conscientious payers and didn't obligations end up getting punished relative to now payers who get low interest rates. a bad message. it will add tens of billions of dollars to the deficit and national debt. there are other objections as well. we may be, as senator johnson hinted, overinvesting in some ways in higher education. the advantages of getting a degree are actually starting to decline, not increase, particularly for young graduates. we need to reduce our aid programs, probably doing away with tuition tax credits and plus loans in con training other grants. there are no painless solutions, but merely doing more of the same, lowering interest rates, more loans will worsen this situation and probably enhance, not reduce, income in equality in america. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. i really appreciate all of our

witnesses today. there's a lot of attendance today. obviously a discussion that many people are interested in. we do have a series of four votes beginning in a half-hour so i'm going to be very strict with the time clock today in allowing five minutes to each senator and we'll be calling on people in order of arrival. so with that, ms. jones, i wanted to start with you and thank you for sharing your story and being here today to testify. your story actually really resonates with me. all of my brothers and sisters and i went to college on pell grants and student loans to finance our education and i taught young children early on in my career which is actually what got me into politic to pe begin with. but the financial burden of student loan debt is considerably more than when i graduated. so i share your understanding and appreciate your being here. in your testimony you said that you paid over 600 dollars a month to cover your federal student loans. how much was your monthly take home pay at that time?

>> at that time my monthly take home was roughly 1,500. >> and do you have any money saved? >> i do not. i've been using my savings to pay back the loans that i've taken out for any under graduate degree. >> when you ran into difficult repaying all of your loans, did your servicer offer any alternative repayment plan, like the income based repayment option? >> they did not. i did not learn of the program until very recently and i believe had i been offered that program my payments would have been roughly $150 a month as opposed to the $60 a month. >> if you had been able to take advantage of that you would have reduced that payment to 150? >> uh-huh. >> do you know how much you would save if you had been allowed to refinance your student loan? >> over ten years i would have been able to save more than $4,000. >> how would that have impacted your life? >> well, as educators, you know,

we always have to buy materials for the classroom because the funding is limited. so i think having the extra funding available would make life easier. definitely i would be able to save for the future and i would be able to plan for retirement as opposed to wondering if it will be possible. >> so i have to speculate if you had known about ibr you would have been in a much better place today but nobody told you. mr. chopper thank you for being here as well. you've worked directly with a lot of student loan borrows and your reports have talked about the macro economic consequences. have you encountered a lot of stories like brittany's? >> one of the top issuesers that borrows identify is difficulties repaying, restructuring en, enrolling in loan modification programs and staying current to avoid delinquency and default. >> so our services are not reaching out and helping young people or even adults learn what

their options are today? >> we learned a very painful lesson in the years around the finance crisis in the mortgage servicing environment. there is a misalignment where what may be good for the loan owner and the investor and what may be good for the borrower is not actually the outcome. and market forces due to modern structured finance can often cause terrible outcomes for everybody. >> i've heard from a lot of people today who are paying back loans that they don't know how much they owe, they're having trouble getting that information, they don't get yearly statements. brittany is nodding her head. is that something you hear a lot as well? >> i think it's not actually just not knowing about it. it's also we hear from many borrowers and we see anytime the data that a number of the borrowers are reaching out and seeking help but are often told

to choose forbearance. we have continued to hear complaints from service members and military families that they call about their service member civil relief benefits and are simply told, well, do a military forbearance. that option will keep interest accruing, it will keep the debt burden harder. but it is earnly easier for the service person to accomplish rather than walking them through the steps to enroll in their legal benefits. >> it's hard for them to get good information personally about what they should be doing. tell me in the last 50 seconds, some of the larger itch occasions for our economy? >> in our discussions with the banking industry and particularly the housing industry, there's concern about increasing debt to income ratios. why the advantages of going to college, the differential between college graduates and nongraduates is growing. most of that is growing because

noncollege graduates are slipping. so if college graduates are slipping but debt which is growing actually faster than division costs, that means less ability to create new credit whether it be for mortgages or to use those funds for other productive purposes. >> thank you. my time is out. senator johnson. >> ms. jones, thank to comes to testify, to all of the witnesses. did either high school or college counselor ever go through the calculation of taking on student loan debt and how you would be able to repay it based on the type of profession you were looking at? >> they did not. actually when we started the conversations about college they let us know that you can apply for millions of dollars in scholarships and grants, they're available. you just have to apply for them and you can talk to your financial aid counselor about the other options for paying for college. >> did you ever talk to a financial aid counselor that

ever talk about the ability to repay? >> not in the initial stages. they simply were saying you have this much of a balance. you can pay with it using this part of your pay package and you can take them if you want or you can borrow from your family. >> do you wish you would have had, like i had, a finance professor to kind of talk about -- i mean, in other words if you could go back in time, would you do the same thing over again? would you try and figure out maybe a different solution? >> in my experience and more my profession, a college degree was absolutely necessary. there was no -- the option to not get a degree was not available. i would do it because ultimately my goal is to become a teacher. >> have you ever heard of the college of the ozarks. they go by the moniker of hard work u. it's a college university setup where all of the students work and it's set up so that nobody incurring debt. is that a good idea to you? again to get a college degree it's a great investment.

but if it's a great investment the amount of loans ought to match it so you can handle those when you get all done. >> it should. and that's why i think being able to refinance the loans that we have would be a great benefit for students like me. the loans made it possible. there was no funding available to go to school and we have to have our degrees to teach. you don't want an unqualified teacher in the room. i don't see myself doing anything else. whatever it take to get to a classroom, that's what i will do. we need to look at what we can do to make it possible for everybody to get the degree they want. >> god bless you were being willing to teach our kids and we wish you the best of luck. >> you said the student debt is hampering a lot of stuff. how would shifting this debt to a select few to all of our kids and grandkids how would that help the economy and

entrepreneurship? that's what we could b doing within shifting the debt to all of our kids and grandkids because we can't afford it and it's going to be piling the debt on our kids and grandkids. >> turn on your mike foep. >> -- to refinance a loan in other markets, such as a mortgage environment. when environments change, it is common not only for homeowners but also the corporate sector as well as the government to be able to match their debt to something that potentially reflects better their own broader interest rates, their credit pro file -- >> let me interrupt. are you supportive of the -- i'm trying to thing, that act i was talking about, the 2007 act that forgives student loan debt of ten years of work in the public sector. are you in favor of that in. >> we do not know the results of that yet. nobody has actually received forgiveness from that program. >> but again forgiveness will

come on the backs of the american taxpayer or additional burden on our kids or grandkids, correct? >> that is congress's decision on how to -- >> i'm asking are you supportive of that program. i'm going to your comment, how does that not hamper or economy, not hamper entrepreneurship if we shift it from a select few to all of our kids and grandkids. i'm trying to point out what's actually happened here. >> the distribution of the debt burden will come in multil sectors. but i think the marginal propensity to consume for young people who are at prime ages for ownership and durable goods, this is something of great worry to the financial sector -- >> but our debt burden dush so there may be higher propensity to spend in some sectors but there will be a lower propensity because of the debt burden. are you disturbed about the politico and "the wall street journal" articles i was reading about how the graduate schools

are gaming that program? does that corn you? it sure concerns me. >> as we saw up to the financial crisis, the incentive misalignment between those who broker loans or offer loans and their alignment with investors or others can lead to very sfar rouse consequences. i don't know the specifics of the schools that you mentioned. but aligning incentives between schools, between financial services providers and others is critical to ensure that market outcomes are efficient. >> thank you. thank you madame chair. >> senator white house. >> thanks very much, chairman. one of the noteworthy things about student loans, and they stand out from virtually all other debt in this respect, is that somebody wrangled a pro

vision into the bankruptcy reform act years ago, a somebody who has left no finger prints on the amendment. i think it was snuck in in conference. and to this day, nobody takes credit for it. but it snuck in and became the law of the land. and it provides that student loan debt is not dischargeable in bankruptcy. bankruptcy is provided for in the constitution. it's one of the sort of elemental principles of entrepreneurship. you have the ability to fail and pick yourself up and get in there and do it again. virtually every type of debt is dischargeable in bankruptcy expect student loan debt. mr. chopra, is there an economic justification for bankruptcy debt being treated differently than any other kind of debt in

that respect or was that a nature of an unexpect blessing to the then largely privately held student loan industry? >> well pursuant to a report that was required by congress for the cfpd and the department of education to publish, we analyze data related to student loan originations, particularly private student loans, throughout the past 15 years or so. and the 2005 change in the bankruptcy code, one would anticipate that an ordinary marketplace, that prices would come down as bankruptcy codes become more strict. but in fact, we saw that prices actually went up. and this suggests that broader capital markets, conditions may be larger contributors to pricing in some of these markets. and it also suggests that as a general matter the bankruptcy code is operating in a very

different way in the student loan market as it compares to other consumer product markets. >> we've had representatives from the private student loan industry come in and testify that it woulz be wrong to unwind this stealth pro vision that was stuck into the dark in this pro vision because it would upset the settled expectations of the loan industry, which is -- i mean, congress as a whole of irony primt. but it's particularly interesting that an industry that snuck this in at midnight upsetting every settled expectation of borrowers as to how their loans would be treated now try to defend themselves by the rule of settled expectations.

