congresswoman mar; h!lackburn has been a vocal and unkafshgerring crusader for conservative principles and individual liberty from the very moment she was sworn in. she remains today one of the house's most renowned and respected lieutenants on health care, six years ago a leader )$wroducing a bill on health care portability. congresswoman blackburn. >> thank you. yes.w3 thank you for letting me with you this morning. i am absolutely thrilled. i love the new format of cpac and the fact that this is like boot camp to take on the liberals.

you believe what you hear on thee1ok nightly news with a no?wñ02y going to tell the more3w important than ever al>÷ by the way, i have networks that people are listening to every single night. do y'all want to hear them. all of y'all want to hear these? okay, here we go.hdb this is what you're going to be fighting. zíb[[ mk now, this is what i call the news networks, abc is the all about clinton news network. nbc is the nothing but clinton news network. cnn is the clinton news network and poor cbs the -s.inton bs network. you and we have a message for you to get out.

obamacare is too expensive to afford. there is no way the numbers are ever going to work on this and repeatedly as we fought this bill that became a +law i would ask secretary sebelius just show me onefá example where government-run health care provides better 6!3ú less expensive and provides û

feared people were going to face a tax penalty and what we now know.wcú÷ to your friends and neighbors. h h&r block, the affordable care act has made health care a tax issue that no one can understand. these are the tax preparers and h&r block predicts over 3 million people who signed up for obamacare will have reduced tax refunds this year. now, those are the facts. and that is what we know. so it becomes an issue of what are we going to do about this because right now what we are facing is a decreased access. we are facing increased costs.

we are facing enormous tax penalties. those are the knowns. so let's say that we all agree that our goal is how do you make health care more affordable for the american people? how do you preserve that access? let me give you one answer. let's empower patients and individuals to control their money, control their access and control that relationship. a way we do that is legislation i have worked on for six years across state line purchase of health insurance. open up the health insurance marketplace. allow you the american people to make the choices of what you want to buy from whom you want to buy it where you want to buy it and at a price you can afford. let's return health care to allow you the individual to work with your doctor to be certain

that you get what you want and let's make certain that we the american people be the people and that we put the death knell in obamacare and repeal that law and send it packing. thank you so much. [ applause ] >> next we have jim capretta who spent more than decades setting american health care policy as an associate director at the white house's office of management and budget from 2001 to 2004. he was responsible for all health care social security and welfare issues at the american enterprise institute he researches how to replace obamacare with a less expensive reform plan that protect's america's doctor/patient relationship. jim. >> thank you. [ applause ] thank you. really, really terrific to be here at cpac. thanks for inviting me. a privilege to be on the same podium with senator barrasso and congresswoman blackburn.

look, this is a huge issue in our politics and our policy discussions. it's absolutely imperative that we move forward with an alternative vision for how to improve american health care because we do have that vision. we just need to work at it and put it in place. you know the president and his supporters of the 2010 health care law often bristle when people say, well, it amounts to a government takeover of american health care but actually recently the secretary of health and human services wrote an op-ed in "the new england journal of medicine" where she outlined the vision she has at the department for the next couple of years and essentially she said that the department is working on having the ability to move into where american health care is delivered, that is trying to help doctors and hospitals make decisions about how they organize and practice medicine to improve the quality and cost of american health care.

in other words, she has a vision where hhs will be very involved in telling doctors and hospitals how to take care of patients. it was very clear that that was what they have in mind for the next couple of years. it's obviously the nextw obamacare. it's where they want to go. it really does amount to moving a massive amount of power and authority over the delivery system of american health care to the federal government. that's what is wrong with this law. that's what will lead to an emotion of quality and lead to a lowest common denominator approach to delivering services to patients and a lack of innovation and quality improvement so that's what we need to fight. our problem has been -- we have many, many good ideas that have been put forward but we need to rally around a relatively united vision for that approach going into the next couple of years to displace the current law. my own opinion is that we won't be able to repeal and replace the 2010 law unless the movement

