certainly if you did have a settlement. it would seem the monitors could be hugely important. that whatever accord is worked out would hold. >> if i may, one brief word on that. we had on the 17th of april a meeting in geneva between john kerry, sergei lavrov, the european union and the ukrainian gov. so far that was unfortunately only a one-time event. in my view it is highly desirable that a second geneva, geneva 2, as we've continued to call it, should take place, and osce i think is a good organization to support and help implement the kinds of decisions that were leadership in taken and not fully implemented,

unfortunately. so i do agree that osce has a potential important and continuing role to play in supporting what at a different level needs to be hammered out between the u.s., the european union, the ukrainian themselves, and of course the russian government. >> thank you. yes? please state your name and affiliation. yes, right there. >> steve lair by, rand corporation. a quick comment -- >> speak up, please. >> a quick comment to wolfgang and then a question to doctor brzezinski. wolfgang, that question that you mentioned regarding troops and so forth, that was -- the beginning of that sentence is very important, because it says as long as the current security situation does not change. well, it certainly changed when

one country invades another, and annexes it. so i think the situation most people would say has radically changed and therefore western policy is no longer obligated by that statement. i would say -- i want to get your reaction to china. how do you think china looks at this? because they certainly were not happy with the annexation of crimea, and what implications do you think that this might have for u.s. relations with china? >> do you want me to do that? >> yeah. >> i have to say that regrettably in my view, neither china nor america have handled their relationship all that well in the last couple years.

i am not thinking just of the american press. i think -- i'm thinking of some american officials pronouncements and then actions such as the pivot speech, which unfortunately i think was not well worded, because it's -- the end was not to give the impression that the united states is committed to the physical military containment of china, but the emphasis on pivoting, on the pivot, on the reallocation of troops, on the deployment of troops in australia, which as far as i know is not under the imnent threat of an attack about papaw and new guinea, to -- it gave the impression that we are really siding into the position with siding with whatever neighbor of china has a territorial conflict with china. that's an exaggeration, but that's the way they have interpreted it it.

secondly on the chinese side, in the last year or so, there has been a dramatic increase -- i for the this very closely, a dramatic increase in public pronouncements in the officially controlled and censored press, but also in the statements of particular officials from gift parts of the government, noted the military extremely hostile to the united states. so i think this relationship needs some careful tending and correction however, on the russian/american, quote/unquote conflict, china has scrupulously neutral with the effect, of course of not backing the russians who would have wished for such backing. in the u.n., the chinese abstained. so they did not support the motion that was introduced, but they did not vote against it as the russians did. it was a kind of in-between

posture reflecting a preoccupation with their own national interest more than anything else. incidentally, a posture copied -- not much noticed in the american press -- by israel, who is of course the principal beneficiary of our military assistance, political assistance, and so forth. they took this neutral position for their own reasons and interests. so one shouldn't be too surprised that the chinese did it, too. in the russian/chinese relationship, i think what we are seeing is a gradually increasing russian dependence on china, that 30 years treaty, by and large, is more advantageous to china than to russia, even though the chinese squeezed the russians into some price concessions. because the fact remains that the major financial investments, in order to make it opera tiff are going to be made by the

russians in communications, in facilities, pipelines, so forth. and the chinese are going to have alternatives in terms of price, as soon as iran opens up, as soon as they reach out to deal with saudi arabia, and so forth. therefore, at some point the chinese would be able to go to the russians and say that's very nice, we value this treaty, but you really have to lower the price, because the world price is going down, and we have this options. the russians will have no choice, they'll have to accommodate, which means the benefits of that treaty will be increasing favorable to the chinese, who are at the same time moving into central asia, quite visibly and openly. >> thank you. yes? in the center. >> thank you. obret, office for trade and investment. i have two questions, one pertaining to trust. i think one of the common elements is there's a definite

lack of trust of the russians. my question is, is what makes you think that we can build trust with the russians? because it's on the basis of our actions over the previous years in terms of invading countries, in terms of spying on our own citizens, in terms of illegal detentions, in terms of our own disregard of international law, what makes you think that we can somehow convince the russians to sit at a table and trust us if we don't trust them? with good reason, given what you have all described. how do we get back to building trust? the second question pertains to the cost of doing what you have said. it's clear in terms of the cost you have laid out for the russians, but what's the cost in supporting ukraine for europe and for the u.s.? how much is that going to cost? can that be borne, the burden, by the recovering economies of

europe in particular? >> thank you. >> i can answer the second question. ukraine has struck a deal with the international monetary fund, and the imf has agreed to provide ukraine $17 billion over two years provided, and this is a very important provided -- provided that ukraine does the necessary reform steps that are required in the program. and so the way the imf doles out the money is every several months there's a review, if ukraine has met the conditionalities it's agreed to in terms of reform steps, then they get the next installment of money. it was interesting, there have been a lot of imf missions to ukraine over the last 20 years. usually the mission would go there and sit down and say here's the problem, it would be the imf mission say here's what you need to do. what i understand ways in march when they went to meet with the new acting government for the first time in dealing with independent ukraine, the acting

government said here's our to-do list and it was the right to-do list. i think people like the acting prime minister, and the president, they understand the economic steps that ukraine has to take. there's been discussions with eye crane and the government about this for 20 years. the real issue is can they sustain the political support for the steps that in some cases will be very painful. in other words, to start the program on may 1st, ukraines raised the price of heating every housemold. may 1st is the great time to raise the price, but in november, december, when the temperature is down in the 20s and the teens, people will notice their heating bills are way, way up. at that point politically is the public going to say to the public we need to do this, we need to get through the nbc cup 8 years. moreover it doesn't stop with the imf. with that program in place and there were other funds from the world bank, the european union,

and so ukraine has access potential to 20 to 25 billion over the next couple years, primarily in the form of low-interest loans. that should help ukraine get through this period if they do the right things. >> would you like to take on the trust question, the first part of the question? >> i'll be very brief. i don't think it is fair to compare russia's behavior on ukraine and especially crimea with -- with western behavior going -- that's a very popular thing for russians to claim, that we are at fault, because, as russians say, we, the west, we aggressed the former yugoslavia. we did what we did in libya, and

of course in iraq, et cetera. i believe that it is important to note that, for example, in the case of libya, we the west, certainly the united states, went to the security council of the united nations and obtained actually with russian abstention at the time, a resolution endorsing activities directed at libya. the same is true in a number of other activities. we went to the security council i don't know how many times trying to find a way forward on syria, trying to find a way forward on kosovo and on bosnia, et cetera. i am not aware that the russian federation even tried not even once to seize the security council to authorize rationed action on crimea. so i think it's -- the

comparison is not fair. i would grant you one point. the european security architecture as it exists with institutions like nato, the nato russia council, oosce, is not working the way it should. we do not have a efficiently functioning body of institutions and rules. that's my take. so that needs to be improved and repaired. in order to do it, you need to have a minimum of trust that all actors are, you know, singing from the same page. that's very hard now that we have had such a terrible loss of trust in the predictability of russian policy, as it happened over the last few months. >> thank you. david ignatius, that will

probably be our final question. >> thank you. i want to ask ambassador ischinger of his assessment on whether germany, meeps the government of chancellor merkel and the german people, whether germany is prepared to support the policies of deterring this chauvinist russia that dr. brzezinski described, even though germany will pay significant costs in doing so. >> david, i think yes, but the question is how, how exactly? if you take the majority of you among the german public, you find a lot of skepticism regarding or jointly adopted decision on sanctions. you will find a lot of skepticism regarding the

question of weapons delivery. you will find a lot of skepticism regarding deployment of military force to eastern nato countries. in other words, there are obstacles to overcome in terms of public opinion. and quite frankly as much as i personally agree with the point that our eastern nato members need to be reassured -- should be reassured by certain types of activity, including symbolic or not so symbolic military deployments, i think that our priority number one needs to be to stabilize ukraine, and quite frankly by sending a few airplanes to estonia or to poland, we are not directly

doing anything to help these poor ukrainians to handle their problems. so i think the first objective, the first priority needs to be things that will help ukraine directly. i know of, having been involved in these discussions over how to deal with the ukrainian crisis over the last month or so, i know of no leaders, certainly no leader in europe who has spent more time trying to explain to president putin that he's making a mistake, a big one. and i think chancellor merkel has also been quite successful, surprisingly successful in convincing the german business community, which has a much larger stake in the russian business than the u.s. business community that the german

business community should not oppose sanctions against russia. in fact, just over this past weekend, the leadership of the german business community, the bdi, issued a statement supporting with pain, as they said -- for us this is painful, but we accept that this has to be the prerogative of political decision-making among transatlantic partners. and if they believe sanctions are needed and may more sanctions are needed, then so be it. that's a painful thing for somebody who say who actually represents many hundreds, if not thousands of large and small businesses who have been doing a lot of business with russia and with subsidiaries in russia. so it's not a small thing. >> i very much agree with what wolfgang just said about the problems and especially the problems with the europeans and

the germans face when it comes to subsidies -- not subsidies, sanctions. i just want to add a bit to it, namely it's true that their difficulties in that regard are greater than our difficulties, but we also have expenses. for example, the president has just committed $1 billion for the reinforcement of central european security. that will come out of the pockets of the voters, but it is a step in the same direction so that we assume certainly obligations and difficulties, costs as well. i also think that in any case solidarity is what is essential. solidarity need not be on the tangible. it can be symbolic. and anything that our european allies can do to show that the issue of european security is of

common concern and common responsibility is to the good. it's not an anti-russian step. it is a stabilizing step. in the last several years, the russians have held several exercises, military exercises in its western territories. in fact, in large measure in belarus soil, which brings it much closer to the baltic states, and these are enormous exercises by our statistics. large army, repelling an attack and moving forward, and last one with a simulated nuclear attack on the central european capital. nuclear attack. no one has used nuclear weapons since 1945. these are things that we haven't paid much attention to, but they're part of this equation, and building security has to be very much a reciprocal responsibility in addition to solidarity in the face of challenge. >> thank you so much. this was a terrific roundtable.

