in early 2013, after sending it. in each one of my constituents talk about the rights as god-given. inheriting . and the recent words of our conservative writer who wrote we don't have the right to keep and bear arms because the bill of rights says the. the bill of rights is so because the right to keep and bear arms is intrinsic to our very being. it's a right which we are endowed by our creator. my point is that there is a reason for this mystical compromises treatment of the second amendment within the modern right. it fits naturally into the need to become more and more extreme

in the campaign to undermine the legitimacy of government. that's the nature of the modern republican party. but the second cause for the starting position on the right i think is the change economic model of the gun industry. only one-third of americans are buying guns at that number is dropping every single month. that's opposed to half of americans who used to own guns 30 years ago. meaning that they can industry is relying on a small group of gun owners buying large caches of expensive weapons like va are 15. numbers of buyers has shrunk. the industry realizes just sell more weapons to the smaller market. how do you do this? you convince people that there are really only a few needs to buy weapons, but one of them, in addition to being able to hunt or shoot for sport come is to

protect yourself. you can also make a guns a collectible in a dizzying array of models that of an offer by gun makers that certainly turns gun clicking into a hobby. but something else is going on within the gun industry's marketing. the other motivation that a fee for the stockpile of firearms is that same revolutionary theory that became over time so attractive to the republican party. again industry in cahoots with the gun lobby, the nra and the gun owners of america, they have created a fantasy construct of the world in which citizens need to arm themselves against an out of control government. instead of one gun, you need 10 or 20 or 40. so that you can arm yourself and your neighborhood when the black helicopters start landing in your backyard. and you but also stockpile a year's worth of ammunition, just in case. further, the industry figured out in the wake of this

increasing fear of domestic terror attack, gun ownership can be marketed as a way of protecting average americans from the blast radius of violent extremism to the nra councils every american needs will a security plan which unsurprisingly means owning one or perhaps many expensive firearms. the reason americans need is a good plan is because as they can industry tells us, no laws can keep us safe. this is another essential element of the gun industry's new position. the illegitimacy of law or government as a means to protect us all from harm if they get industries hope is that if americans lose faith in the laws ability to protect the public safety, then a natural turn will be to a massive private firearms ownership the gun lobby opposes every single law designed to keep america safe from gun violence because to acknowledge the efficacy of any law would be

to undermine the importance of guns. now, how else can you explain the transformation of the nra's position of background checks? in 1999 the nra was probably the halls of congress pressing for an expansion of background checks. very similar law to the one they fought tooth and nail to defeat in 2013 but it's not what to do know that over this period of time from columbine to sandy hook the industry which provides a sizable chunk of the gun lobbies financing changed. into graduate it's a big need for the gun lobby to help create a new motivation for large sales of gun purchases -- to perpetuate. this is the new reality in the right today. and absolutist, a complete refusal to engage in a conversation because to do so compromise the notion of the heart of american freedom and liberty as the unrestricted right to stockpile arms is used in case of emergency against the

governor which is regrettable because even if you think the supreme court got it wrong in the hello decision would help of the second amendment protects a responsible abiding citizens right to possess a handgun, the court still confirm clearly and unequivocally that the amendment protects only a limited right, just as scalia said quote nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in places such as schools and government buildings or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. as clear as the law is today, and the data is just as clear. antony this is maybe the most tragic part of this story. because the right is so captured, so imprisoned by the conversation about god-given rights and rhetoric that we all miss the fact there are some

pretty minor changes in our law supported by the vast majority of americans that would unquestionably reduce gun deaths in connecticut we passed a strict handgun licensing law in 1995 that resulted in the johns hopkins survey, in a 40% reduction in our firearms related homicide rate. at the same time in missouri, repealed a similar law which johns hopkins showed resulted in a 25% increase in firearms homicide rates. 46% fewer women are shot to death in states with universal background checks. 48% fewer off duty police officers are shot and killed in states with universal background checks. two out of three gun deaths, they are suicide related in states with gun purchase waiting periods have a den suicide rate that is 51% lower in states without waiting periods. and safety measures are constitutional. they work and they are popular.