that we're associated with can identify and present to the public a compelling alternative. the president didn't get many things right into 2009 when he pushed this law but the one thing he did get right was that the system actually had a lot of flaws in it and the public is not going to be ready to go back to the pre-obamacare status quo that doesn't fix the problems that were hurting some people at that time so what do we need to do to fix american health care? the first thing we need to do is realize that many, many americans have as we saw in the debate in 2013 perfectly fine good quality health insurance and don't want the government to take it away from them. that includes many many tens of millions with employer-responded health care. we ought to leave them alone. if they want to stay with their employer plan, let them keep it [ applause ] the second thing we need to do is treat people who respect in employer health care fairly. right now you get a very large federal tax break associated

with employer health care but you don't really get that when you buy insurance on your own. we need to equalize that treatment in a way that doesn't disrupt the employer system but allows people to buy on their own when they want to or when they have to. and they can do that with a tax credit. a tax credit that is not like the kind that they pass in 2010 but one that is flexible and controllinged by the patient. the next thing we need to do is deal with the issue of pre-existing conditions in a rational way. you didn't need to have the federal government take over the entire system to make sure that people with a health condition had adequate health insurance. we can do that by making it work on behalf of patients by one simple rule. if you stay continuously insured, you can't be penalized for developing a health problem that is costly. that means people that have a real incentive to buy it and don't have to have the government forcing them to do so and finally, we need to do serious changes in our public

insurance programs. we have an elderly insurance system that -- they protect a lot of people with insurance but they have actually contributed to many of the problems in american health care. those need serious reform to move away from a command and control washington focused approach to one in which the citizens and the states actually control the resources and make choices for themselves that can be done with a rational pragmatic reform approach. i'm very very pleased that the cpac has taken on this issue and wants to address it as part of the agenda this year. it's critically important in the next two years we all rally around a very sensible commonsense approach that the public would support. thank you very much. [ applause ] so here we are now five years we've been talking about repealing and replacing obamacare. we know the american people are

folks that think this health care law was set up and designed to fail so that they could get to the single payer system that the president has supported all along like the english system or system in canada. but this is a transition to get the impetus out of washington so that our candidate in 2016 can then run on the position the

conservative positions of how we actually replace it after the election when we have a republican president who can then sign it into law. >> amy i think one of the important things for us to do is quite simply this to lay out the vision for what we are for when it comes to health care and how we move that power away from the government and back to individuals. how do we get the government out of your pocketbook, out of your health care, how do we make certain that the individuals are able to control their health care records and not the federal government? and there are some components for in that we have had in the house. we had 163 different bills that would deal with replacement of obamacare in defining some of these issues, addressing liability reforms addressing portability, opening up the insurance marketplace, being certain that individuals have the ability to get the same tax

treatment and deductibility on their tax filing that big companies do. those are messages where we are right, the american people are with us sometimes we talk about something being an 80% issue those are 80% issues and we need you to help us talk about those. >> okay. well, i'm not the politician on -- >> the policy wonk. >> the simple answer is i think yes that we're going to have two more chances to push american health care policy in a new direction. one the senator just mentioned after the king case if there's -- if the plaintiffs are successful in that case. that will open up a big opportunity and ought to be taken advantage of but the next one really is the 2016 presidential race, frankly, and i think you know, who knows what the biggest issues will be. it could be foreign affairs frankly, and other things but the economy willing prominent and health care will be prominent and a real shame if we

don't advance during that time a vision that the public can see and agree to through their votes. >> great. we talked about king versus -- can one of you go into a little bit more into detail? i know we talked about at this level. what are the consequences either way for the ruleing? >> right, and secretary burwell is coming before our subcommittee or our committee energy and commerce this morning. but the king versus burwell case will deal with the issue of the subsidies and how those -- what the allocation can be on those subsidies. we have state exchanges we have federal exchanges. i had a letter from the secretary last week dealing with this issue and she even notes in the letter that the insurance would be too expensive to afford for some people if not for the subsidies. that is why you're going to hear more about this. obamacare is an enormous redistribution of wealth. and taking the federal

government inserting itself into the health insurance and health care delivery marketplace simultaneously and then wrapping up that money and then that access. that's why we have to keep our focus on king versus burwell and the appropriate response. >> what if the court rules against the white house? what is congress' obligation to those that have health insurance? >> that's the issue because the king case is about the line in the law that says that subsidies only go to people in states where the states set up their own exchange and even gruber had said in his testimony that oh no, that's only those states but 37 states chose not to set up their own exchange so they got there through the federal exchange and those people the law says are not entitled to the subsidies. the federal government has done this forever. both in the state senate and put out carrots for states to do things and then the state gets the money so that's why i think