i hope that this is an issue that we can address. because i don't believe that there is any rational distinction between student loan debt and other kinds of debt. ms. jones, thank you for your testimony. you've been a terrific witness that has brought a real dose of reality to this hearing. how has your student loan debt affected other personal decisions in your life, like to own a home, to have a family? how has that burden of debt changed what you might do with your life? >> i have this conversation with my mother a lot because she's now asked maybe 15 times what i is it that i'm still pursuing the education field. actually to pay for some of my college education she borrowed against her own retirement so i could in fact back the teacher i want to be. and the decision to stay --

stick with education was driven because of the desire to want to see the future generations have the same chances we have. i will say the decisions to take out more student loans made going back to school a hard decision to make, as referenced in my testimony. i couldn't justify using more of my mom's retirement even the pay for the master's degree. >> what has it done to the likelihood of owning a home. >> considering i don't have any funds right now for down payment that's been put off for a few years. but hopefully in the future we can work something out with the refinance bill so i can start saving again. >> thank you, ms. jones. >> i want to chaing the chair. i wanted to just ask mr. chopra, do we have an estimate by the administration yet as to how many student loan borrowers would actually take up the potential option to refinance

their prejuly 2013 student loans? do we have a sense of what numbers we're talking about? and also, do we have an estimate of what that will cost? i just think it's important so we understand given the challenges we're facing as a nation as we look at this piece of legislation. do we know what those numbers are yet? >> senator, the cfpb is an independent agency, not part of the administration. so i do not have that type of analysis available. what i can say is that we do know from our experience in various mortgage financing programs that the economic impact of individual mortgage refinancing, according to a study by the department of housing and urban development, led to approximately 2r5$,000 of

economic impact per homeowner who was able to refinance. now that being said, a mortgage is a much larger loan. but then again, a younger person with student debt may have a higher likely to be in prime age for certain purchases. but again, ki not speak to that. >> yeah. what i'm trying to get at is the basics. how much more are we going to add to the debt. how much more do we -- is this going to cost? i mean we ask this important kb question about every piece of legislation because it's basic information. dr. veder perhaps with your background -- let's start with 100% of borrowers. we don't know that 100% of borrowers will adopt this and certainly there'll be some ratio to that effect. if 100% of borrowers were to refinance their july 1, 2013 loans or a large percentage, what kind of impact? do we have any numbers that we

can think about here? >> i have not personally done any estimation of that. however the math suggests the numbers can be very large. we have what, 40 million borrowers, not all of them prior to 2013 but most of them. so you have close to 40 million borrowers borrowing on average 25 or $35,000. you're talking over a trillion dollars. if you, just say for the heck of it you lowered interest rates 2 percentage point on a trillion dollars, that's $20 billion a year. that's real money. it's probably less than that. i have seen one estimate that the deficit effects measured in the tens of billions of dollars over a long period of time. i think it's a consequential amount of money. >> i think it's an important piece of information that i would hope that we would have.

mr. chopra, i wanted to ask you about this issue that dr. vedder raced. it's an issue that i hear from parents and students and -- we're going to get to a point where if the rate of increase of what it costs to get a college education keeps going up at that rate, no matter what we invest, the fed call government, if we're thinking that we're going to be able to help, you know the debt burden of someone like ms. jones, then if it's going up higher than -- you know, i don't know. it may not be going up higher than health care. this is a big issue in terms of how high it's going. how do we get at that issue? and if we're going -- with your investment, how do we get to more accountability for these institutions to actually have to really be market based, think innovatively and deliver quality education at a more reasonable price. because to me, this is a big

issue that's just going to hit us all no matter what we do here. >> so i completely agree, the rising college cost is an american tragedy. and we should do everything we can to make sure that those people who are going to college this fall, the class of 2018, the class of 2019, that they don't incur a lot of debt. but we cannot ignore the class of 2008 and class of 2009 who graduated almost by no fault of their own, when they were started at freshmen in 2004, they could not probably imagine that they would graduate into a financial crisis. and that is something that we have to work on both ends and it's not just looking at one of those issues but both. >> well i appreciate that, but obviously we're going to look back on all of pre-july 1, 2013 loans, that's a large number of people. and it seems to me, i would like

to take that -- have you answer that question for the record. we're investing already, regardless of what we do on legislation, a lot to help students in this country get a good education. and i'd like to know what your thoughts on on how we hold these institutions more accountable. >> senator, we have a lot of senators and votes coming. i'll have him answer for the record. >> i appreciate that. thank you. >> senator baldwin. >> thank you. chair murray and senator johnson, i appreciate both of you for hosting this hearing on such a critical issue. the statistics are staggering nationally with $1.2 trillion in student debt. i look at the statistics for my home state of wisconsin, 70% of students in wisconsin are graduating with an average today of $28,000 in debt. and these numbers i think

starkly demonstrate that there is a student loan debt crisis facing our nation. again, in wisconsin individuals with a bachelor's degree report making average monthly payments of about $350, graduate or professional degrees are making average monthly payments on their student loans of $448. and that's just an average figure. obviously it varies below and above. the length of student loan debt obligations was nearly 19 years for persons with bachelor's degrees and over 22 years for persons with professional degrees. and as we've heard through your testimony and the questions so far that these -- this fact, these statistics are under scored by millions of personal stories and anecdotes and they affect personal decisions. as i've heard testimony in round

tables that i've held in wisconsin on this issue, people literally deciding whether and when to start a family because of the impact of this debt. the career decisions that ms. jones has talked about. you know, there's a lot of folks who are getting a higher education because they want to teach or because they want to do public service or work for a nonprofit or a community based service organization. and yet the level of debt con trains their career decisions and career choices. and then financial decisions. we've heard a little bit of testimony and discussion on that. you know, you get out of college and start a business or put that off. do you get out of college and do you rent? do you buy? do you move back home with your parents? i've heard a lot of people facing those choices in their late 20s, early 30s. do you buy a used car? do you buy a new car? all of those have ripple effects

throughout our entire economy. so i'm glad, ms. jones, that you've been talking about it in, you know, your own -- sharing your own story. so many have stepped forward to do that because this is a crisis we need to confront. i have in my very limited time sort of two questions i wanted to pose to mr. chopra about a couple of realities in our current law on student aid. i've heard from a number of students who have to hold down part-time work, sometimes almost full-time work while studying. and they're hit with something that's known commonly as the work penalty. because their incomes may exceed the income protection allowance that's part of the eligibility calculation for a federal financial aid under the higher

education act. and i'm working on legislation that deals with this work penalty that would raise the income protection allowance. but i wonder if you can speak to the importance of the availability of financial aid to working students. >> well, there's no question that an enormous number of people return to higher education after being displaced from the labor force in the great recession and have took on part time jobs to support their family. that's something we'd be happy to discuss with you further. >> i certainly know that that's been a reality in my home state and many of the factories that were closed, you know, there weren't a supply of jobs without significant retraining. so we've heard a lot about that. the other thing i wanted to follow up on is the work you've done regarding servicers.

you know, anything from simply failing to provide quality customer service to ignoring some of the legal obligations around notice and payment options and fees to certain borrowers. i've heard from people in wisconsin about the challenges, about getting quality information and the frustrations and the additional costs that come along with simply trying to pay back what they owe. constituent from marsh field wrote me about loans that she took out for her daughter's education and believed she had finished paying it off years ago only to find out of the blue that there were claims that she still owed money. i'm wondering if you can speak to how strong the iermts for student loan servicers, like the ones could give students valuable information. >> well, as i mentioned earlier, we learned a valuable lesson from the breakdowns in the

mortgage services market. but i would also add, we've learned as financial regulators from the past ten years another very important lesson. in 2004 the student loan marketing association was privatized and operated as a private company for the past ten years. it's since restructured and is a different entity. despite the public benefits and subsidies that the successor corporation received, sally mae was ordered in 2008 to stop breaking multiple laws -- >> mr. i'm going to have to move on. we've got a lot of senators who are waiting to ask questions and votes are going to be called shortly. if we can get an answer in writing on that, i would appreciate it. senator werner, i know that you help bring this -- okay. i want to thank senator werner and senator cain were helping us

get a witness from virginia today. i know that you both have questions because we're going to go to -- we still have a few more senators and vote is going to be called shortly. if any members want to go vote and come back, we'll keep going as the vote is called. we'll go to senator markly now. >> thank you very much, madam chair. mr. chopra, one of the statistics i find interesting is that in comparison to germany, a year of college in germany costs 4.3% of the country's median income. here it's 51% of the country's median income. how does that affect the aspirations of students in those twho nations? >> well, you know, the lack of affordability of college may not only impact the students themselves, but it also might impact the broader family balance sheet. as we saw, the rise in student loan debt was not only because