let me sku congratulate ambassador ischinger on the volume. i high le recommend it to all of the, thank you. dr. brzezinski for your extraordinary keynote, your thought much comments. thank you. we're adjourned. thank you so much. in about 40 minutes from now, at 5:00 p.m. eastern, we'll show you today's senate hearing looking at false advertising of weight-loss products. well-know surgeon and television host dr. mehmet oz was among the witnesses defending the products and topics he focuses on during his show. the federal trade commission also had a witness. watch the here at 5:00 eastern.

tomorrow general motors ceo maria barra it was before a house committee about gm's internal investigation related to the company's ignition switch recall. in april ms. barra declined to answer many of the questions posed by lawmakers during hearings, saying she wanted to wait for findings. the report released earlier this month cleared ms. barra and her executive team of any wrongdoing, but criticized the bureaucracy in which senior managers shirked responsibility and lower-level engineers either concealed or overliked vital information. see that will hearing wednesday live at 10:00 a.m. eastern and throughout the hearing, we'll be interested in your thoughts on ms. barra's testimony. weigh in on our facebook page or at twitter using th the #c-spanchat. with live coverage of the u.s. house on c spans and the senate on c spans 3, here on

c-span3, we complement that coverage by showing you the most relevant congressional hearings and public air fares events. on weekends c-span3 is the home to american history tv that programs that tell our nation's story, including six unique series. the civil wars '150th an verries, american artifacts, touring museums and historic sites to discover what artifacts reveal about america's past. history bookshelf, the best-known history writers. the presidency looking tess legacy. lecture and history with top college professors delves into. and real america, feature archival films from the '30s through the '70s, created by the cable industry and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook, and follow us on twitter. next a discussion on efforts to help unaccompanied immigrant

children navigate the system. from today's "washington journal" these 40 minutes. yesterday in this segment od "the washington journal" we talked about illegal immigration and how it's impacting customs r and border protection. we look at it from a different perspective with wendy young, a president in kinds in need of defense. your group andas how did you get started?ears >> first, it's kids in need of defense, and we were launched fiveiers by the microsoft foundation to address a very en critical legal services gap in the united states, which is children who arrive alone and ae are placed into deportation.s. to make sure we can hear you on this. as we're talking to wendy young, we want to let you know the dy phone liables republicans at 202-585-3881.ll in on democrats 53880 independent t

202-585-3882. i'm sorry. you were talking about kids in need of defense and what it does. >> children are placed into deportation proceedings when they arrive in thetati united ss alone, just as an adult would be. our system does not provide theo with amp lawyer, counsel to represent them in the proceedings, which are very complex. they appear before an immigration judge, there's a trial attorney from the department of homeland security arguing and there's the child without a lawyer unless a , i ha volunteer attorney comes forware to represent them. i've seen kids as young as 5 years old in proceedings alone with no lawyer to help. >> talk about this influx of unakeyed children into the united states. a chart from your recent report on this topic put it in perspective, dating back to 2012, but what are the stats? run through the stats on recent years? >> uppen about the fall of 2011, we saw about 6,000 to 8,000 children arrive alone each yeare starting that fall, the numbers

started to tick up. at first we thought this is just an aberration, things will settle back down and go back to normal. in fact the numbers have climbeg ever since then. particular in the spring they're escalating rather dramatically, so this year the project is thae as many as 90,000 children may arrive alone, appeared next year 130,000 or more, so this is a crisis. >> the main reasons why? >> it's primarily violence in central america. about 97% of the children that we see arrives these days are from honduras, guatemala and el salvador. these are countries that are just experiencing rampant violence primarily from gangs and narc otraffickers. in their jurisdictions, these are countries relatively weak in their governance, and they can't control this kind of violence, l so thedr gangs in particular ar targeting children at very young ages, coming into schools, into homes, trying to recruit young people into their ranks and

threatening their lives if they don't cooperate. families and children are making this very desperate children to send the children now.spect >> how much is the prospect of immigration reform in the united states, the immigration efforts of the obama administration, how much is that contributing to this rise in numbers?a >> frankly very little. the u.n. refugees agency recently released a report thatn found that 58% of these childreo are fleeing a level of violence that should trigger international protection or refugee protection. so it's a push factor not a pull factor. frankly the thought that an 8-year-old would understand we're thinking about immigration reform is kind of absurd. these are people really fleeingd for their lives.n >> our phone lines are open. we're talking about the group fo kidsf in needs of defense and e influx of unaccompanied children across the border. i have a special line also in this segment of the washington journal for border state

residents. in particular that number 202-585-3883. otherwise republicans, democrats and independents can call on the standard lines.talk a as folks arebo calling in, can p talk about what typically happens to an unaccompanied child who comes across the border and then falls into federal protection? >> sure. well, first the children make very dangerous journey across the region. they're preyed upon as they d, e cross mexico in particular.d wes they're robbed, beaten, and we see very high levels of sexual violence against the girls.s ar many of the girls we are working with are arriving pregnant as a result. once they reach their border, ty they're first taken into custods by the border patrol. the border patrol can hold the kids up to 72 hours unit our laws. you have probably seene cr some the images of those border patrol stations getting more and more crowded. appro these arepr facilities that don have the appropriate conditions

to house children. once the chi is released from tr border patrol custody, they're transferred to the department o health and human services, and the office of refugee resettlement within hhs.nsibil the office of refugee are, resettlement has the responsibility to provide care,. services d placement to these children, and what them try to do is release them to a family member who's already es. present in the united states. that could be a parent, but in many cases it's an aunt, an uncle, older sibling, a cousin, someone who has familial relationship to the child and can take care of the child why . it's in the united states, but it's important to remember host they're still in deportation proceedings. >> so what is theiral s legal ss and what are their rights durinl these proceedings? >> sure, pending the proceeding, they're really in legal limbo.ro they have nove status in the understandin united states. the federal government has to try to sort out whether they're eligible for some sort of uivale protection under our laws.

that could be asylum, it could be a t-visa for children who p have beenro tracked, or other forms of protect. >> we're talking with wendy young of kids in need of defense. working on the senate judiciary committee here to join us to talk about her group. otican check it out at supportkind.org. we'll starta with otis calling n from border state, down in texas, in houston on our line for republicans. good morning. >> caller: good morning. go ahead, and turn your tv down. just go ahead with your question or comments. >> caller: okay. sorry about that. good morning. >> go ahead. >> caller: my question is this.e i've been watching the nuts saying all the kids coming from south america, and there's been word out there, a lot of them are gang members. and more than that, that they're told to tell the border patrol that they're being threatened,

and their family is being threatened, and that's the linet they've been told to give to tho border patrol to get in this country, abu my question is this -- is it expensive? and once they go through the h e proceedings, they get -- what we are doing is taking the gang bangers from el salvador and honduras and guatemala and turning them loose here. >> wendy?unde >> i think it's really criticals to understand thes.e kids el oig floodings gangs. t they're trying to stay away from the gangs, not joining the gangs. just like an american child in n the streets of los angeles, sometimes recruited by gangs an very afraid as a result, these a kids are trying to get away fro that kind ofto activity.uld if a gang member did happen to cross the u.s. border, they it would be subject to removal he s proceedings or ysdeportation an not allowed to remain. it is true that the system needs to be resourced to sort the situation out as quickly as s a

possible. the numbers are very, very high right for you. it is a program that's been estimated to cost $2 billion next year.em so we need to resource the it system, sort 0u9 the children's situation, provide protection te those that need it and return those to their home countries who don't need it. >> when kids in need of defense gets involved in a deportation effort, are you always advocating for the child to sito remain in the united states? is there any situation in whichd you would seem -- say it would be acceptable for the child to get deported? >> we actually screen the cases as they come to us. if a child doesn't appear to ben eligible for any form of ercent- protection, we advise the child we won't be able to represent them. we really focus on the kids we think need protection. and then our volunteer attorneys represent the child in the r courtroom and help the child gen circumstances the so that the judge can determine, should they be e allowed to stay or go?stan kids in need of defense does noe

stand for the notion that every child shoo remain in the united states. just the is opposite in some wa what we try to stand for is baci every childn should have a saf life. that could be here in the unitem states orst could be more eed appropriately back in the home country. >> how many children has kids in needs of defense worked with? >> we've worked with over 6,000l children in our first five years and we've trained about 7800 lawyers to represent them from the private sector. o se >> wendy young is here to answer your questions. shawn is waiting in cleveland on our democrats line. >> caller: good morning. >> go ahead, sean. >> caller: thank you for takingr my call. first of all, i want to thank merchandise young for making the distinction between the childret being immigrants and refugees. i think that's very important point to make out. i just wanted to say to the american people, that we see ndt all -- you know, try to get a