the supreme court is going to rule our way. but there are 5 million people, maybe more and now with what the president did recently to extend the period where people can enroll all the way through april, i mean that's just more and more people who are going to be subsidized in a way we think is illegal. now, you can imagine if the supreme court rules against the president and said he's going to act, acted illegally, he's going to you know completely attack -- he's going to call a partisan court and say i have this simple one-page bill is the solution. just make everything i've done, make it legal and we're not prepared to do that. what we want to do is use this in an opportunity to get the power out of washington and back to people at the state level. but you can imagine there's also going to be significant pressure on all of your governors or the governors of those 37 states to actually set up a state exchange in each of those states. and the effort to try to say, hey, let them get subsidyies that way. >> let's talk briefly about something that's been in the news talking about state

exchanges. we have the former disgraced governor of oregon and whaegs's done has been corrupt and fraud and a major major cover-up. so let me ask you is congress going to look at this experience before other states look into exchanges? i mean how are they going to handle what just happened talking about the public trust? i mean this, is a major violation of public trust. >> that's a major violation of public trust. but this entire approach to government overreach is also a major violation of public trust. and people do not trust washington to solve this problem. whether it's the situation that you're referencing, whether it is the entire process of obamacare, health care.gov. so instead of sing-shotting it put all of those into one bucket and say this is what has gotten

us in here. individuals that had their information accessed over healthcare.gov and received calls, who got the money for that information why did they embed third parties into this online network in this marketplace? so, amy, what we will do is look at all of those and say how do we restore that allow the patient to control that access to their health care information without having the federal government or anyone else, any insurance company having access that the individual doesn't want. so all of that will come to bear and then you look at how do you solve that access problem? maybe it's time for our medicaid programs to be focused more like a health savings account. >> absolutely. thank you. jim, i'm going to come to something you said. you said there's many good ideas rallying around there so i'd like to get into specifics that i think a lot of us don't know

what those ideas are. there have been a lot of ideas so what has gained the most traction or support on capitol hill and in policy circles? what pieces are we going to put together to create the best bill? >> well, there's a couple of very good bills that have been introduced of course in the house there's a bill that was put together in the last congress by a person who was the person study committee has a very large number of co-sponsors in the house with many, many good ideas including tax treatment changes, flexibility in the insurance marketplace movement toward cost reductions through sensible medical liability adjustments and other things like that. so it has a whole bunch of provisions associated with it. there's a bill in the senate that was put together by senators richard burr, orrin hatch and now joined by congressman fred upton the chairperson of the energy and commerce committee in the house so it's now both chambers are

involved in it and that's a very good bill so-called bur-hatch-upton and would note there is a 2017 project. i urge you to take a look at their website they have a good plan called the winning alternative to obamacare which carries many of the same type of features with these other two proposals but puts it together i think in a particularly effective and compelling way. their whole in addition is designed to develop and agenda that can be picked up and used in 2017 to move the country forward on a number of fronts including and encephalopathy health care so i would point to those three as places to begin but i do think it's very important to understand when you do a replacement plan for the 2010 law it's got to do two things i think to meet a credibility test and has to make it so everybody can have health care if they want to use it and buy it so that's not a hard thing to do. you don't need this massive 2,000-page bill that senator barrasso is said to do that but

you got to do some things. there are low income people in america that can't afford health insurance without some tax support so we'll have to do that. the second thing you got to do is deal with pre-existing conditions without this massive regulatory structure they did in obamacare. that also too can be done. you just don't have to do it their way. it has to be done with a sensible regulation that says as long as people have health insurance insurance companies shouldn't be able to charge them more because they have a health condition. it's just a fairness principle. so between those two things, those are the most important elements for a sensible replacement program. >> thanks. i have a question from the audience. somebody tweeted and i think it's great. how are we going to sell a conservative replacement if the media is so hostile. >> the network of you. this is where we need each and every person talking to their group of friends and their family. you know ronald reagan taut us and margaret thatcher also you go over the top.