college was increasing in cost. it was also because students themselves are bearing a larger share of total college costs compared to their parents or other sources. that means that because people had less home equity, they had less savings, they dealt with unemployment themselves. those costs got shifted to students. so it may actual i impact not only the student but the family's aspirations themselves about how they will prosper economically over the long term. >> does this reflect on a philosophical issue over whether education is a public good that not only benefits individual children but strengthens society as a whole? >> well, i'm not a philosopher, but i believe -- i get your point there, that the positive externalities of a more educated population benefits all of us. there's some empirical literature to suggest that. but at the same time we need to

make sure people are completing, people are able to repay their student debt and their student debt doesn't replace other productive spending. >> let me put it a different way. colleagues of ms. jones, if they're looking at the challenge of debt and are deciding ki not pursue a path where i have the possibility of a mill stone, a debt aek wall to a home mortgage, a mill stone of debt around my neck pulling me down because of the consequences, the struggle that's seen. that not only impacts the individual, but doesn't that impact the future prosperity of our entire society if the folks in our own generation, the student generation do not reach the fullness of their potential and their contribution back to the economy? >> i think behind all of the facts and statistics is a broader question about, you know, the american tradition of entrepreneurialism and risk taking. and unfortunately too many

people feel that they can't take those risks, can't start the small business out of their garage and that's something we should think about. >> let's think about how this amplifies the inequality of wealth. if our students are unable to begin purchasing a home earlier in their life and home ownership is the major builder of personal family wealth for working americans with doesn't that amplify the inequality of wealth in our society? >> as i note in my testimony, there is a large gap in certain simulations of graduates who do have student debt and those who don't, in terms of what those final outcomes might be for their retirement balances. so traditionally, younger workers have be able to stash cash away for a home down payment or saving for retirement. but if they're not able to make those early contributions, they

lose those compounding effects. so student debt, if it soaks up some of that ability to invest and save, the long term repercussions could be real. >> meaning amplifying the inequality in wealth. thank you. i wanted to make that point. the thing that i'm most concerned about is the impact on aspirations. i live in a working class community. my children go to the same public high school that i went to. and what i am hearing is a feeling among the high school students that there is not a path in which they have an opportunity to thrive, that is to pursue their potential. which then affects their behavior in high school as to whether or not they're going -- how hard they're going to work to make that path possible. my concern here is that this is the heart of the american dream, that there is a full opportunity to thrive for every american, whether they're the child of a mechanic or the child of a

janitor or the child of a ceo. given this huge hurdle of college debt, is that really compromising that vision? >> i mean, the change in aspirations from the stories that we are constantly submitting to the public record illustrate many of the themes you just discussed. >> ms. jones, would you like to comment on that. >> i'm going to have to interrupt. we do have votes occurring now. we'll let you answer that for the record. i appreciate the question. the senators next to be recogniz recognized. i'm going to go vote and come back. i would suggest anybody who is on the end of that list go with me and come back. we'll can't this through the votes. senator stapeno. >> thank you so much for hosting this hearing. ms. jones, thank you for working hard and stick in there and

doing what's right when everybody says to work hard, like most people, most of us when i was in school didn't have the capacity to turn to my parents and say hey, can i borrow $20,000 or $30,000 or $5,000 or whatever it was. so most people aren't in a situation where they have a lot of other options, aassume from what you're saying you would be in a situation that i was. fortunately for me in the '70s we did a whole lot more on scholarships. i wouldn't have gone to college. i was fortunate to get a bachelors and masters. but on top of my 93-person graduating class in clair, michigan, my dad was sick, we didn't have a lot of money and qualified for a scholarship for four years and that got me to college. we don't have those anymore. when i look at the numbers, you know, unfortunately state of michigan now is one of the highest in the country at cutting higher education, over 32% of the funding to

universities and community colleges. interestingly, the public universities have not increased tuition by that same 32%. now they have increased it. and about 19% and that's more than we certainly would like to see. but they are taking significant cuts. what i find interesting is that the for-profit universities actually have increased their tuition twice as much as public universities, twice as much. and 57% of the for-profit school grads are coming out with $30,000 more in debt, 57% rather than 12% of public schools. there's a lot of things involved in this, all of which we need to be looking at. but i don't think we should say that in the meantime students should not have the same

opportunity that all the rest of us have had when we want to finance a house, which is to get the lowest interest rates that are out there today. and i do want to say before asking questions that the good news for this refinancing bill, unlike other things that congress has done over the years, the bank bailout, all kinds of other things, you know, this is paid for. that's the good news on this one. this is not adding to the deficit, what we're pro posing is actually to ask everybody to kmip this in, pay their own share. it's fully paid for. dr. vedder, i have to say, turn to you and say, i'm so very surprised at your testimony. it seems in terms of saying that we should reduce the federal role and that we have too many graduate in our economy. wow. i have to tell you, in michigan, for michigan, georgetown center

on education and workforce has said there's going to be, out of the 1.5 million jobs expected to be created in michigan alone, a million of the million and a half will take education beyond high school. when i look at the national association of manufacturers who say there's 600,000 job jabl now that we can't match up skills. not all of those are four year, maybe two years in terms of a community college. but when we look at the need on s.t.e.m., science, technology, engineering and math, where we're going as an economy, i'm amazed that you think that we have too many graduates going into our economy. and i wonder if you might speak about that. >> certainly. we have -- if you look at bureau

of labor statistics data, of people who are working with college degrees in the united states today, nearly half of them are in jobs that the bls at least has characterized as jobs that do not require four-year degrees. now that is statistic has to be taken be a little bit of grain of salt. i'm the first to admit. there's some judgment calls of what is and what is not. the unemployment rate among college graduates 21 to 24, just right out of college, last year was above the overall u.s. unemployment rate. ms. jones' story which i think is a compelling story, is a story of someone who has worked hard and so forth but she's making $10 an hour or $13 an hour. and this goes back to actually senator widen's great bill that

wants to bring more information to the students before they make these wrong decisions. i think there's a huge information problem here. i see we're out of time. >> yes. >> although i don't know who's running the hearing now so maybe we aren't out of time. >> let me just say in conclusion, that i don't hear anywhere from any business or anybody that i work with right now that we need less education for folks. thank you again, ms. jones. we're going to do everything we can to give you a fair shot to lower those costs so you can actually buy a house. >> senator cain. >> thank you senator widen. thanks to the committee members. as a richmond resident like you, ms. jones, i appreciate your testimony. let me read for the record something you read but i don't want it to pass unnoticed. student loan debt has been the driving force of my decisions for the last eight years of my life and acorrespondent to my current repayment plan it is

projected to be for the next 25 years of my life, well into the years for which i would be planning for retirement. that's a powerful statement. i would like to be a student in your class because somebody who wants to be a teacher as much as you do, somebody who has been willing to take on your shoulders that much debt and still fight to achieve your dream of being a teacher, somebody who is willing to move halfway across the country to get a master's degree, you are going to be -- i know you are and are going to be one fantastic teacher. i thank you for your commitment. i really want to focus on the cost side of this equation, as dr. vedder did. bringing down the cost of higher education. i support so many of the issues on loans, the ability to refinance a student loan. but i really am focused on the cost issues. and i think we've probably done a disservice to students and their families by not laying out in a more clear fashion as a public policy matter lower cost ways to get the kinds of skills

were degrees that you need to succeed. for example, one kind of skill you can get is not a college degree, but a license or a professional credential. the georgetown workforce center says that 27% of young workers with licenses or certificates earn more than those with bachelor's degrees. it's not that you don't get education after high school, but sometimes the right education is an american society welding certificate. my dad was a welder. i don't think we coach and counsel our young people that there's ways to get the credentials that allow you to work. most of our financial aid policies, you can't use military division assistance benefits. 4500 dollars a year to active duty military for college or community college courses. you can't use those benefit to pay a $300 certification exam. it's foolish. second we have dual enrollment possibilities for students and more and more states are

embracing the notion that students while they're in high school should be able to get dual enrollment credits. you can't use pell grant credits, you can't use the current program to pay for college credits you can obtain for a really cheap cost in high school with a dual enrollmentment pi was able to graduate from college in three years because of dual enrollment and it was enormously helpful to my family. my family couldn't afford the colleges i got into when i first applied and they had to tell me, you're going to have to go talk your way into some place because everywhere accepted you is too expensive for us. >> ap credits are a way to reduce college costs. ms. jones, a lot of students now, today, this wasn't happening so much for me, but a lot of students now in your schools are going to sergeant reynolds for two years and then going to vcu and when they do

that their total costs shrinks. but somebody has had to sit down with them and council them as a path you can get a four year degree there there same college you did and it will be 20 or 30% cheaper if you start at the legal community college. i am concerned about debt but i'm probably most concerned, most concerned about this college cost issue. and i do think there are already a number of pathways for people to get college degrees or the credentials and certificates that will enable them to work. but we have an obligation to provide better information. and we also have an obligation to provide policies that don't discourage or treat a srt of second class education, some of the things that the professional certificates and certifications. i would like to ask both mr. chopra and dr. vedder in terms of the information information, you have some concerns about the grading system and i do too.