little more understanding of the situation, to make an analogy, if you were traveling about your regular day and you happened trt upon a child who was out here by themselves on the street by themselves, you would wouldn't just pass them by and not deal with it. you would want to do something for that child. i just want to make people hem understand these are children. i heard some callers refer to - them as the difference between . teenagers and children, but en a they're all lichildren, and we o need to keep that in mind when you're dealing the situation.lay i also want to thank the lawyers who are representing the children.ha i wanted tove ask a question le about. do they children have any legalt representation? but you answered it for me before i could get to ask that question.gu >> wendy young, any comments one shawn? >> sure. thank you for raising that perspective. i e would say that we are tryin very hard to ensure that no child ever appear in immigratior

court ealone, but with the numbers we are looking at, i fear that many children are n going through unreceipted. was i've seen a 5-year-old in her s immigration court. she was literally dressed in he- sunday best clutching a doll an appears before an immigration judge without a lawyer. this is really flies in the face of what the united states stands for in terms of judicial fairness and due process. it's heartbreaking to watch. av >> what'sing the difference bed having a lawyer and representation and having a child advocate? >> a child advocate is more like a guardian add light temperaturt in the immigration system.o they look at the child's best o interests the it's notin tied t the legal process. the lawyer is argues forer p th child's legal interest. >> sea of tranquility asked, what kind of treatment do kids get in foster care? how does it compare to the treatment these kids get who i cross the border? >> the vast majority of childree arseett housed in large shelter by the office of refugee

resettlement. there's a limitedthey number available to the kids that are generally held for kids at very young ages under 5, or children with disabilities or kids who are particularly traumatized. those are the most vulnerable children. otherwise they're held in these shelters, which are actually locked facilities. they're children detention centers. they're kind ofs dormitory sty, when you go in, and services are brought into the children.lati but thison i population is not really in competition with u.s. citizen children in terms of foster care placement. s. >> again, the numbers on 2013, border apprehensions, 414,000 rr total border apprehensions, 367,000 were adults, 38,000 of those unaccompanied juveniles, and then 8500 being accompanied juveniles. you said the numbers of unaccompanied children could tii reach upwards of 90,000 by the end of this year. >> correct. th >> let'oss go to paul waiting i

san diego in one of those border states, calling on that line.no paul, good morning. >> caller: thanks very much for the program. just a question -- now that we e have identified these as refugees, why are we their refus not treating them at refugees. like the west of the world. there are tens of thousands refugees in turkey and lebanon m and god knows where. else. what do they do? they put them in tent cities feed them, clothe them, given humane treatment, but they do ah not giveem them attorney privileges to integrate them into a country where they don't belong. so i'll take the answer lly off-line. >> sure' well, first i should say the united states is the world's th leader inco refugees protection and we support those countries in their ability to tolerate large numbers of refugees in th jurisdictions. i think the difference has to b pointed out,re however, that it very different being a refugee from darfur and going into neighboring chad, as oppose to

do coming from central america and lanning in the united states with the resources this country has. wither treating them right now in an emergency situation. they're being housed in emergency facilities. the department of health and human services is cooperating eb with fema toer administer. these are large facilities housing very large numbers of children up to 1200 at the time. that's the equivalent of a refugee camp at the moment.hostu >> let's go to steve on the line for independents. good morning. ev >> caller: good morning, and thanks. i would like to ask the attorney, however six or seven thousand i believe you said that you've represented, how many were allow to do remain in the united states? that's question number one. is there any limit on the amount of refugees that the american people should be asked to absorb from central and latin america? how does an 8-year-old child o

make a conscious decision to come to the united states on their own? and what about the women that are pregnant, which are there in great number, that is coming in with small children to become anchor babies and anchor eally n children. you say this is not a magnet situation. and the president has sent a signal of dreamers, dreamer act -- >> lots of questions there from steve, steve calling in from florida, according to "the miamr herald" a recent story, miami being one of ten cities where s children are being sent for immigration proceedings as border shelters start to fill up, but i'll let you take on steve's question. >> at the end of the day 40% are found eligible, the other 60% are ordered deported. it's verythis important, because this is a complex legal proceedings that they do be represented by an attorney in the courtroom.

this isn't only better for the child, it's actually better for the courtroom.rapi the judges are able to make e te decisions in these cases much more rapidly when there's counsel there to guide the child through the proceeding. imagine being an immigration judge with a youngster, a his re toddler standing inal front of i you,s and i have to make this life-changing decision in this child's case and there's nobody there to help the child navigate the system, so counsel is really important. on the question of the poll is factors, i would point out veryh interestingly there's another country in that neighborhood xpc nicaragua, very poor. it's not experiencing the levela of violence that we're seeing in guatemala, honduras and el e in salvador. vice president biden isica expd to be in central america this ma week pto, according to "the wo washington times" plead with parents to stop sending their children illegally to the u.s., but critics according to "the e. washington times" say the president himself should take a stronger stand to stem the ce pe

streaming over thesi mexican border. what do you want to hear from vice president biden this week?e >> sure, i think it is importane that we advise families and reg children in the region that it'. very dangerous to make this trip on your own and once you reach here, it's not a guarantee you're going to be provided legal status in the united states. you're still facing many, many hurdles before that might even t possibly happen. mreside so i think that is an important message for the vice president s to deliver. but i also think we really need to look at this as a regional crisis. we need toex worpek with governs in the region, both those governments that are experiencing this kind of violence from which the children are leaving, as well as mexico as a transit country, to see if we can address this issue on a t regional basis and cooperate to find solution. thisunder scores against this is a refugee crisis, that refugee claims in countries in the ric region such an panama and costa rica are up by several hundred percent right now, because the

guatemalans, hon durans and sal ra dorans fearing violence are fleeing into the region. >> mary writing in -- we have to find out why this is happening u and stop it, but while these children are here, we have to d everything we can for them. our line for border states, john is calling in from texas. good morning you're on with wendy young. >> caller: yes, ms. young how are you doing today? >> fine, thanks. >> caller: i wouldaid like to . you said earlier today that it would cost like $2 billion a year? $2 billion to address the immediate emergency.eed to i agree with the comment that john just shared, that we need to find a solution to this. this can't go on forever, but io also agree that we need to provide these children with care in the interim. that's going to require some resources. >> john, did you follow up on the price tag?

>> caller: what, sir? >> did you have a follow-up on - your question? >> caller: yes, the real question i would have is, why can't we take that $2 billion and you know it's going to ends up being like 4 to 6 before it's all over with. why not take these funds and use it for a task force or somebody to go down there and get rid of a lot of these drug lords and stuff like we used to.t down we didn't have this problem when we were able to take care of it before everything was shut down, and it would keep those drug lords in check, it would keep our borders in check. we ne >> edwell, certainly i would age that we need toth addresse thet causes of this migration in thel region, and the u.s. is very influential actor in this region. we need to support those ment i countries in their ability to combat violence. that involves investment both in terms of their judicial systems

and ability to prosecute criminal elements, but it also i means supporting international development in the region, so that their economies are strengthened, and people have ea opportunity in their home country. kids could go to school, this would help a lot. >> let's go to bobby in ft. nin. smith, arkansas on our line for republicans. good more, bobbi. >> caller: good morning. i would like to say that i don't like to sound harsh and hard, but i -- i am a social worker. i worked in the foster care t system, and we don't have one third of the foster care placements that we need for our legal children, and they don't g actually have enoughs money to provide the things that they need, and we have spent money on

other countries until we almost are no longer a country s i i d' don't expect us to have freedomy unless something is done, perhaps militarily, more than another year. these >> well, again i'd like to underscore that most of thinks children actually do not go inta foster care. they're reunified with family members here that do provide the day to daycare, so it's not a strong competition for domestic foster care systems. >> how long have you been working at kids in need of defense. >> since we launched in january 2009, we just passed our fifth anniversary. >> george on our line for democrats. supportkind.org is the website you can go to check out kids in need of defense. >> caller: good morning.

thank you. thank you, wendy. i do have a question and a c-sp couple comments. some time back c-span portrayedo information relative to monies that were sent to other countries, one being mexico. i think the amount was approximately $73 bill chron.pet when you talk about the money wh that's going to be spent here, s why can't we utilize the money that we're sending to these countries in order to force thek to do something about their borders, and keeping their kids there? the other thinthg sis, i notice that the three countries these kids are coming from, honduras, guatemala, and el salvador, i oe think they're - part of the naf treaty. we do get produce from those countries as well. the other thing is i haven't ly. heard about the amount of do violence that's been talked about recently. why would we continue to do business with those countries who are i guess, exhibiting thie

type of violence? my point is, number one, address the issue regarding the money that has been sent to these e countries, and why can't we utilize that money to help combat this? >> all right. joe, we'll let wendy young respond on leverages foreign aid was the first question. first they're much smaller than mexico, so the level of need probably wouldn't approach what the caller mentioned, probably. we want to help develop the co countries so people do have a safe option to remain home. the hon duran president declared this a war-like situation. the countries are feeling desperate to combat the violence they are experiencing there. >> jim, good morning, you're on

with wendy young. >> caller: good morning.guest: my experience is i frankly have a relationship with a padre down in el salvador from 2010 to now, and he -- i talk to him frequently. you know, he really is confused v toio to what is happening. yes, there are gangs there. he is establishing a, you know, a grate schooled there, and he has a school of about 885 re goi childrenng there. three of the kids -- the parents are coming to me, saying they're going north to the states. the basic reason is because the rumor is, you know, that you're not going to stop them and deport them.