and yet they go nowhere in congress time after time because the two sides within the political system are living on different planets when it comes to this issue. what do we do? or more accurately what do i do and some of it was committed to my senate career to this issue. i will lay out three things and then i will close. first i remind myself that all politics still is local. if the political force for the anti-gun violence measures becomes strong enough to its will cannot be resisted. so we keep building up our grassroots organizations, pushing more voters to elevate this issue on the priority list and work towards a day when the voters will force the right to moderate its stance on guns in order to win elections. that political transformation right now is playing out before our eyes. anti-gun violence groups are getting stronger. numbers are growing all over the country. for 20 years though, 1994-2012,

the anti-gun violence women was dormant in this country. it's at a very short period of time to catch up. but let's look at to competitive senate races to tell the story of how things can change so quickly. in pennsylvania come and comment senator pat toomey is running on his support for background checks. one of his first ads trumpeted support for the 2013 compromise measure. when he originally ran in 2010, there was no mention of his position on guns. six years later it is an essential part of this campaign. in new hampshire with one of the nation's highest rates of gun ownership, kelly ayotte, senator kelly ayotte's first add on the campaign was in defense of our position on guns. of all the issues she could've lived with she chose guns because she knows what an important issue it's going to be to swing voters in an sugar and

also one of the grassroots organizations that i was talking about a strong enough that they raised the money to run two ads criticizing a position on guns early on in the cycle. in her first race when the exact opposite dynamic was in effect. her democratic opponent that year was bending over backwards trying to get to her right on guns. trumpeting his a rating from the nra. not issue. not a single democrat this year is running for the senate trying to cozy to the gun lobby. times and voters have both changed. second, we have to take on the gun lobby had on. and unmask it for what has become, a spokesman for the gun makers, not for gun owners. 80% of gun owners even enter a number support universal background checks. a higher percentage of gun owners than non-gun owners some polls showed support closing the terror loophole.

more political leaders need to call up the gun lobbies and make the endorsement all of the less meaningful. at the top of the ticket of the clip is doing just that. don't underestimate the importance of the major party presidential candidate asking for advantage on the issue of guns and colin the opponents of gun reform along the way. some of the biggest applause lines for clinton in her speeches are which he pledges to take on the gun lobby. she isn't afraid to talk about this in unlikely places like north carolina and virginia. we are getting new unlike the allies within the republican party. during the debate to follow our filibuster, senators like jeff flake and lindsey graham who both voted against background checks were very critical of those that argued with the status quo. quote, every right has boundaries on it, unquote. that's what lindsey graham said earlier this year about the second amendment. i'm sure he would not have conceded that .2 or four or six years ago.

and lastly, this is the hardest part, we need to resist trying to remake the modern right. if you are moving towards that type of anarchy where everything he touches his solid ground, then we shouldn't try to think that those on the side of stronger gun laws can alone stop this march. the solution then also lies in democrats moving away from our own safe space and recognizing that the right slide away from defending the legitimacy of government isn't going to magically abate, especially if a democrat continue to occupy the white house. we have to be ready to meet republicans on the space. in a sense we should be thinking about another outlet for republicans to show the antigovernment bona fide other than drawing a line an in the sd on gun laws. many republicans that i talk to want to be more wisdom on the issue of guns but they are stuck in a party which their positions on guns is a litmus test for how

much you hate government. there has got to be other proxies to demonstrate ideological purity in this respect. we should be working hard with sympathetic republicans to fight another path forward, not simply coming at them for refusing to work with us. following sandy hook, former supreme court justice john paul stevens said quote the law should encourage intelligent discussion of possible remedies for what every american can recognize is an ongoing national tragedy. that intelligent discussion is just not happening. rather than something continuing to occupy our separate planets, time is now for those of us leading the charge to take on gun violence. to try to force us to stop talking past each other and to fix the bugs in the system that create that reality. i'm mad and even in the wake of orlando, the deadliest mass shooting in the nation's

history, coming on the back of sandy hook, san bernardino and rosenberg that we couldn't get the background checks bill passed or even a bill stopping those on the terrorist watch lists from buying guns. but the filibuster and the city and that followed did change things. it help grow this political movement that is now more powerful than ever. it because republicans and democrats to talk past each other a little bit less in the senate, a compromise was reached on a simple idea if you're too dangerous to fly you shouldn't be able to own a gun. and maybe democrats are beginning to poke our heads up from the weeds of policy, and republicans are occasionally willing to send from the clouds i talk to those two things are happening. the political structure getting bigger and batter and the two sides of congress finding new ways to work together, they maybe it's just a matter of time before the laws of this country finally catch up to the will of 90% of americans. thank you very much for having me today.

[applause] >> thank you, senator. just a reminder to those watching on c-span or listening in, the public is invited to our lunch and you're at the national press club. the applause here is not necessarily from the journalists covering the event. let me ask you first off, are you planning any dramatic strategy to put the can issue on the front burner this fall, like your june filibuster on the senate floor? are you going to try to top your record? >> yeah, i am very pleased that in the wake of the filibuster and the city and, the momentum has seemed to have shifted on this issue -- sit-in. i think went to be in the business over the next two months of the basic blocking and tackling of winning elections. there are some key elections out there that i'm dense