but in terms of providing students and parents with information earlier in their lives so they can make decisions, what more can we do at the federal level, using the leverage of the investment we make? >> well, one of the things that we have noted is that it's also very difficult to even compute what the cost, true cost of college is for many families. not only do tuitions change from year to year, but also it's a challenge to protect what your monthly payment will be when you take on a certain amount of debt this year. so just like we saw in the mortgage market where interest rates might reset or conditions change, people really are rolling the dice. they've created a lot of tools to assist with this but there could be more that should be done. >> time of the gentleman expired. our chair has come back and

senator king, you're up. >> thank you were senator widen. very good testimony. thanks to all three of you. it seems to me that one of the things that we talked about, and ms. jones, you touched on this in your answer to questions from senator murray, is there that there are program like the income based repayment that is apparently have a very low uptake rate. isn't one of the things that we do, regardless what we do, is to take more information available to borrowers both at the beginning at at end of their schooling so they know what these options are? that would have helped you dramatically apparently. >> it definitely would have help in the beginning to know instead of -- well to know what i was getting into when i signed my promissory notes. i think at the beginning you were told this is what you need

to get through college and if you use this, then you can deal with it afterward. but right now it's not going to incur -- you won't be incurring interest on your subsidized loans, thank those first, then your unsubsidized loans. we'll talk about that more when you take your exit exam and counseling upon graduation. what i realize is in doing that -- even in not knowing we're losing potentially great teachers. they're walking away from the profession because they can't afford the education they need. >> but they may have options they don't know they have that would help them stay in the profession which is what we want. mr. chopra, there's something like seven different repayment options. how about streamlining those, making more information, isn't that one thing we ought to do, regardless of what else we do here? >> simplicity of how to repay your loans i think is a very important goal. i think i'm also struck by -- i

recently heard from a former employee, a student loan servicer and they had told me that they're evaluated partially on how quickly they can get someone off the phone who calls them for help. so that can lead to very quick interactions or being transferred and you might get the shortcut answer rather than the answer that ultimately is better for the owner of the loan, for the borrower and maybe even the economy for broadly if it avoids default. addressing those incentives is major concern. >> that is something we need to look at regardless of what else we do p. mr. vedder, i enjoyed your testimony. i'll share with you a to iry you can ooh use. in a former life i was a talk show host and i interviewed an officer and he said, you know,

for the past 40 years the cost of a good private college has been about the same as a new ford. in the '40s it was a $1,000 and went up in the '60s to $3,000. but something happened because a new ford today is about $20,000 and the cost of a private college education is approaching $60,000. i think we need to explore, madam chair, why that happened. have colleges come and tell us why what they sell has increased two and three times the rate of inflation and what it is they're buying that costs so much that's causing college costs -- because we're talking about the finances costs but the real underlying problem is the cost of the product. as you pointed out, if tuition had risen at the rate of inflation, we wouldn't be having this hearing. so we've got to be focusing on that. but i am concerned and part of it is accountability. but i want to be hur when we talk about account about and

holding schools accountable that we apply standards such as gainful employment and graduate rates and those things that we don't penalize those institutions that are risks wit income and not college experience students. would you comment on that? >> the cfpb is not -- we are not exploring that specific regulation. that's the department of education. what i can say is aligning the incentives between the schools, whatever loan programs or financial services institutions, the students are important. we want to examine how it can -- we can increase accountability so that outcomes are improved for everybody, regardless of where they come from. >> i think we all want to increase accountability. all i'm saying is we have to be careful how we do it that we don't inadvertently pemmize the very students we want to get

into the system by putting -- macing requirements that would be -- that would disincentive -- that's not really a word. that were punish schools that are taking the risks to bring those students -- to give those students an education. thank you all very much. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you very much, senator widen. >> thank you, chair murray, thank you for your years of passion and commitment to this effort. and it's particularly timely right now. i think we understand that our students are just getting smothered with these costs and these bills. they're up to their eyeballs in debt and this is having a huge effect on their ability to have the productive life that they would want. and it takes a toll in a myriad array of ways. recently i was making a tour of college campuses in oregon and talked about a piece of lemts lation i'll describe in a

minute. and a young woman came up to me and said, you know, i owe $50,000, $60,000. what i want to do more than anything else is i want to have a family. and i'm not convinced somebody will marry me when i'm carrying around those kinds of debts. and, you know, she teared up and we talked about various kinds of options. but i think that's pretty representative of what's going on out there. this is taking an enormous toll. in effect, putting students and young people in shackles. and it seems to me there are two kind of pieces to the puzzle. the first is we've got to help the students that are under water. and i appreciated what you and other students have had to say about that, ms. jones. and whether it's refinancing, income-based repayments, i'm open to a variety of different approaches. the second is a different kind of issue, and that is making sure that not only do we get students in the door, but they get more value for their

education. and senator rubio, senator warner and i have introduced a piece of legislation calls the student right to know before you go act. so for the first time, it would be possible for students to get this information in one place and heaven forbid when students and families find out about a school that's doing a good job in terms of graduation rates, a lack of needed remedial education which you earn at the school, if the school's doing a good job and another school isn't doing a good job, the other school better clean up its act or heaven forbid market forces would kick in and that would, in effect, advance the schools that are doing a good job. my understanding, and i want to start with you on this, dr. vetter. i know all three of you have views on this. to get the kind of data you need to really do this right, it's going to take a piece of legislation. whether it's the bill that

senator warner, senator rubio and i have, or something close -- by the way, other senators have bills that -- for purposes of government work, it's close enough. and i think this is what's needed. are we going to be able to get the data that we need to really set up this kind of seamless opportunity for students to get more value for their education along the lines of what i've kind of capsulized here this morning? >> well, senator, first of all, let me say i am very, very pleased that you have introduced this legislation. and i have written on it publicly on several occasions. it's ironic that the universities that are in the knowledge business are sometimes very reticent about providing knowledge about their own students what they're learning, what they're earning after they graduate. of course the colleges themselves don't often have that information. the irs could provide enormously

useful information on the earnings of graduates. by majors, by institutions, so forth. in this modern age, without violating privacy or anything. why don't we do that? we collect all this data. the social security administration has the capacity to provide a lot of information. if part of the problem is student financial burdens, shouldn't the students know at least what is the probability they're going to earn a certain amount of money when they graduate? and so i think information bills are fortunate. i think they're low cost. they are consumer friendly. markets work better when there's more information around, by all parties. and i think the efforts that you and senator rubio and senator warner and others are making is one of the few positive developments in this area right now. >> i want to let senator murray

have a chance to summarize, because we're going to have a vote in a minute. i'm something of a privacy hawk around here. i see that with the nsa and a whole host of other issues. so we have tried very hard to have significantly stronger privacy protections than you have today under a variety of these programs. and my last request, ms. jones, i followed your good work. we'd very much like to work with you and the other students on this. so we really get this right. we lock in the privacy that your generation deserves, we deal with the refinancing, repayment, whatever is necessary, and we in particular get the counsel of you student hotds, as i described it, are getting smothered and really facing these problems because there's been so much foot-dragging here. i think now is really the time, and chair hurry, again for all your leadership my thanks, and look forward to working with you. >> i want to thank our witnesses

for being here today. i really appreciate your input on this. i want to thank all of our members. there was very high participation rate today, i think because this is an issue that is impacting so many families and communities and the future economic possibilities for our country. it's one we've got to address. i'm looking forward to working with all of you to do that. so again, thank you. thank you so senator johnson for filling in today. i gave him an "a" as a former teacher for today. thank you again to all of our witnesses. this is a topic that we will continue to have much discussion around. thank you.