and yes, we have fragmentation with families all over the place in el salvador.to w you've beehant touching on thes kinds of things to what really needs to be done, obviously, is to -- is to help the country itself become -- become -- to be able to support their own people, because in reality -- >> i'm sorry, we lost jim there. some of the issues that you -- bring up also part of a front page commentary piece by david keen in today's "washington reo times" president blameless, obama dodges responsibility for the children's border surge. it might be interesting reading that, but endy, i'll let you respond. administration that's actually enforced our borders more than any administration in prior years. the deportation numbers are jus.

way up from prior administrations, so i think it's not fair to declare president obama soft on the border. i would say it's just the s opposite. i would like to address this issue of the rumors fueling the flow of children from central is america. what we have seen is kind of a vicious circle. the gangs that are preying on these kids in the home country are also fueling their movement to the united states.hu they're engaging in human and th smuggling and human traffickingu and they're manipulating the ieo crisis in the united states s t encourage more families to send their children out. so this is another aspect of thn issue that we really do need to crack down on the smuggling and we can't s but revictimize the child in the process. we need to ensure the child protection is the core of the program. we should also note that the lead el torrie in today's "new york times" also touches on this subject. the editorial board of "new york times" writing -- it's past time

for excuses and too soon for a post mortgagele. the administration needs to -- care, shelter and legal assistance for children who have faced horrific violence in their home countries. as vice president biden meetsds with officials in thor countries, they should all commit to making it safe for would-be my grapts to stay at home by reducing the murders, congress should meanwhile, approve the administration's $1.4 billion request for handle the emergency on this side of the border, though more will surely be needed to help assure health, safety and due pros for these -- think >> i t couldn't have said it better. i think they encapsulated the ei issue.ds prote we needct to provide these kids with protection and care, sort out their situation, allow those whose lives are in danger is cot remain, sent home, and really fix the root causes in the home countries. that's ultimately the absolute.a

got time for a few more calls in our last ten minutes or so with wendy young. morning charlotte is in smith station, alabama on our line for alabama. charlotte, good morning. >> caller: good morning, how are you? >> good. go ahead. i understand about the u.s. and what they stand for. th >> caller: i really, truly feel. sorry for these children. but these are children that coms over and when they're take chb in by their families here, usually their families here are illegal. and the government is paying for them so then they have to pay more to take care of the kids. but what about our kids over st here?at just go to any city in the united states and there are . american-born children that are not being taken care of. we're sending money to other countries and they're sending their kids over here. okay? it's like an exchange, okay? we're helping their country but they're sending their people

here. >> miss young?n. >> well, again, this is fugees inherently a refugee situation and refugees around the world rm when facing violence flee. they try to 2350i7bd safety. that's a very human reaction if your child's life is threatened or a gang is threateni ining ra your 12-year-old daughter, you'll take whatever steps you can to save that child's life. parents make sacrifices for o their kids all over the world and it goes to the heart of who we are as a country in terms of how we treat these children. somebody famous once said the mentor of the society is how it treats its children and this isb aod pivotal moment for the unith states. >> foreyth some of these childr that are repatriated o'back to the countries they come to through these proceedings what is the u.s. responsibility to those children after they go home? is there any? >> typically they're escorted s back by the department of homeland security. but the asums is made that the

home country is responsible for the child's care on the receiving end. there's a pilot project in guatemala to make sure they are reunited with family andmake its home safely to their home and community. and then we provide them with services of our ngo partners alc there toan help them re-integra into the community.an we think it's essential to make sure the child can get home safely and stay home skafly and children are provided appropriate support and a good chance they'll remigrate to the united states. >> lola on the line for independence. good morning. >> caller: good morning. >> go ahead. >> caller: i was wondering. are there groups of children? are they brothers and sisters and are they separated?e adds trauma and is there anything that the average american can do to help these children? >> great. well, first, yes, we see more and more siblings groups

arriving.d an wed recently were working with three and 6-year-old brother and sister that arrived. that's happening more frequently and the department of health and human services very good about trying to keep the siblings ly groups together because it woulh be very traumatizing to arrive with your siblings and made a inkrodbly dangerous trip and then be straighted so they try to hold the family units together. >> how ft$a 3 and 6-year-old get here? >> very heoften, that's either somebody's traveling with them u that they know in the community more often than not it's a smuggler that's bringing them in. >> so the question of what lola can do to help? >>th basically, work with us to get the word outids. that these kids in need of our help. stand up for these kids. we'd really appreciate that. there's a big debate happening here in washington, d.c. about how to address this crisis and it's important that policymakers hear that americans do 3w4r50e6 lawhe protection of children so that would be a great help.

for lawyers. go to my website and volunteer. we need your help. o >> that's the support kind.org n and on twitter, @support kind. >> andre in texas. good morning. >> caller: good morning. my question to the lady is -- why don't we start holding -- i heard he say we give billions of dollars to mexico. these kids come from guatemala and el salvador.y're they're note coming through the water or through the air. they're coming through mention okay so why don't we quit giving these dollars to mexican government in order for them to squur their borders. because you know when you go too anyf albertsons on a friday afternoon when they get paid 90% of their money goes back to mexico. until they secure their borders from the central american ays ai countries, quit giving them the money? >> okay plays a pivotal role in the issue.t of thi the children are transiting

through mexico on their way to the united states.ican so part of this regional effort has to do with working with the mexican government to make sure the children can seek safety int mexico itself rather than making an extra trip to the united states. so we're working hard to promotn that as part of the policy response. >> judyam in rochester, new ho b hampshire. i have a couple of ideas. it >> caller: i feel sorry for thee children being dropped off but at the same time i i don't thina it's theites' responsibility to take care of dthem. there's a lot of parents here who would like to adopt children. why don't we put to them up for adoption so they lose contact with with their family which i know may southbound cruel but hx the sfmlys where abandoning theu anyway and it takes the tax burden off of the taxpayers eveb because nowet you have familiese adopting children who will give them better love and care?

and also, why can't we also do y like a support system. why don't we charge these countries and deduct it from monies that they owe us and money we give them each child deduct that amount to other om e moneytion that we giveir them f their country and maybe their country will take it from a poor familiar alreadyax b or whatevet that country will pay us for child support take the tax burden off of us. we as citizens can't keep paying it. i work hard for my money. i had all i can do to raise my children and we had to go without to put thm through college and high school, even, because you have to buy your own books where i was from. so these -- we just can't going this way. >> two suggestion from judy. >> sure. well, the -- first, on the adoption question. most of the children as i e chil

mentioned earlier, actually do have some family member here wht can support them. her d adoption in those cases wouldn't be necessary. for those children who truly have nobody here, generally they are placed in foster care rather than put up for adoption just on the chance that they maven ch me to eventually reitun re-unify w parents and in the international aide we should offer these countries more money to beef up their child welfare system so the kids aren't forced to flee here. >> and roy on our line for ing b independence. good morning. >> caller: good morning. thanks tooua a c-span. you mentioned something about the obama administration

deporting the most you will legals and i just kind of like the record to be set straight. that the turning them around at the border but they're counting them which is something they've never done. so i'm thinking that's why the numbers are so high for the obama administration. i'd just like to clarify that. thank you. >> well certainly there's been a tremendous focus on the part of the obama administration on border enforcement weir spending about $17 billion a year on border enforcement to try to get the throw of irregular migration under control. and it's having its impact. again, i think it's very critical that we separate what'. happening with these children from the integration issue at large because this is a humanitarian crisis. as 3r0ib declared a couple of weeks ago. it's a refugee situation and different laws and standards should come into play in dealing with the refugee 1i67 h situation as opposed to an ow sn

immigrationat situation. >> and in the last minute or two that we have left. talk about how the senate passeo immigrationw reform bill would impact unaccompanied children, l and if there's any stand-alone measures in the housing that would impact them as well? >> sure. the reform they passed in the senate did not really address this specific situation, crisis that we're dealing with right now because in terms of the legalization program that contained you have to be a resident for a number of years before you're eligible for adjustment of status so these r kids are q new arrivals so they would never pass. and some bills enhanced children's opportunities to access legal council. which we were supportive of. and there have been a number of discussions going on about happn whether we should address this e disstreet issue of inaccompanied children through legislation. >> so what is your

recommendation ifioefer you cou it through legislation or would you prefer executive action? l >> if there were legislation, ip would hope that it wouldro suppt providing these kids and the thr system with a kind of services to help the kids navigate the process. i think it's a good thing to reach very quick decision in these children's cases. at the same time, p preserving their access to council and their ability to r50e8ly navigate the system. but make a decision and decide d who has to go home. >> wendy young is a kids in need of defense. you can check them out at support kind.org. appreciate you joining us this morning on the "washington journal." today's senate hooirg looking at false advertising of weight loss products. well known cardio thoracic surgeon and dr. oz was among the witnesses defending the language and diet products that me foe he focuses on in his show. the federal trade commission was also a witness.