when you're trying to communicate, go straight to your friends, just we know that the mainstream media is never going to be with us on this. and bear in mind they weren't with us in 2014 and those elections they weren't with us in 2010. they weren't with us in 2000. they weren't with us in '84 or in 1980. they never are. but the american people are with us and that is how we're going to get this out is because of each and every one of you who loved this country and are willing to go fight for this country, that's how we'll do it. [ applause ] >> thank you. >> and, of course as conservatives, we actually don't think that big government does big things well. i mean you're not going to see us coming down to the senate floor with a wheelbarrow because we know it's best to do things in a step-by-step process that -- so if we can get these decisions to be made at the

state level and the state decides and the employer mandate -- give them the for exampleability and freedom of choice to make their own decisions for the people no those states i think it would be a much better system. >> i think our time is limited although it's not up there right now but before we leave today, i wanted to have a minute from each of you to give your final thoughts on what must happen, what is something that must happen in order for us to enact a true alternative to obamacare. >> well, i'll just start by saying i think we all need to set aside everybody has their own pet idea pet approach and it's fine but we need to realize as an opposition to the lawyer, we need to kind of come and rally around a basic single vision for where we need to go. that's likely to happen as part of the 2016 process, but it's really important for everybody to set aside their small differences so that they can rally around the big issue which is can we present the country

with a basic practical workable credible approach that could actually pass in 2017 and fix the problems in american health care? so i would say a lot of it is politically, let's get around a single vision. >> i think that it's important for the house and the senate to lay out what we are for and to pass those bills out of the house on to the senate and the senate to take them up and pass them and senator barrasso and some of his colleagues are doing a great job of helping us. king versus burwell and the aftermath of that is going to give us an excellent opportunity to expand this conversation because that court decision will focus the american people's attention on what is right and wrong and this is where each of you come in. >> and i think it's critically important that somebody who appears here this weekend is elected president in 2016. that's what's going to help us repeal and replace this health care law with the good ideas you

have a heard. >> let's give them another round of applause. what a great session today. [ applause ] >> conservative action starts in this room and we have a couple of slides together what we have learned. any time to take out your phone it's now and i'm hoping that they'll show the slides. we packed so much in so there's some summary points right up here if you want to take a picture of it. if you can't take a picture go to my website at 60plus.org. what we learned today. what's so important about this conference is that you take what you learn from all of these panels, take what you learned here back into your communities, the second slide is going to give a list of resources of where you can go to get some more information from today's panel.

and then the third is something you all know. we go back to our communities, i go back to virginia i write letters to the editor. i talk to people in the grocery store. i go door to door and i let people know that change does not happen in washington until our voices are heard. so please go home, get the message out. thank you so much for joining us panel today. god bless. ♪ >> now senator joni ernst and retired lieutenant colonel oliver north at the conservative political action conference who spoke about honoring veterans. >> thank you. thank you so much. thanks for awful you for allowing me to join you here today. your voices and your actions are so important to the fight to get

our great nation back on track. thank you for all that you do. [ applause ] for the next few minutes i am honored to have the opportunity to discuss a topic that as many of you know is very near and dear to my heart, celebrating the service and recognizing the sacrifices of america's military veterans. [ applause ] i wanted to take a moment to honor those men and women who currently or have in the past worn our nation's uniform. those who have defended the very ideals values and freedoms that make this the greatest nation in the history of mankind. [ applause ]

for more than 20 years i've had the great privilege of serving my state and my country while working alongside some of our finest soldiers. my husband gale has been a tremendous support system through the years. he is a retired command sergeant major and army ranger and has sumably served our country. [ applause ] thank you. today i serve as a lieutenant colonel in the iowa army national guard and i've been privileged to have commanded at many levels from company to battalion. from 2003 to 2004 i served as a company commander during "operation iraqi freedom" while my unit was tasked with running convoys throughout kuwait and

southern iraq. the brave soldiers sailors, airmen and marines that we served alongside while deployed all came from different corners of america and from different backgrounds, but what was so much more important than any differences was the common belief in the greatness of america and their willingness to make tremendous sacrifices to defend her and so they came forward, they raised their right hand and they pledged to defend our freedoms and our very way of life. because of the fearless men and women like these veterans from earlier generations to those who will step forward and answer duty's call in the months and year as head, i will always remain optimistic about the bright future for america.