talking with reporters in washington, d.c. this morning, a senior advise tore the president talked about ledge haitian from senators john mccain and bernie sanders aimed at improving medical care for veterans. here's a look. >> i think that the bill that senator sanders and senator mccain just agreed upon last night is a much better way to go than privatizing veterans' health care. i think we have a sacred obligation to our veterans to provide health benefits that they have been promised. and i think that resources that are contained in the sanders/mccain bill, the focus on getting more primary care doctors into the system, the focus on improving the facilities that would come from the resources that are contained in that bill, would be a much better way to go than simply

privatizing the system. and that builds on the president's commitment which sometimes gets lost in the recent conversations of having expanding access for pts, for agent orange, for taking care of the veterans that are -- the baby boomer veterans who are now entering the system, as well as the post- 9/11 veterans who need care and need the quality of care that the veteran system is capable of delivering, but i think we obviously have problems in the structure of how that service was being performed. and, you know, the acting secretary has now taken action, and as he announced in phoenix

yesterday, to improve that. but i think it's going to take the kind of legislation that's now moving on a bipartisan basis through the senate to really improve the delivery of health care in the system. we also obviously are looking for someone to lead the va who can -- and lead the veterans health system -- who can perform the kind of reenveinvention tha will be necessary to get those kind of improvements in place. today is the 70th anniversary of d-day. we'll have president obama's speech at the normandy american cemetery. it overlooks omaha beach which is one of the landing spots of allied forces which they invaded nazi-occupied france. after that an international ceremony marking d-day with remarks from french president francois hollande. later the world bar 2 memorial

on the national mall and hear speeches from past presidents marking d-day. congressman buck mckeeian issued a statement that says in part, standing on the shore with the men who risked their lives to take this ground, among the graves of those who made the ultimate sacrifice, words fail me. from house minority lead are nancy pelosi, part of the congressional d-day delegation, neither our nation nor any nation that cherishes the blessings of liberty fought for, bled for, and died for on d-day can ever forget its memory. joseph submit was the founding prophet of the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints. the earliest account we have of joseph smith's first vision occurs in a book that he began writing in in 1832. the front part of that book he wrote a personal history about his-to that point. in this 1832 history, he describes this vision that he had 12 years earlier.

joseph smith himself did not write a lot of things personally. but he had clerks at work writing for him, altogether and printed for him when we finish with our joseph smith papers project, we'll have about two dozen printed volumes of about 500 pages apiece. >> this weekend learn about the rich history and literary life of salt lake city, utah. saturday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2's "become tv" and sunday at 2:00 p.m. on c-span3's "american history tv." this weekend on "newsmakers" an interview with wyoming senator john barrasso, chairman of the republican policy committee. he answers questions about the environmental protection agency's plan so cut carbon emission busy 30%. the release of army sergeant bowe bergdahl. how the republicans will run the senate if they win a majority in the election.

minnesota senator al franken introduced a bill that would ban companies from tracking the location of smartphone users without their consent. he chaired a senate judiciary subcommittee hearing on the issue earlier this week. we'll hear from officials with the justice department and the federal trade commission. the hearing is two hours. >> this hearing will be called to order. welcome to the senate judiciary subcommittee on privacy, technology and the law. this is a hearing on my bill to protect sensitive location information, the location privacy protection account of 2014. i held a hearing to look at how our laws were locating the location information generated by smartphones, cell phones and tablets. the first group they heard from

was the minnesota coalition for battered women. they told me that across minnesota, victims were being followed through so-called stalking apps. specifically designed to help stalkers secretly track their victims. i started investigating these stalking apps. let me read you some of their -- from some of their websites. here's from one called spy era. "most of the time you think your spouse is being unfaithful, you are right. spy era will be your spy in their pocket. you will need to sneak your spouse's phone and download it to their phone. after the software is downloaded, you'll be able to see where they are geographically. if your husband is two counties over from where you live, spy era will tell you that." and of course husband can mean wife or ex or whatever you want to put in there.

here's another, this is from flexispy. "flexispy gives you total control of your partner's phone without them knowing it. see exactly where they are, or were, at any given date in time." here's another quote that's since been taken down. quote, worried about your spouse cheating? track every text, every call, and every move they make, using our easy cell phone spy software." these apps can be found online in minutes and abusers find them and use them to stalk thousands of women around the country. the minnesota coalition for battered women submitted testimony about a northern minnesota woman who was the victim of domestic violence and the victim of one of these stalking apps. this victim had decided to get help.

so she went to a domestic violence program located in a county building. she got to the building and within five minutes, she got a text from her abuser asking her why she was in the county building. the woman was terrified and so an advocate took her to the courthouse to get a restraining order. as soon as she filed for the order, she got a second text from her abuser asking why she was at the county courthouse and whether she was getting a restraining order against him. they later figured out she was being tracked through a stalking app installed in her phone. this doesn't just happen in minnesota. a national study conducted by the national network to end domestic violence found that 72% of victims service programs across the country had seen victims who were tracked through

a stalking app or a stand-alone gps device. without objection i'll add to the record the accounts of a few other victims. here's one from a victim in illinois. she was living in kansas with her abuser. she fled to elgin, illinois, a town three states away. she didn't know the whole time her cell phone was transmitting her precise location to her abuser. he drove the 700 miles to elgin, tracked her to a shelter and then to the home of her friend, where he assaulted her and tried to strangle her. here's one from a victim in scottsdale, arizona. her husband and she were going through a divorce. her husband tracked her for over a month, through her cell phone. eventually he murdered their two children in a rage. in most of these cases, the perpetrator was arrested because it's illegal to stalk someone.

but it's not clearly illegal to make and to market and to sell a stalking app. so nothing happened to the companies making money off of the stalking. nothing happened to the stalking apps. my bill will shut down these apps once and for all. it would clearly prohibit making, running, and selling apps and other devices that are designed to help stalkers track their victims. it would let police seize the money that these companies make and use this money to actually prevent stalking. my bill will prioritize grants to the organizations that train and raise awareness around gps stalking and it would make the department of justice get up to date statistics on gps stalking. that's a big deal. because the latest statistics we have from doj are from 2006. and at that point, they

estimated over 25,000 people were being gps-stalked annually, back in 2006. and we know what smartphone technology has done since then. but my bill doesn't just protect victims of stalking. it protects everyone who uses a smartphone, an in-car navigation device, or any mobile device connected to the internet. my bill makes sure that if a company wants to get your location or give it out to others, they need to get your permission first. i think that we all have a fundamental right to privacy, a right to control who gets your sensitive information, and with whom they share it. someone who has a record of your location doesn't just know where you live. they know where you work and where you drop your kids off at school. they know the church you attend and the doctors that you visit.

location information is extremely sensitive, but it's not being protected the way it should be. in 2010, "the wall street journal" found that half of the most popular apps were collecting their users' location information and then sending it to third parties, usually without permission. since then, some of the most popular apps in the country have been found disclosing their users' precise location to third parties without their permission. and it's not just apps. the nissan leafs on-board commuter was found sending drivers' locations to third-party websites. onstar threatened even after they canceled the service. they only stopped when i and other senators called them out on this. and a whole new industry has grown up around tracking the movements of people going shopping, without their permission, and sometimes when they don't even enter a store. the fact is that most of this is totally legal with only a few exceptions. if a company gets your location

information over the internet, they are free to give to it almost anyone they want. my bill closes these loopholes. if a company wants to collect or share your information, it has to get your permission first. and put up a post online saying what the company is doing with your data. once the company is tracking you, it has to be transparent or else has to send you a reminder that you're being tracked. those requirements apply only to the first company getting location information from your device. for any other company getting large amounts of location data all they have to do is put up a post online explaining what they're doing with their data. that's it. these rules are built on existing industry best practices. and they have exceptions for emergencies, theft prevention and parents tracking their kids. the bill is backed by the leading anti-domestic violence

and consumer groups without objection. i will add letters to the record from the minnesota coalition for battered women, the national center for victims of crime, the national women's law center, the online trust alliance and consumers union, all in support of my bill. this bill is just common sense. before i turn it over to my friend, the ranking member, i want to make one thing clear. location-based services are terrific. i use them all the time. when i drive across minnesota. they save time and money and they save lives. 99% of companies that get your information, your location information are good, legitimate companies. so i've already taken into account many of the industry's concerns that i heard when we debated this bill in the last congress. i've capped liability, i've made

compliance easier. and if folks still have issues with the bill, i want to address them. so with that, i will turn it over to senator flake. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you again to the witnesses for being here. i know you have busy schedules and appreciate you doing this. i think we can all agree that stalking and domestic violence are serious concerns. that's why i was pleased to support the reauthorization of the violence against women act. i agree with those who will testify today that, like miss southworth of the national network to end domestic violence and detective hill, second panel, that domestic violence and stalking are serious problems that need to be addressed. i'm not aware of any concerns that have been expressed about some of the sections of this bill, this bill. those that address the stalking apps and directing the government to study gps stalking and prioritize grants to educate law enforcement about this problem. having said that, there are sections of the bill i think

that are still a bit concerning. the bill before us regulates the commercial collection of geolocation information. some concerns have been raised about its effect on businesses and applications that use geolocation information to provide consumers with services that they now rely on. i'd like to enter into the record letters from the national retail federation and the interactive advertisement bureau if that's okay. >> sorry. without objection. >> thanks. in our efforts to protect the privacy of americans, which is extremely important, we've got to be careful not to stifle innovation in dynamic sectors in the economy. a lot of the concerns that have been expressed are about static regulations that deal with a dynamic sector of the economy, and we want to make sure that we don't hamper development of new products and technologies. with that, i look forward to the witnesses. thanks. >> thank you, senator flake.