missouri senator claire mccaskill chairs this committee. this hearing will now come to order. we have all heard and seen the ads. promising quick and substantial weight loss if only you take this pill, drink this shake, use this device or apply this cream. all without a adjusting diet or increasing physical activity. it seems too good to be true and of course, it is. we have a short clip of some of these ads that have run on television. satellite radio online and imprint that i'm going to play so it is clear what we're talking about today. >> it's called sensa the new sensation you sprinkle on the take the weight off. whether you need to lose 10 pounds, 50 pounds or more, now

you can without dieting. simply sprinkle sensa on and eat all the foods you love and watch the pounds come off! it's that easy. you'll lose weight faster and easier than you ever dreamed possible. >> i lost over 120 pounds with sensa. >> you may think magic is make-believe but this little bean as scientists say, they found the magic weight loss cure for everybody's type. green coffee beans and when turned into a supplement this mir come kpil burn fat faster than anyone wants to lose weight. this is very peting and breaking news. >> millions of you love coffee. but now, you're going to love it for a whole other reason.

a staggering newly released study reveal coffee coffee bean in its pure east tomorrow play hold a see kraet h credit to weight loss you've been waiting for. a study of the meeting of the world's largest scientific society triggered unprecedented excitement for weight loss. showing women and men who took green coffee extract and lost an astounding mount of fat and weight, 17 pounds in 22 weeks. by doing absolutely nothing extra in their day. could this be the magic weight loss bean to help melt away unwanted pounds that you've been waiting for? >> we also had a satellite radio ad i thought we were going to

play. there's lots of terrible ads on satellite radio. easy why so many consumers are willing to take a chance and believe suspicious claims like these. according to the centers for disease yol and prevention more than one-third of american adults are obese and 70% are either obese or overweight. but this familiar story of the obesity epidemic is further colored by surveys finding the desire among american to lose weight consistently failing to put in the over the to do so. in 2013, gallup survey showed 51% of adults wanted to lose weight while 25% said they were seriously working toward that goal. this mismatch between americans stated desire to shed weight and their lack of serious effort can, perhaps, explain the growth of the u.s. weight loss industry as well as h as well as the proliferation of false and decepti deceptive advertising for weight loss products. so many americans desperate for anything that might make it easier to lose weight no wonder

scam artists and fraud sters have turned the $ 60 billion weight loss market to make a quick buck. this is not a new problem. the federal trade commission filed its first weight-loss case in 1927. they claimed in the true romance magazine excess fat is literally dissolved away leaving if figure slim and properly rounded and giving the light grace to the body every man and woman desires. since 1927, the fdc has filed more than 250 cases, challenging false and unproven weight loss claims. including, just this year, four settlements announced in january, and last month, a complaint filed in federal ko t court, against the green coffee dietary settlement. more than one in ten fraud claims are for weight loss products but the problem is much

larger than any enforcement agency could possibly tackle on its own. private stakeholders and companies that sell weight loss product the and media outlets and other advertising platforms and consumer watchdogs must do their part. they are a critical gatekeeper well positioned to keep 235u8s and deceptive advertising from reaching consumers. i appreciate trust in ads.org representing some of the largest yankee platforms being here today to discuss their recent report on this issue. the challenge online companies face addressing false and deceptive advertising and what more they can do. the problem is not limited to the internet in in preparing for this hearing my staff reached out to a variety of media companies across all mediums to better understand the industry practices in screening and monitoring advertising. i find it troubling that broadcast and satellite radio witnesses who are asked to be here today were unwilling to

appear. to me, this indicates there's either something hide or they don't have a good story to tell. either way we'll not be effect thif in addressing this problem until all stakeholders take it seriously. like in virtually any other industry there's good actors and bad actors and we'll hear today from council for responsible nutrition. a trade association for the dietary supplement industry and the better business bureau advertising self regulatory council about industry's efforts to police itself. we'll hear today from dr. oz, a host of a very popular daytime show that frequently airs segments on weight loss issues and products and frequently cited in the false and deceptive advertisement used to market questionable weight loss products. dr. oz i'll have some tough questions for you about your role, intentional or not in perpetuating these scams. when you feature a product on this show it creates what's

known as the "oz effect." dramatically boosting sales and driving scam artists to pop up overnight and using false and deceptive ads to sell questionable products. while i understand your message is focused on basics like with healthy eating and exercise i'm concerned your medicaling medical add series. news and entertainment in a way that harms consumers. this committee has looked at a number of scams affecting consumers and in most of the cases, the scams resulted in financial losses which can certainly be devastating. but what makes the weight loss scams really stand out is they not only result in financial losses, they can potentially put a consumer's health at risk. i hope to hare suggestions about better empower consumers with tools and knowledge needed to not fall victim to weight loss scams and what more stakeholders can and should be doing to keeping these ads from reaching the consumers in the first place. i look forward to hearing from all off witnesses today and i thank you all very much for

being here. senator? thank you for holding the hearing regarding the weight loss industry and our witnesses for being here, also. we all know weight management is of interest to many americans. probably should add politicians to that, too. it's no secure price that the market is quite significant totalling $60.5 billion in 2013 alone in one estimate. i can understand the appeal these products have for many who are tempting to improve their health and lifestyles. they make responsibility representation about health benefits and other claim but like increase other marketplace there's bad actortion in this space who make erroneous claims about questionable products and there are fraudsters and -- and those who seize upon dieting fadtion and work to scam the

vulnerable members of our population. i strongly that the key to healthy weight loss is a combination of diet and exercise. i personally would be suspect of a magic weight loss cure or a miracle pill. that being said, i can understand how a person may question their own assumptions when a person who they believe has credibility on the issue makes a claim about any particular product. that's why i'm pleased we're here joined today by miss mary engal, the associate director of advertising practices within the ftc, bureau of consumer protection. i applaud their work to shut down the squam artists and look forward to learning more about the commission's success this year in bringing a series of cases under the agency's exist section 5 authority against a number of companies deceptive advertising on weight loss products. i look forward to hearing her thoughts on how the commission is applying the reasonable basis stn card for substantiating

health claims including weight logs and what it considers to be competent and reliable scientific evidence to back certain claims. while this has traditionally been flexible it's no secret that they have pursued more stringent requirements recently. it's a open question as to who the new substanceation. and aisle welcome dr. oz here today. the "dr. osz show" debuted in 2009 and reached 3 million viewers every day. i look forward to hearing from dr. oz on what steps he's taken to ensure the information he shares in conversation he moderates provides accurate claims. we're informed dr. oz does not -- however, much has been written about the so-called "dr.

oz effect" whereby demands for products spike after they are featured on his show. when a celebrity doctor mentioned that mini pods, sales rose by 12,000%. and internet searches for the device rose by 42,000%. it's this pop layer did that may have influenced that florida based company to enter the market in green coffee bean extraux and the ingredient dachlt oz reached to as a magic weight loss cure and a miracle pill that can burn fat fast. this company is now the subject of an enforcement action brought by the ftc and is currently pending in federal district court in florida for unfair and deceptive claims with regard to this product. i'd like to also welcome our other witnesses. lee peeler from the better business bureau. mr. steven mister of the council for responsibility nutrition. mr. rob heraldson of trust.org

and dr. daniel of the natural products association. than i you all for taking time to be here today and thank you madam chairman for how olding the hearing. ilike forward to the testimony to answer some of our questions. >> great. i think that my colleague did a great job of introducing everyone so i'll do it wickly. miss mary engal, the associate director of division of advertising practices. bureau of consumer protection at the federal trade commission. dr. 'oz, vice chairman and professor of surgery columbia university college of physicians and surgeons and host of "the dr. oz show." and mr. peeler,ment and ceo, executive vice president, down simil council 06 the better business bureau of new york. mr. steven muster,ment and ceo of the koun 1i8 for responsible

nutrition. mr. robert heir relson iv, trust in ads.org and executive director and ceo of natural products association. and we'll begin with the testimony. we'll have you on a clock which i'm sure you understand. i know you understand, dr. oz, about the clock. but we're not strict about this. if you feel the need to go over by a few moments we are won't have a problem and keep in mind the entirety of any written testimony you'd like to submit is in included in the record. welcome, ms. engal. >> good morning, madam chair and members of the committee. i'm mary engal soesh can yacht director at the federal trade commission and impleased to saw this opportunity to provide information regarding the fty's effort to testify combat fraudulent weight loss advertising. the united states is facing an obesity epidemic. nearly 70% of u.s. adults are overweight or obese.

excess weight and obesity are major contributors to chronic disease and health care cost and present a serious public health care challenge. it's not surprising that there's strong interest in products that claim to promote weight loss. where there's strong consumer interest fraud often follows. in their 2011 survey of consumer fraud, we found that more consumers were victims of fraudulent weight loss products than of any of the other specific frauds that we surveyed. despite the continuing boom in the weight loss industry, there exists very little scientific evidence that pills and supplements alone can help one lose a significant amount of weight. scientists agree that the foundation of successful weight loss is to eat a healthful, calorie-controlled diet and increase physical activity products that promote the healthy changes deter ler the people from making the tough but necessary changes.