[ applause ] thank you. in the united states senate i have the honor of serving on the armed services committee. we are already working on a wide range of issues including threats from isis, al qaeda and others who are being radicalized by them. congress must hold president obama accountable to ensure that he and his administration finally develop a cohesive and strong strategy to confront these and the many other threats that we face. we also must do all we can to stand up here at home to ensure that our veterans receive the quality of care they were promised and deserve. [ applause ]

a month ago i was honored to give the republican address following the state of the union. i had an extra gallery ticket so i called my friend, owen an iowa iowan who lives in this area. he and i attended iowa state university together many years ago and now owen is an active duty member of the united states army. when i called him, he said joni, i'd love to go. but on that day i'm being fitted for my new leg. folks, owen lives here now at least temporarily at walter reed medical center. during owen's last deployment to afghanistan he and his team were caught in a firefight and he was shot multiple times which

resulted in the loss of his leg and the sight in his left eye. i spent a morning with owen at walter reed and as he went through his routine appointments and his physical therapy with his new prosthetic leg i was honored to be there with him. there were maybe a dozen other service members present. they were missing arms, their legs or combination. they were in wheelchairs or on prosthetics, they were using canes and they were using crutch crutches and as i looked around i didn't see america's broken soldiers, i saw america's tenacious survivors. [ applause ]

that day that day with owen reinforced to me that in the end, we will not be judged by what's on the outside, our physicaln strength, but by what's on the inside, our inner perfection and strength. that strength which enables us to stand up for what is right and to stand against what is wrong. [ applause ] these men and women owen, his teammates, our other wonderful veterans, they have all demonstrated their inner strength and courage and as we gather together over the next

few days to celebrate our values, our beliefs and our great freedom i encourage all of you to take a moment to reach out and thank a veteran and their family, because they help to protect those rights. in fact at this time if you are able, i would like to ask all of our military men and women to please rise and allow us to show our deep gratitude and appreciation. [ applause ] thank you. thanks to all of you. thank you. thank you. thanks to each of you from a

forever, forever grateful nation, thank you all for having me here today and may god bless you, may god bless our wonderful servicemen and women and god bless the great united states of america. [ cheers and applause ] thank you. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ladies and gentlemen this is a salute to veterans. please welcome lieutenant colonel oliver north. [ applause ] ♪ >> good morning. thank you. thank you all. it is great to see you all here today and i want to remind you what i have said before at these great cpac gatherings that i have the best job in broadcasting because my job is to keep company with heroes and let them tell their stories of ordinary americans who have done extraordinary things to the benefit of our country. as vietnam was for my generation the war on radical islam that by the way is our enemy whether

anyone at the white house knows it or not or against radical islam is the defining event for this generation of americans, it has shaped our politics our culture and society and impacted our economy, it's divided our nation between those who see radical islam as a real and dangerous threat and those who try to explain it away. for millions of americans the war has experienced longer lines at the airport security screenings at professional football games, but for others, it's left a more lasting mark a deeper scar, if you will. i'm talking about the 2.5 million young americans who have deployed to difficult and dangerous places in support of "operations enduring freedom" and "phrase iraqi freedom." many of them have served seven, eight, nine, even ten or more deployments. that kind of up-tempo as it's

called has strained and often broken family relationships. some 6,849 americans lost their lives in iraq and afghanistan to an enemy this administration cannot even identify. tens of thousands more have returned home wounded, but every american who served in those theaters of combat and their families have been impacted. each of them have left a piece of their body or a part of their soul on those battlefields and now more than ever they need our support. they need a veterans administration that cares and doesn't lie about the treatment they offer. they need an economy that creates real jobs. they need a commander in chief who knows our enemy and knows how to win. can't sayeven say the worth today.