while the first panel of witnesses has seated themselves, thank you. bea hanson is the principal deputy director of the united states department of justice office on violence against women. before joining the ovw, ms. hanson was director for emergency services and the chief program officer for safe horizon, a crime victims service organization in new york city. ms. hanson is a minnesotan by birth and was raised in st. paul. jessica rich is the director of the ftc's bureau of consumer protection. during her time at the ftc, miss rich has led major policy initiatives related to privacy, data security and emerging technology, overseen actions and developed significant ftc rules. she also received the chairman's award in 2011 for her contributions to the ftc's

mission. mark goldstein is the director of physical infrastructure issues for the u.s. government accountability office. he is a frequent witness before congress and served as senior staff member on the senate committee for homeland security and governmental affairs. he'll testify about two studies that gao conduct at my request on the subject of location privacy. i'd like to welcome you all. thank you for appearing. your written testimony will be made part of the record. you each have about five minutes for any opening remarks that you'd like to make. we'll start with ms. hanson. >> thank you so much. good afternoon, chairman franken and ranking member flake and members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the department of justice regarding stalking, mobile devices and location privacy. my name and bea hanson, i'm the principal deputy director at the

united states department of justice office on violence against women or ovw. one key way that the department of justice has focused on strengthening the criminal justice response to stalking is through the implementation of the violence against women act or vawa. since the passage of vawa in 1994, we've made significant strides in enhancing the criminal justice system's response to stalking. congress has been a strong partner in our national efforts to address this issue. since 1994, congress has amended vawa to address our growing understanding of this crime, adding stalking to the purpose areas of grant programs, broaden the federal interstate stalking statute to protect victims of cyberstalking and enhancing penalties for repeat stalking offenders. just last year in the most recent vaba reauthorization, congress closed a loophole in the federal cyberstalking statute to permit federal prosecutors to pursuit cases

where the offender and the victim both lived in the same state. congress also amended the jean require that universities report crime statistics on incidents of stalking. as you both know, stalking is a complex crime and it continues to be misunderstood and very much underestimated. incidents of stalking behavior, when considered separately, may seem relatively innocuous. however, stalking behavior tends to escalate over time. and it's often paired with or followed by sexual assault, physical its victims feel isolated, vulnerable, and frightened and tend to suffer from anxiety from depression and from insomnia. results of the 2010 national intimate partner and sexual violence survey which was

released by the centers for disease control in late 2011 demonstrate the grave scope of this crime. using a conservative definition of stalking, the survey found 6.6 million people were stalked in the previous 12-month period, and that 1 in 6 women and 1 in 19 men were stalked at some point in their lifetimes. the survey report noted that although anyone can be a victim of stalking, females were more than three times more likely to be stalked than males. and young adults have the highest rates of stalking victimization. the report also showed the two frequent nexus between stalking and intimate partner abuse. for the overwhelming majority of victims, the stalker is someone that's known to them. an acquaintance, family member, or most off then a current or former intimate partner. the report confirmed that most stalking cases involved form of technology. more than three-quarters of the victims reported having received

unwanted phone calls, voice messages and text messages. roughly one-third of the victims were watched, followed or tracked with a listening or other kind of device. the report authors noted that their findings showed a higher percentage of stalking than previous national studies and hypothesized that this increase could be due to new technologies that make stalking behavior easier. technology has provided new tools for stalkers, for example, the rapid increased use of cellular phones in recent years has created a new market in malicious software that when installed on mobile devices allows perpetrators to intercept victims' communications without their knowledge or consent. through the use of the software, perpetrators can read victims' e-mail and text messages, listen to their telephone calls, trace their movements, and turn on the microphone in their phone to record conversations occurring in the immediate surrounding oar. all of this can be done remotely and surreptitiously.

a recent study conducted by the national network to end domestic violence, supported by the department of justice office on victims of crime, further suggests that technology-enhanced stalking, including the use of mobile devices, is neither novel nor rare. of the more than 750 victim service agencies that responded 72% reported helping victims who had been tracked by gps, either through a cell phone or gps device. the findings from this report and other surveys underscores how critical it is that professionals who work with talking abouting victims understand the dynamics of stalking, particularly how stalkers use technology. we know that stalking is often a precursor to other forms of violence because stalking can be challenging to recognize, ovw grant programs support specialized training for police, prosecutors and others to ensure that comprehensive services are available to victims. we also fund a number of training and technical assistance projects that target the intersection of technology

and the crime of stalking sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence. and there's more information on that in my written testimony. we have some of our grantees that are going to be talking here later on in the second panel. i appreciate the opportunity to testify today and i look forward to continuing to working with congress, working with you all as it considers these important issues. thank you. >> thank you, ms. hanson. ms. rich? >> good afternoon, chairman franken and ranking member flake. my name is jessica rich and i'm the director of the bureau of consumer protection at the federal trade commission. i very much appreciate this opportunity to present the commission's testimony on consumer protection issues involving geolocation information and to offer some initial views on the draft location privacy protection act. protecting consumers' privacy is a key focus of commission's efforts and we commend the committee for its continued attention to this really important issue. products and services that use geolocation data make consumers'

lives easier and more efficient as you've noted, chairman franken. consumers can get turn by turn directions to their destinations, find the closest bank, check the weather when they are traveling, among many other examples. at the same time, the increasing collection, use, and disclosure of this data presents serious privacy concerns. for this reason, the commission considers precise geolocation data to be sensitive, warranting opt-in consent prior to collection from a consumer's mobile device. why is this data so sensitive? a device's geolocation can reveal consumers' movements in realtime and over time, and thus develop intimate personal details about them. such as the doctor's office they visit, how often they go, their place of worship, when and what route their kids walk to school in the morning and return home in the afternoon. this data can be accessed and used in many ways consumers don't expect. for example, collected through stalking apps, sold to

third parties for unspecified uses, paired with other data to build detailed profiles of consumers' activities, or stolen by hackers. the risk to consumers range from unwanted tracking to threats to personal safety. the commission has taken action to protect this data through law enforcement and outreach efforts. using its authority under the ftc act, the commission has brought cases against companies engaged in unfair and deceptive practices involving geolocation data. one example is our settlement with snap chat, the developer of a popular mobile messaging app. in that case, the ftc alleged that in addition to misrepresenting that photo and video messages sent through the service would disappear, which is what was publicized most about that case, snap chat also collected and transmitted geolocation data from its app even though its privacy policy claimed it didn't track users or access such information at all. in other case, this one involving the developer of a

popular flashlight app, the ftc alleged that the developer told users that it would collect diagnostic and technical information simply to assist with product support, but failed to disclose that the app transmitted the device's precise geolocation and unique device i.d. to ad networks. finally, in a series of settlements with rent to own retailer aaron's and its affiliates, the ftc alleged the company's installation and use of software on rental computers that secretly monitored and tracked consumers violated the ftc act. the software could log keystrokes, snap screen shots, and take photos using the phone's web cam unbeknownst to users. the ftc acknowledged that installing tracking devices on the rented computers without the renter's consent and disclosing

the information was an unfair and i will legal practice. in addition to enforcement, the commission has conducted studies held workshops and issued reports in this area. for example, in 2012, ftc staff issued two reports about the disclosures provided in mobile apps for kids. the reports showed that the apps collected data from the kids' devices, including unique device i.d. and geolocation data, and shared it with third parties, often without notice to parents. in february of last year, ftc staff issued a report providing specific recommendations about how all players in the mobile ecosystem, platforms, app developers, ad networks, analytics companies, and trade associations, can and must ensure that consumers have timely, easy to understand disclosures and choices about what data companies collect and use, including geolocation data. now turning to a discussion of the location privacy protection act. the commission very much

supports the goals of this bill, which seeks to improve the transparency and consumer control over the collection and use of sensitive geolocation data. the bill really represents an important step forward, notably by requiring clear and accurate disclosures and opt-in consent from consumers before this sensitive data can be collected. the bill contains both civil and criminal provisions and gives the department of justice sole authority to enforce both. we very much support strong remedies for violations. however, as the federal government's leading privacy enforcement agency, we do recommend that the commission be given responsibility for enforcing the civil provisions of the bill. thank you very much for this opportunity. to provide the commission's views. the ftc is very committed to protecting the privacy of consumers' geolocation and we look forward to continuing to work with the committee and congress on this issue. >> thank you, ms. rich. i noted your recommendation in your written testimony and again just now. >> okay, thanks.