commission filed its first weight loss case in 1927 and since then we've filed another 250 cases, challenging false and unproven weight loss claims. in the past ten years the commission has brought 82 law enforcement actions challenging false or unsubstantiated claims about the effectiveness of a wide variety of weight loss products and 16ss. since 2010 alone the commission collected nearly $107 million in consumer restitution for deceptive weight loss claims. our recent cases highlight thousand agency know kuds its enforcement priorities on large national advertising campaigns for a creative range of weight loss supplements without -- they targeting the fads with popular infood add tis. in one failed resolution case the consumers were urged to shake their sensa and lose 30,

40, 90 ponds or more without diet and exercise. and in another, they're told to rub in the body slimming capabilities to trim inches in i week. the third, consooumers with a taste for the rare, might try hgc drops made from human hormone to lose a pound a day and each case resulted in a settlement with the f twrooempb despite the long history of ftc enforcement weight loss fraud persists because it's an area where consumers are particularly vulnerable to fraud wash h, an enormous amount of money to being made and people will graff talt to where the money is. we noticed some diszuving developments with respect to weight loss advertising. the reliance on proprietary

studies using erroneous or fabricated data. this was true in our case against sensa and sketcher's toning shoes. they add a layer of complexity to our weight-loss investigations. a soaked trend is the appearance of weight loss fads and mainstream media supported by trusted spokes people. our pending case against npb advertising shows the marketer of the pure green coffee dietary supplement capitalized on dr. oz having featured the coffee bean extract on his showing it magic and a the miracle. when they market in sophisticated weighs on respected media outlets or praised by hosts they trust it's difficult for them to listen to their inter23458 voices telling them to beware. that's why we long sought the partnership of the media to screen the deaccept five diet ad bfrs they run. our recently gut check reference guide sent to media outlets throughout the country advices the media that they say simply

cannot be true and the media should think twice about before running. finally, we recognize that consumers are the first line of defense against weight loss fraud. the ftc developed a full arsenal of consumer materials that law out the facts for consumers to yiechb teaser websites and today launched a new consumer quiz. i want to thank the committee to focus their attention on the weight loss scams and giving them an opportunity to describe its role. while we'll never eliminate weight loss fraud but we'll continue to pursue the perpetrators and work with the media to prevent fraudulent ads and educate consumers that trusting their gut instinct can be a strong, protective mechanism. thank you and i'll be happy to respond to any questions. >> thank you, dr. oz? >> thank you members of the committee for convening this session. this hearing and for allowing me to testify. consumer scams and fraud related

to weight loss products have plagued me since i first started in media long before my talk show launched in 2009. it's a problem i've spoent immeasure time, energy, broad casting resources and money trying to combat and i'm chagrinned to say the problem has only increase exponentially. and the contributions hopefully will help. with our collective u brain power, dowse the claims. after i finished my training 1993, about a decade of training, i began practicing cardio thor thoracic surgery. i rooelszed we needed to educate people to take part of their care and so i went to public life in an effort to teach. i started as a guest on the "oprah winfrey show" in 2004 and had my first experience with

scam advertise ewing at that time. we discussed a berry and there wasn't anything special about my description of them and immediately on the internet, show quotes claiming that we supported these product the and selling them. miss woprah and i sued and i'm forced to defend mary reputation every day. they take money from 2rusing viewers and many believe i'm selling the items and just to be clear with in case it comes up, i've never sold supplements. i've taken a number of measurements to protect my viewers. i accept responsibility that the passionate language i use to describe something that's fodder, my show tempered an editorial and we include opposing voices on these

segments and this has no, no discernible impact. marketers can select a phrase of support without the surrounding context and the clip you showed and others of similar ones, if you look deeper into the shows i'll almost always mention something about the fact they're not ups. design designed short-term support and i talk about what a scam is and what to look for and i launched a campaign called "it's not me." i devote a portion 06 e6ry broadcast and i look directly into the camera and the last thing i tell the viewer, i don't sell anything. if they see my picture with a product, don't buy the product. check any show and i'll see that at the end. we created "oz watch" a way for viewers to report squams. we've collected more than 35,000 complaints. we hired a private company to

help with the complaints and police the web and have issued more than 600 cease and desist letters. after months of investigation i confronted an egregious advertiser on my show because we found, this is the part that hurts me, and senator you mentioned this, not only was using my name and stealing my name but providing 10% of the active ingredient. whether it works or not that's a separate issue. if he doesn't have the product in it it can't possibly do anything. i went yankee last night and i could still purchase this product if i wanted to. a fairly shameless series of perpetrators. i've taken actions and i believe working together we can achieve a lot more. before offering suggestions and i have a few i'll address criticisms that my show may be fueling the internet problem. i'm respectful and i encourage the nation searching for answers to their health woes. we address weight loss because as you mentioned it affects about two-thirds of the population.

i said eat less and move more which is the most important thing people need to do. we wouldn't tackle this challenge because viewers know this and they still straulg so we look for short term support. a traditional chinese medicine and feature cleanses and new diet programs by promising authors. many of these are controversial as are the supplements we research and protrial. i'd rather is a conversation of this material on my stage than in back alleys. we're not here to decide if vitamin supplements make sense. the problem we've been invited to discuss, internet scamming and fraud will work only when state and federal agency whose have jooishd amplify their enforcement as a public/private cooperative effort is undertaken in earnest including everyone on

this panel including the ftc and legitimate ads and media outlets like mine. i need to be part of this and i feel passionate about this. since my time is up i won't cover the suggestions but i'd like to offer some thoughts about how to created a quarterback reference registry, whistle blowers and maybe a bounty to assist the ftc in this very difficult and challenging task. thank you. t the. >> thank you and good morning. i appreciate the chance to testify aplooiing to weight loss 5d tiesing. this system was created in 1971 by the nation's leading advertising trade soesh yaigs and cooperation with the council and better business bush ros. since that time we have pioneered a rigorous form of self-regulation that's impartial and administered by the council

of better business bureaus and comprehensive and applies to all national advertisers in all media. it's transparent. all of our decisions are publicly reported. it's effective. companies that don't participate in the process or don't follow the recommendations are publicly referred to the appropriate government agency usually the federal trade commission. we work on a case-by-case basis active live monitoring national advertising for question claims and practices and we apply ftc type standards to those claims. each year we issue almost 200 decisions on a wide variety of advertising issues including about a dozen last year that address advertising of weight loss claims and required the companies to stop or modify the ads in question. self-regulatory claims for weight loss production inclyde issues ranging from 2ek cal, easy to remedy, disclosure questions to questions about the

validity of complex underlying studies that support the advertisers claim. for example, one recent nad decision addressed advertising for a product. including claims that it had been clinically proven to promote four times weight loss than diet or exercise. some of the claims were contained in a special report on how to lose 28 pounds in one month. with two healing cleanses recommended by dr. oz. other claims resultresulte resultresulted ---ited results of the specific studies. in this case the advertiser told us the special report i referred to earlier was posted by an unauthorized third party and the advertiser immediately took steps to take the report off the internet. the nad determined that the remaining specific product performance claims and ingredients claims should be discontinued in their current form. the advertiser fully cooperated with the review and agreed to

discontinue the claims as do about 90% of the companies that participate in the process. we had very similar case with one of the other ingredients that's popular in this area, and they climt that of the better business bureau system in producting consumers. bbb jazz handled hundreds of advertising review cases locally including those associated with weight loss proh products and conservatives. they work to reshove complaints about business practices and are uniquely positioned to identify local and national scams as they emerge and warn consumers about them. we're major outlet for the educational material that the ftc described because we have 100 -- over 100 better business bureaus located around the country. last year, better business bureaus handled thousands of complaints about weight loss products and services, including a grow number of complaints about weight loss clinics.

bbb of often finds unsubstantiated weight loss claims are associated with problematic billing practices and auto-ship programs, underscoring the adage that this lightens the consumer wide. this overall results are consistent with those observed by our st. louis bbb serving eastern missouri and southern illinois except the st. louis bbb has not seen the rise in the number of weight loss clinic ads in that particular jurisdiction. self-regulation works if it has the support of the industry and the government. and the area of weight loss, two associations in particular, the electronic retailing association and council for responsible nutrition have stepped forward to provide the type of no-strings attached funding allowing us to do impartial monitoring and decision making. although there's no formal relationship between the advertising self-regulation process and the government,

decades of support by the federal trade commission have been absolutely critical in the success of the process. so although there have been significant efforts by the federal and state government to control unsubstantiated and exaggerated claims more can be done, obviously. one of the things i think everybody agrees on is a type of state and federal enforcement actions of the ftc has been bringing are critical to controlling this type of advertising. in addition, trade association through members include representatives of the weight loss industries need to follow the example set by the electronic retail soesh yiegts and the council for responsible nutrition and step up and support increased self regulatory monitoring in the marketplace. good for businesses and good for consumers. finally can renewed efforts to enlist consistent support of the media and guarding against the most egregious types of weight loss claims a key step.