>> mr. goldstein. >> thank you, good afternoon, mr. chairman, ranking member flake, members of the subcommittee. thank you for the opportunity to be here this afternoon and provide testimony on consumers' location data. smartphones and in-car navigation systems give consumers access to useful location-based services. >> okay, sorry. i'm sorry. >> he actually sounded very good. very sonorous. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> is sonorous good? >> okay, go ahead, sorry you were interrupted by ms. rich. [ laughter ] >> quite all right. however, questions about privacy can arise if companies use or share location data without their knowledge. several agencies have responsibility to address consumers' privacy issues, including the ftc, which has authority to take enforcement actions against unfair or deceptive acts, and the ntia, which advises the president on

telecommunications information policy issues. my testimony addresses, one, companies' use and sharing of location data. two, consumers' location privacy risks. and three, actions taken by selected companies and federal agencies to protect consumers' location privacy. our findings were as follows in two reports that we released over the last couple years. first that 14 mobile industry companies and 10 in-car navigation providers gao examined in its 2012 and 2013 reports, including mobile carriers and auto manufacturers, collect location data and use or share them to provide consumers with location-based services and improve consumer services. for example, mobile carriers and application developers use location data to provide social networking services that are linked to consumers' locations. in-car navigation use location data to provide services such as turn by turn directions, or roadside assistance. location data can also be used and shared to enhance the

functionality of services such as search engines to make search results more relevant. for example, returning results of nearby businesses. second, while consumers can benefit from the location-based services their privacy may be at risk when companies collect and share location data. for example, in both our reports, we found when consumers are unaware that their location data are shared and for what purpose that data may be shared, they may be unable to judge whether location data is shared with trustworthy third parties. furthermore, when location data are amassed over time they can create detailed profiles of individual behavior including habits, preferences, and routes traveled. private information that could be exploited. additionally, consumers could be at higher risk of identity theft or threats to personal safety when companies retain location data for long period of times or in ways that link the data to individual consumers. companies can anonymize location

data they use or share in part by removing personally identifying information. however, in our 2013 report, we found that in-car navigation providers that goa examined use different identification methods that may lead to varying levels of protection for consumers. third, consumer companies gao have examined in our reports have not consistently implemented practices to protect consumers' location privacy. the companies have taken some steps that are in line with recommended practices for better protecting consumers' privacy. for example, all of the companies we examined, used privacy policies or other disclosures to inform consumers about the collection of location data and other information. however, companies did not consistently or clearly disclose to consumers what the companies do with these data or third party schts they might share that data, leaving consumers unable to specifically judge whether such uses of their location data might violate their privacy. in our 2012 report, we found federal agencies have taken

steps to address location privacy data through educational outreach events, reports with recommendations and guidance for industry. for example, the department of commerce's ntia has brought stakeholders together to develop codes of conduct for industry. but gao found this effort lacks specific goals, milestones and performance measures, making it unclear whether the effort would actually even address location privacy. additionally, in response to a recommendation gao's 2012 report, the ftc issued guidance in 2013 toip form companies of the commission's views on the appropriate actions mobile industry companies should take to disclose their privacy practices and obtain consumers' consent. gao made recommendations to enhars consumer protections in 2012. gao recommended for example ntia develop goals and pile steins and measures for its stake holder initiative. gao will continue to monitor this effort in the future. mr. chairman, this concludes my oral statement. i'd be happy to respond to any

comments. thank you. >> thank you, mr. goldstein. and thank you all for your testimony. ms. hanson and ms. rich, your agencies have already done important work to combat cyberstalking and gps stalking but i want to challenge you to do more. i want to press you to investigate and shut down these smartphone stalking apps. they hurt tens of thousands of people every year. they market themselves directly and brazenly to stalkers and they're easily available on the internet. my bill will give you even more tools to go after these guys, but will you pledge to me today that you will use all of your existing tools to investigate and shut down these apps? >> yes, i will, within my powers. we do have a commission that needs to approve things, but i run the bureau of consumer

protection. i will note that we did bring a case against a similar service called remote spy. we litigated a case against them that was providing this very same type of service to spy on people, and we obtained a strong order against the company and we can use similar tools to pursue these types of stalking apps. >> thank you. >> you know, my role at the office on violence against women, we're a grant-funded organization. and really want to work with you and work together to address these issues around stalking applications. this has been a huge, big priority for the department. i would like to bring this back to those folks who actually do the prosecution and want to share the concerns of the criminal division, specifically the computer crime and

intellectual property section, as well as the u.s. attorney's office, executive office of the u.s. attorney, who handles the criminal prosecutions, and i'll bring that back to them. >> well, thank you. and there is bipartisan agreement on this. in 2011, i sent a letter by senators grassley, klobuchar, cornyn, blumn that will, graham, whitehouse, shumar and feinstein asking your agencies to crack down on these apps, i want to ask each of you to everything you can to shut them down. mr. goldstein, some of the witnesses on the second panel urge us to be cautious about legislating. they favor self-regulation. as part of your investigation you looked at industry best practices for the collection and sharing of location data. in an interview after the report you said that there weren't very many rules in place and that in many ways, this was still "the wild west of the electronic era."

did you find that industry best practices were being implemented consistently and did you find that consumers were being given the information they needed to make choices about their privacy? >> thank you, mr. chairman. our reports clearly indicate that there is no comprehensive approach, that some companies do pay attention very consistently to the rules, the self-regulating rules that are out there, and some do not. and that there is a great variety. and not a lot of transparency. those seem to be the two principal problems. a lot of variety, and some pay attention to some rules and the not others, and the lack of transparency and that consumers don't always have enough information to make choices about what kind of information is being retained, how long it is being retained, by whom it is being retained and used, things like that. so there are quite a lot of problems still out there with the application of the rules. >> and i see you're nodding,

ms. rich? >> yes. many industry groups and individual companies say they implement opt-in or opt-in as a best practice. but our enforcement more broadly even outside of stalking apps but related to the collection of geolocation information, including the snap chat case, the golden shores case which was the flashlight case, our case against aaron's, and also our survey of kids' apps shows that these -- this opt-in standard is not being complied with in a regular basis. >> yeah, i found the snap chat particularly ironic because their whole selling point was that once you post a video or a photo, that it would disappear. >> and we allege that wasn't true, among other things. >> it didn't. other than that, it was exactly what it said. >> yeah. >> okay.

i'm running out of my time. i'll ask one more question and we want to get to our other panel. so i'll give it to senator flake and i'll ask one more question of ms. hanson. >> thank you. mr. goldberg, in your testimony, you outlined a series of what-ifs. asserting that location data could be used to track consumers. i think we all understand the potential of this. you say these -- which can be used to steal identity, stalk them, monitor them without their knowledge. you also say that collection of data, location data, poses a thread. we all understand that. you've explained that very well. but in your study, or in your investigation, did you uncover examples of companies stealing customers' identities, or stalking them, or criminals obtaining location data? we know the potential exists,

did you actually turn up any nefarious activity? >> no, senator, we did not. it was really a look at the kinds of issues that were out there. it was not really within the scope, but we also did not find any. >> all right. ms. rich, are you -- you mentioned a few of them, cases that have been brought. what's been out there in popular media that has caught your attention? or is that usually how you find these cases? or how do you come on to these cases where you decide to bring action against them? >> we find cases in a variety of ways. we may be tipped off by an insider. we may be -- get referrals from businesses or consumer groups or tech people.

but responding to the question you just asked my colleague, i mean, one thing that our cases do show is that companies, even flashlights, are collecting this data, contrary to the claims they're making, and then they're sharing it. so it is being collected and used and given what it can show, in terms of consumers' private activities, that raises concerns. >> yeah, certainly i think we all recognize that people use it for advertising and some of them aren't disclosing or giving the opportunity to opt out. my question was to mr. goldstein was, do we see criminals using it for purposes that are -- potential certainly exists, but if there are examples of that in a criminal way. we've seen some of the stalking, and obviously we want to make sure that we crack down on that, but i know that the potential exists, i was just wondering in

the studies if we've seen that actually occurring. we see some of it on the commercial side, but not so much on the criminal side yet, is that an accurate statement? >> i think that the stalking apps are the clearest example of the harm that it can do. i agree. >> i mentioned in my opening statement that we want to make sure we don't stifle any development of new technologies and new positive uses of this geolocation information. miss hanson, the department of justice as you know works with law enforcement agencies across the country and broadcasters, transportation agencies, and the wireless industry to issue amber alerts. the national center for missing and exploited children manages a secondary distribution of these amber alerts. these are obviously only sent when a child is at risk of serious injury or death. would amber alerts fall within one of the exceptions to the bill?