network broadcasters have fairly sophisticated process for network ads and similarly in the new media google has recently introduced a new approach to ads screening that's tailors to that specific new media. but there are lots of other meade yeah outlets independent channels, cable television, cable can satellite radio, and radio, that are mouth doing as much. and finally, i guess i just close with an anecdote. this weekend i got a spam e-mail. it was for a product called forzcolin. it said if i took it it would never have to diet again. and -- when i went on the internet and used google earth, the return address was for a p.o. box. so it was sort of a regulatory trifecta. spam e-mail for a red flag claim

that no one can substantiate with a seller nobody can find. thank you. >> thank you. mr. mister? >> good morning. i'm steve muster and imew president and ceo of the council for responsible nutrition. we are the leading trade association representing the manufacturers and marketers of dietary supplements functional foods and their nutritional ingredients. we empathize with the many americans vulnerable to false promises for losing weight fast with everything from rubber pants and bracelets from sprays to creams and exercise gadgets and, yes, dietary supplements. collectively americans spend over $40 billion a year trying to lose weight. the nutrition business journal reports that dietary supplements and meal replacements formulated for weight loss are a $5.3 billion a year industry, a small fraction of the total be a

significant su known the less. and the dietary supplement health and education act requires that all supplements must have substance and this requires that they report by well-conducted human trials with sta test clai human benefits and along with the consumes duped with this, the responsible person 'stands to lose when they take advantage of misleading and unsupported ads and i'm here to re-enforce the committee of our members to help address testify scams and frauds in the weight loss marketplace. unfortunately, the reality of the current weight loss market is that it is a tale of two

industries. legitimate manufacturers who responsibly proproducts that work and then on the other hand, the unscrupulous players who prey on consumer desperation and the their desire to be skin. and these claims are made in the advertising of weight loss products as you heard today and crn has publicly support and will continue to applaud the numerous enforcement actions brought by the ftc in recent years and the more than 438 million in restitution and civil penalties assessed by the commission against deceptive advertising with respect to weight loss products since 2004. enforcement sweeps like the ftc's operation waistline and more recently, failed resolution,nd its media awareness campaigns like gut check. help to remove misleading claims

but they also alert the public while sending a message of deterrents through the industry and we applaud them but in the internet age along with the proliferation of cable television, talk radio and various online media and the increasing pressure for ad nooifr among shrinking print media, they have insufficient resources to combat the number of deceptive claims in the market. some media outlets will turn a blind eye to advertising kwoip that clearly violates the law and deceives consumers. in 2006, crn began a self-regulatory program to help self-police the advertising claims of dietary supplement marketers. crn has committed over $2 million to underwrite this program which has already investigated almost 200 challenges of the claims made by

supplement marketers many involving these weight loss products. i'm proud of the track record of this program for providing fair, thoughtful and entrantransparen decisions for achieving a high rate of industry participation and the press dents it sets to deter others in the industry from making similarly fraudulent claims. their members are committed to manufacturing and marketing, high-quality, safe, beneficial products and ensure consumers this receive sylvia fowles accurate information. we the challenge for legitimate weight loss products essentially this. american consumers unrealistically yearn for a magic bullet and unscrupulous marketers will take advantage of these desires with hallowed promises. like a successful weight loss program, the solutions are not easy. significant first steps should include increasing resources and priorities for enforcement of the existing legal requirements by both the ftc and the fda.

expanding and strengthening selfle-policing programs among manufacturers and marketers in the industry like our initiative with the nad and calling on media outlets and online retailers to conduct their own advertising clearance before accepting ads with claims that are illegal and simply too good to be true and finally, educating consumers to be realistic about their weight-loss strategies and their expectations. to make them less vulnerable to outrageous and unsupported claims. thank you for the opportunity to share our views with the committee. >> okay. thank you. distinguished members of the committee. thank you. i'm rob heraldson. in my testimony i will highlight how our member companies are incentivized to keep bad ads out

of our systems and note how they are investing significant resources in this area and have already removed millions of bad ads from the services. trust in ads.org includes internet industry leaders rachlt ol, facebook, google, twitter and yahoo!. we found this organization to work together towards a common goal. protect people from malicious online ads and deceptive practices. we're bringing awareness to consumers about you're ads and working collaboratively to identify trends in deceptive ads and best practices and sharing our knowledge with policymakers and consumer advocates around the country. trust in ads.org offers guidance to consumers on how to avoifd scams and through the regular release of what we call -- our bad as trends alert. consumer-friendly and eepsly digestible reports that exam trind or trends that we're seeing and provide examples of bad ads in websites that the companies have removed.

we highlight the steps that companies have taken to combat the problem and get the consumer useful tips on how to make good choices online. our website also includes a dedicated page where people can go to learn how to easy report a suspicious ad on any member companies websites. our first report released in may detailed ads for phony tech support services and yesterday our newest report on fraudulent ads related to weight loss products and tie tear supplements. companies have allocated significant resources to keep bad ads off their ploratforms. this is essential to maintaining a vibrant internet ecosystem. the sale of numerous weight loss products and dietary supplements through advertising is seen across all mediums. print, broadcast, radio and the web. while most entities selling these kinds of products provide accurate and truthful information regarding the overall effectiveness, some bad

actors in an attempt to entice consumers market products with outrageous claims and promises of dramatic weight loss. the bad actor as tempting to use online advertising, these cliends of claims violate the member companies' advertising policies and existing laws aimed at protecting consumers. we applaud federal agency's for recognizing the weight loss scam problem and their active efforts to educate consumers about misleading claims. in diggs, the ftc's consumer information website has an entire section devoted to weight loss and fitness outlining many advertise that users could encounter on the internet and other places and debunks their claims. stopping the ads critical for online advertising companies swrel. collectively, our member companies have hundreds of individuals on their respective teams spanning policy, engineering, network security and legal, that are dedicated to identifying and preventing this

illegal activity. fortunately, most of these types of ads never reach the user and are immediately rejected through automated filmer thing processes as soon as they are submitted. for those detected after being published they are immediately reviewed and the advertiser account is reviewed. temporary or permanent u suspension is considered gepding on the swearity its se vooeris their violations.jected million adtion due to numerous ad policy violations. all stakeholders are working hard to stop these ads, weight loss scammers, some who are incredibly sophisticated work maliciously to find ways to avoid direction by agencies falling within their guidelines and circumvent our company's all

the automated filters. they are fully committed to improving their systems to help protect users across the web. we believe that if we all work together to identify threats and stamp them out we can make the web a safer place for everyone. again, thank you for this opportunity to testify. >> thank you. docto doctor? >> thank you for this opportunity to discussion and participate in the panel discussion. i'm the ceo and zoik director of natural products association been the oldest and largest trade organization in the natural product strie. we represent thousands of suppliers, and distributors and the millions of americans that eyes supplements. some members are household names and many are small businesses many women own who got in the

business to help people live healthier lives. always consult with your health care provider and dietary supplements are part of a broader healthier lifestyle that includes diet and exercise. madam chair, we support efforts to prevent fraud. deaccept tich advertisinging is illegal and should not be tolerated and we're concerned about fraud on the internet. our association was founded by brick and mortar. our members know that public trust with their customers one of the main reason natural products are in such high demand. no one has more of an interest in weeding out fraud than our members because bad actors only tarnish their good integrity. to support the ftc, npa has their own program what members report special ad claims and bad actortion can be the disciplined. we are allowed to follow these rules and if you see something, say something. under truth in advertising program, questionable ad claims

are reviewed bay if industry attorneys to determine if they're over the line. the first is to mail a cease and desist letter. i attached a the example of that in my testimony and the second is to refer cases to ftc and fda. since this program began in 2010 it resulted in 446 letters to such firms. of those with 320 acknowledge the issues an made corrections. the remainder were submitted to fta and fdc over the time. we depend on federal authorities to provide enforcement action and make all this a reality. while we see positive action we also see areas for consideration and some areas of concern. we heard about existing enforcement authorities but some are being used for the first time. my former job, director of the dietary supplement primes at the fda using tools like mandatory recall, injunctions and procedures for recidivist firms

failing to meet. quality standards. they have taken actions against firms that have deceived consumers with regard to weight loss. npa fully supports those efforts but we're wrestling with the internet advertising today and fly-by-night issues. they need to be more agile and disciplinary. more aggressive enforce m of the so-called "fly by night" needs to be as important add large scale problems. the department of justice and other agencies currently eyes misdemeanor prosecutions, assist civil money penalties for those under consent orders or those that violated other laws but we don't see much use of these toombs. also, it appears that they need to pursue more sizable cases perhaps at the expense of the regulatory muscle on one end and the security stream.

if they don't act and take down fly-by-night on the front end early in the game more will be the efforted to get into the game. lastly, when we support the fft california's mission. we see evidence of this having negative outcomes from a cost perspective and potentially reducing the quality and quantity of information about the products available. and with the statutory interpretation and rules of general. k5b89, it's not beneficial to anyone particularly consumers. one example is the apparent new requirement that additional studies and research are necessary prior to advertising like a requirement to conduct two double-blind ran domized trust studies to support lawful statements which is not a current legal or statutory requirement. this releases inefficient ref search and it diggs incentives

the claim. this is happening with a cost benefit on abehalf of consumers or the economy. a firm investing in the study that's well controlled and meets competent and reliable standards would be prohibited from sharing that information and that results in less information being available to consumers, not more, and effective live changes the rule. this is a critical concern and to our members it's appears to bridge protected speech or this possible first amendment issues. we'd like to work with the ftc and others to improve in and ultimately protect consumers by giving them the widest access to the information they need. >> madam chair. thank you. >> we'll have questions and we have votes that begin in a little less than an hour. hopefully we'll have an opportunity for everybody here to have two rounds of questions. i can't figure this out, dr. oz.