>> i would have to bring this back to the department about how this would be an exception or not. amber alerts i know have been important in identifying missing children. i think we need to look at this issue more broadly and i can bring that back to the department to take a look at it. through our office on the office end of violence against women, we've seen -- we've seen and you'll hear testimony from folked on the second panel of, if you look at the cases of -- of cyberstalking, that we actually look at -- when you look at it from the perspective of victims of domestic violence, that in actuality we have a large number of victims who have said they've been tracked. my testimony talked about 72% of those reported of looking at victim service agencies had been

tracked by gps through cell phone or gps. so i think those are important issues we need to look at, but i can bring back this issue, question about the amber alert. >> if you could, just let me get -- >> i can answer that, but i'll wait. >> a hypothetical, and some people have talked about and some are actually working on programs i think that would send an amber alert to a specific location. if a child was lost in a mall and you don't need the amber alert at that point because there are certain standards and thresholds at which those are issues. but those you might be able to send it at a lower threshold if it could be confined to a specific location, say a mall. but obviously if the geolocation information of individuals who are in that mall, they would not have consented to receive that amber alert, they would not have opted in, but could -- would this be an exception, and how do we work with the exceptions like that? where useful information could

go out but not for regulations that could come? does that make sense? i'm sorry. >> no, it makes sense. it's not the area that i work in. so what i'd like to do is bring that back to other folks in the department and get back to you on that. >> okay. you had a -- >> well, i just wanted to clarify that an amber alert would be in section 3 of the bill. we put in exceptions. and any emergency allowing a parent or legal guardian to locate an unemancipated minor or child, and also for fire, medical, public safety or other emergency services. so this is specifically in the bill. it would be exempted. >> okay, there are some that are a little less clear, i think mr. atkinson of the second panel will note that there are certain

programs like circle of six, siren seven, these apps allow women to share their precise geolocation information with friends who are in an unsafe situation. these, i think we all agree, can be used to help women in an unsafe situation. we just want to make sure we don't do something that would prohibit those kind of uses. that's a little tougher or fuzzier than amber alert. and so i hope as we move through this process -- and maybe the second panel can shed some light on that as well. but thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator blumenthal has joined us. >> thank you mr. chairman. thank you to you for having this hearing and for your really instrumental work on a lot of this legislation. thanks to this excellent panel. i want to thank particularly bea hanson for your work on sexual assault on campuses and your help to me in the roundtables that we organized around

connecticut and the proposals that we formulated as a result. and the president's great work on this issue. thanks to the wonderful staff that he has working on this issue. and to that point, i wonder if you could talk a little bit about what additional steps colleges and universities ought to be taking with respect to cyberstalking and the relationship or the intersection of cyberstalking with campus sexual assault. you know, in connecticut, more than 50,000 individuals are stalked every year. a lot of it occurs on campuses because college students tend to be more attuned to this technology, and yet i found as i went around the state of connecticut that college administrators and officials there often were not as focused as perhaps they should be on

this issue of cyberstalking and the technology that's available to enable it. so perhaps if you could talk a little bit about that issue. >> thank you, senator blumenthal. and thank you for your work on addressing campus sexual assault and the report that you put together as a result of all of the hearings you did in connecticut. i think that nexus between campus sexual assault and cyberstalking is important. especially when you look at the use of cell phones and smart phones, especially among the college campus students. there's work that's being done and there's more work that we need to do in terms of looking at prevention messages and incorporating issues of stalking and cyberstalking, particularly

into messages around sexual assault. because we know often that stalking isn't something that occurs by itself. but that it often escalates over time and can often be a precursor to crimes like sexual assault or even homicide. i agree with you on your point about the need to train and talk to administrators about it. i think there's a lot more knowledge among the students than there are among the administrators about the training that's needed to look at cyberstalking and those connections. so we're more than happy to work with you and the rest of the committee if there are ways that we can make those efforts even stronger. >> i thank you. this technology has huge promise, but also tremendous peril. and the awareness of the peril

is sometimes difficult among young people who think of themselves as invincible. and yet because of that illusion, they may be the most vulnerable. and the most vulnerable often to their friends who seemingly want to befriend or support them and yet use this technology, really, to put them in great peril. so i thank you for your focus on that. i'd like to ask ms. rich whether you believe under your current authority you can take action against some of the makers, the manufacturers, who may be knowingly or unknowingly promoting misuse or abuse of this technology. >> to date, we have taken action. we did take action and litigated a case against a promoter of -- a seller of spyware that

specifically sold it so that you could capture the movements of somebody secretly. and we did that under our existing authority. so we do have authority, but we do need to prove deception or unfairness. and, um, we -- the, across the board noticed consent requirements with exceptions for legitimate use that are in the proposed law, would make it easier for us to enforce. >> so you would welcome this additional measure? >> we very much support the goals and the basic provisions of the bill, yes.

>> you plan to have round tables or workshops or other means of increasing awareness among students and others? >> we recently had a seminar on mall tracking, which is not about stalking, but it's about the use of gps to track consumer movements in stores. i think that raised awareness about the use of geolocation and we will be issuing a report on that. we continue to have workshops and seminars on consumer protection issues like these. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. i'm going to ask just one little short question of ms. hanson, and it is mainly a short answer, i think, that will be required. the latest statistics we have on the prevalence of gps stalking from a 2006 study conducted by

the department, back then an estimated 25,000 people a year were victims of gps stalking. that was, again, 2006, before the explosion of smartphones. today, the vast majority of adults own a smartphone and most of them -- or cell phone and most of them a smartphone. so we just intuitively know that the rates of gps stalking muffin creased since then. my bill will institute regular reporting on gps stalking, but in the meantime, will doj update statistics on gps stalking as soon as possible and if there are barriers to that, will you tell me what they are? >> yes, thank you for that question. this is a one-time supplement we had put out in 2006 that was funded by the office on violence against women. since then, as i said in my testimony, the national intimate partner sexual violence survey

came out in 2011, and the national institute of justice has been working with the cdc on that. there are questions about stalking and what i would like to do is go back and talk to folks to make sure that -- to identify if there's any additional stalking questions that might be helpful to be asked by the department. just so we're not duplicating anything that would be in the world. but i would be happy to go and look into that and get back to you on that. so thank you. >> thank you very much. i have some questions that i'll submit to you for the written record, but i would like to thank all three of you for your testimony and invite up our second panel.

>> all right. thank you all. i would like to start by introducing our panel. detective brian has served in the sheriff's office since 2000 and has been a detective with the criminal investigation division sense 2008. detective hill is an expert in digital forensics and trained over 3,000 law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges and advocates across minnesota on the use of technology that facilitates stalking. he himself was trained by the minnesota bureau of criminal apprehension, the fbi and secret service. he also served our country as a member of the air force reserves and was deployed for two years for the wars in iraq and afghanistan. very grateful for your service

at home and abroad, detective hill, and proud to have you here. thank you. mr. lou mestria is the executive director of the digital advertising alliance. he leads the daa's effort on self-regulation, consumer transparency and consumer choice. he is a certified information privacy professional and served as the chief privacy officer for a range of organizations. thank you for being here. ms. ally greenberg is the executive director of the national consumer's league and has testified before congress on a variety of issues, including fraud and excessive fees on car rentals. previously she worked at the u.s. department of justice in the anti-defamation league. she was born and raised in

minnesota and a graduate of southwest high school, close to where i grew up. dr. robert atkinson holds a ph.d. from unc chapel hill and published author on economics and technology policy. before founding itif, he was vice president of the progressive policy institute and director of the new technology project. welcome. ms. cindy southward is the vice president of development in innovation at the national network to end domestic violence and founder of the safety net project. she's one of the nation's leading experts on stalking apps and trained thousands of people across the country on stalking

apps and the use of technology to facilitate stalking. thanks to all of you again for joining us. your complete written testimony will be made part of the record. i will note for the record that ms. southworth's written testimony is also being submitted on behalf of the minnesota coalition for battered women. so why don't we start with detective hill. you each have five minutes for eye opening remarks you would like to make. detective hill, please go ahead. >> chairman franken, and distinguished members, thank you for the opportunity to appear to testify for the to appear to testify about law enforcement support of the location privacy protection act of 2014. since 2008, i've been a detective with the criminal investigation division of the sheriff's office in minnesota. i investigate felony and sexual

violence cases with access to the county state of the art forensics lab. i'm a computer mobile device forensics examiner investigator. the written testimony i submitted details of my training, certifications and professional association memberships. why is this legislation important? imagine the trauma of surviving domestic and sexual violence. now add signer stalking to that trauma. they damage, safety, and social well being. as we all use our cell phones to work, bank, text, access the internet, e-mail and pay bills, stalking apps are a tool to isolate victims from the functions and social connections their phones provide. including isolating them from contacting domestic violence advocates or law enforcement. to be rid of a self-stalking app, victims must buy new phones, create new e-mail accounts and change all passwords.

although there are never any guarantees, victims live with the frightening uncertainty of whether the stealth stalking apps are really gone or if they will reappear after removal. privacy and peace of mind continue to be violated by this uncertainty often long after they have bought new phones or changed passwords. i worked with a victim who suspected that her estranged boyfriend put spyware on her phone. she stated he knew about private phone conversations and text messages and he would show up randomly where she was. i examined her phone and couldn't determine if there was any spyware. later, i found her computer had accessed a stalking program. there was then proof that the program was installed on her phone. i worked with her on the expensive and complicated task of getting a new phone and e-mail account on a safe computer.