i guess that you do a lot of good on your show. i understand that you give a lot of information that's great information about health and you do it in a way that's easily understandable. you're very talented add very bright. you've been trained in science-based medicine. now, here's three statements you made on your show. you may think magic is make-believe but this little bean has scientists saying they found the magic weight loss cure for every body type. green coffee extract. quote, i have the number one miracle in a bottle to burn your fat. ration berry ke tone. it is the simple solution you've been looking for to bust your body fat for good. i don't get why you need to say this stuff because you know it's not true. so why, when you have this amazing megaphone, and this

amazing ability to communicate, why would you cheapen your show by saying things like that? >> well, if i could disagree about whether they work or not and i'll move on to the issue of the words that i used. and just with regard to whether they work or not, this is an example, i'm not going to argue that it would pass fta muster if it was a pharmaceutical drug seeking a approval but among the natural products that are out there, this is a product that has several clinical trials. one large one and a good quality one that was done the year we talked about this 2012. >> but what i want to know is -- i want to know about the clinical trial. the only one i know is 16 people in india paid for the company that was in fact, at the point in time you talked about this being a miracle, the only study out there was the one with 16 people in india that was written up by somebody who was being paid by the company producing it. >> this paper argued know one was paying four it be i have the

five papers plus a series of basic science papers as well. but we can spend a lot of time arguing the merits of whether this extract is worth trying or not worth trying. many things we argue you do with regard to your diet are likewise criticize bl. i spent a good part of my career recommending folks have a low-fat diet. we've come full circle and no longer recommend it because we realized it wasn't working. our patients. it's remarkably complex as you know to figure out what works for most people in a dietary program. in the practice of medicine, we evolve by looking at new ideas, challenging orthodoxy, evolving them. so when i hold, you know, these are the five papers, these are clinical papers. and we could argue about the quality of them, very justifiably. i can pick apart papers that show no benefit as well. but at the end of the day, if i have clinical subjects, real people having undergone trials, and in this case, i actually

gave it to members of my audience, it wasn't a formal trial. it was just an -- >> which wouldn't pass -- the trial you did with your audience you would not -- >> no. >> -- say it would ever pass scientific muster. >> i'd never publish the paper. that wasn't the purpose of it. the purpose was for me to get a thumbnail sketch, was this worth talking to people about or not? i don't think this shower a referendum. i've been criticized for having folks come on my show talking about the power of prayer. as a practitioner, i can't prove prayer helps people survive an illness. >> it's hard to buy prayer. >> that's the difference. >> prayer is free. >> prayer is free and people -- that's a very good point. thankfully prayer is free. so when -- i see in the hospital when folks are feeling discomfort in their life, and a lot of it is emotional, when they have people praying for them it lightens their burden. so my show was about hope. as you very kindly stated, we've engaged millions of people in

programs including programs we did with the cdc to get folks to realize that there are different ways they could rethink their future. that their best years aren't behind them. they're in front of them. they actually can lose weight. so if i can just get across the big message that i actually do personally believe in the items that i talk about in the show, i passionately study them, i recognize oftentimes they don't have the scientific muster to present as fact. nevertheless, i would give my audience the advice i gave my family all the time and given my family these products, specifically the ones you mentioned. i'm comfortable with that part. where i do think i've made it more difficult for the ftc is in an intent to engage viewers, i use flowery language, i use language that was very passionate, but it ended up not being helpful but incendiary and provided fodder for unscrupulous advertisers. that clip you played which is over two years old, and i've done hundreds of segments since

then, we've specifically restricted our use of words. i'm literally speaking about things i would otherwise talk about. there's a product i'd never talk about in the show that i feel strongly about because i know what will happen. i will say something very -- in fact, we did a show with yacon syrup. it's a south american root that had a big study published on it, a very high-quality study, it showed not only did it help people lose weight but helped their health. it was done in women who were diabetic. tone by an academic center town there. it was not funded by industry. and we talked about it and i used as careful language as i could and still, there were internet scam ads picking one or two supportive words where of course i support them, i wouldn't be talking about it otherwise. still ended up out there. >> well, listen, i'm surprised that you are defending -- i mine, i've tried to really do a lot of research in preparation for this trial and the

scientific community is almost monolithic against you in terms of the efficacy of the three products you called miracles. when you call a product a miracle and it's something you can buy and something that gives people false hope, i just don't understand why you need to go there. you've got so much you do on your show that makes it different and controversial enough that you get lots of views. i understand you inare in a business of getting viewers but i really implore you to look at the seven -- i would ask you to look at the seven lists that the ftc put out on the gut check. the seven -- it's very simple. causes weight loss of two pounds or more a week for a month without dieting or exercise. causes substantial weight loss no matter how much you eat. causes permanent weight loss. like you said, looking for it to bust your body fat for good. if you just look at those seven and if you spend time on your show telling people that this is the seven things you should know, that there isn't magic in a bottle, that there isn't a

magic pill, that there isn't some kind of magic root or eyesight berry or raspberry that's going to all of a sudden make it not matter that you're not moving and eating a lot of sugar and carbohydrates. do you disagree with any of these seven? >> senator mccaskill, i know the seven. i say those things on my show all the time. >> why would you say something is a miracle in a bottle? >> my job, i feel on the show, is to be a cheerleader for the audience. when they don't think they have hope, when they don't think they can make it happen, i to look and i do look everywhere including an alternative healing traditions for any evidence that might be supportive to them. so you pick on green coffee bean extract. with the amount of information that i have on that, i still am comfortable telling folks that if you can buy a reputable version of this, i say it all the time. i don't sell it and it's not long-term use. green coffee bean extract, one bean a week over the trials that have been done. that happened to be the same

amount of weight lost by the 100 or so folks on show who came on. half the got a placebo, fake pills to half the people, real pills to the other half. it's the same thumbnail. i'm looking at a rough idea. if you can lose a pound a week. you can't sprinkle it on quibasa and expect it to work. if you get a few pounds off, it jump-starts you and gives you confidence to keep going and you follow the things we talk about every single day including the seven items, i think it makes sense. >> well, i'm going to give time to my colleagues now. hopefully i'll have a chance to visit with some of the other witnesses in the next round. i will just tell you that i know you feel that you're a victim, but sometimes conduct invites being a victim, and i think if you would be more careful, maybe you wouldn't be victimized quite as frequently. >> senator mccaskill, those topics you mentioned are over two years old. i have not been talking about products in that way for two

years. and it has not changed at all what i'm seeing on the interpne and frankly it's getting worse. i completely heed your commentary. i realize to my colleagues at the ftc i have made their jobs more difficult. that's whey i came today. >> food. >> i'm cheerleading for this process. i want to do anything i can do help. if taking away those words doesn't change the already happened. >> you're the popular person on the witness stand today, dr. oz. i had a group of students outside and they all knew who you were so i asked the students who clearly their parents or someone watch their show and pay attention. let me ask -- let's be real clear. do you believe that there's a miracle pill out there? >> there's not a pill that's going to help you long term lose weight, live the best life without diet and exercise. >> do you believe there's a magic weigh loss cure out there?

>> the word -- if you're selling something because it's magical, no. if you're argues it's fwoings to be magic because if you -- you might not afree with flowery use of the word, magic, but it's true most people cutting owl simple carbs will lose weight. >> what works for most people? you mentioned that to the chairman. >> what works for most people, diet out of the ground, looking the way it is when you eat it, not been processed, with some physical activity. most of weight loss i believe is about the food choices you make. most of keeping your weight low is about the physical activity you engage in. >> okay. and it is true you do not endorse any products or receive any product from any products sold? >> that is true. >> now you've worked -- you said you had some ideas because you've worked to start advertisers from using your lik testimony you address online advertisements. >> if i could give three ideas. >> i'd like to hear them.

>> i think the private sector can help by creating a quick reference registry that lists celebrities that are directed to products. whether the services are being promised and involve ellen degeneres, jimmy fallon, rachael ray, a list of sam celebrities goes on. if all of us made a list of what products we actually do work with, it would make it easier for web hosting services to say dr. oz doesn't have any proxy sells so how can they run an advertisement saying he's selling this? second idea, we have a whistleblower systems that are in fact in workplace safety. we have them for financial services. i think honest employees deserve comp saigs a compensation and reward if they expose illegal behavior by employers and ought to incentivize whistleblowerses in this space as well. when i busted scam artists in san diego, there were people who worked in the company who knew what day were doing is wrong and might have come forward. thirdly, create a private sector bounty that might help with getting bounty hunters

effectively on the web, people who have time, desire and knowledge to go after these folks. a lot of times the people who are victims of these infringements, myself included, people on this panel, would love to do anything we can to empower private citizens to shut down scammers. if it helps the ftc, it might be worthwhile to consider a bounty system funded by the private sector. not locking for new laws or government funding of these initiatives. >> thank you. mr. harrelson, what is your organization doing to stop these third parties from placing ads on websites and, perhaps, those ads that are less truthful? >> well, again, as i pointed out in my testimony, you know, our companies are deeply incentivized to making sure these ads stay off of our platforms. i think having wruz user trust e