[ applause ] they also need a head of state that knows that our country is made extraordinary sacrifices to defend us the american people, and offer others the hope of freedom. thankfully freedom alliance helps our troops and their families as they struggle with the wounds of war that can keep them in rehabilitation for years. here's some of the projects, freedom align sponsors to care for healing heroes and the families of the fallen. scholarships fund has awarded more than $9 million in college scholarships to the children of military heroes who have been seriously wounded or killed in the line of duty. this past year we provided scholarships to 304 sons and daughters of american heroes in fact, a few of our college scholarship recipients are here at cpac and i hope you'll join me at 10:30 a.m. in the

chesapeake room to meet them and learn more about the sacrifices their fathers made. through partnerships with u.s. bank, freedom alliance is providing mortgage-free homes to service members who fought and sacrificed in iraq and afghanistan. to date we've given homes to troops in california, arizona, colorado minnesota and soon another one in florida. because nothing heals a hero like the great outdoors with fellow service members who have been there, done that freedom alliance offers recreational therapy to injured troops with dozens of hunting and fishing excursions at some of the best locations in the united states and overseas. out in the wilderness new friendships are forged and informal peer-to-peer counseling takes place. many of the troops we host in god's country have said they benefited more by a few days in the woods with freedom alliance than from all their appointments at the v.a. one of those young men who's

joined freedom alliance in our outdoor adventures now mentoring others injured as heroes for our country is a man i want you to meet. he served as a forward observer in the army in "operation iraqi freedom." in january 2009 he was on his second deployment to iraq, he and his team were headed into a village to seize a weapons cache riding in a striker armored vehicle. they struck an anti-tank mine and 55 gallons of homemade explosives. hme as they call it. the blast of the ied caused multiple injuries including massive damage to both his legs requiring the amputation of his left leg and since that day he's fought to keep his right leg and just recently a week ago had further surgery on it. he spent many months at walter reed national military center where freedom alliance met him and has joined us on many

outdoor activities. please welcome to cpac a united states army soldier an american hero, sergeant john moore. john, come on out here. [ cheers and applause ] that is an american hero right there. [ cheers and applause ] another project -- another project sponsored by freedom alliance is helping amputees like john increase their mobility and take advantage of that outdoor therapy but in order to do that they need to be able to get into the woods and out of the woods with some degree of mobility not offered by a chair like the one he's in.

to help with that freedom alliance provides all-terrain track chairs for amputees who love to hunt and fish. john in recognition of your service and sacrifice and to help you continue on the road to recovery freedom alliance and all these great americans gathered here at cpac want to present with your very own track chair. this is -- look at this. i think calvin is bumped up against the screen. i can see it moving. [ cheers and applause ] now, i want to make sure you're going to be able to transition into this thing. just watch this. john is despite these injuries, despite surgery just last week is still mobile enough, don't

want help, i can do it is john's favorite word. ki do it. this is the -- the controls on this thing even i can handle the controls on this thing. there go. [ cheers and applause ] >> john we're going to ask you to take us with you on one of those hunts and i promise to bring with me casey the wonder dog, the best bird dog i've ever had and maybe one of her puppies. >> sir you're welcome to come hunting with me any time you want to. i can promise you that. >> you're going to take this back home. >> yes, sir. >> tell everybody where you live. >> smithfield, virginia. if you don't know where that's at that's where they make the hams. you know and i'm fortunate enough, my family has some property there and we love

hunting and fishing. and that's all we do. you know, and just we actually like having warriors come out there and hunt and fish with us all the time. we host several hunts a year and like you said earlier for me getting out in the woods i guess my peace. that's what i love. so -- >> we admire, you brother and we're grateful for the chance to be able to provide something for you to be able to get around in. >> i appreciate it. >> i love you, brother. i look forward to going on a hunt with you. >> we'll do it. >> thank you, john. >> thank you, sir. >> soldier on, brother. >> i will do it. >> an american hero, ladies and gentlemen. [ applause ] yeah, one of the deals is we're going to have to have millii sup

advise scrubbing the black marks off the white carpeting up here. thank you, john. i notice that there's a lot of young people here as part of cpac. i'm just curious if you would -- give me a show of hands if you are currently or very recently a college student. oh, yeah. oh, yeah. [ applause ] now, here's the question. how many of you have had professors or coaches who told you things like everyone is a winner. or everyone deserves a trophy? at some point in your education? same number. it's almost surreal, isn't it? well, that idea that everyone deserves a trophy or that every participant is entitled to some kind of medal has affected the thinking of my kids and grandkids which now there are 15 of them since friday.

i was once introduced as the husband of four of the father of one and grandfather of 15. it's actually husband of one, father of four and it is the grandfather of 15. i tell them welcome to the real world where there are real awards that require real actions, honors that must remain exclusive to individuals who go above and beyond necessity. the award i'm about to present is one of them. to even be in the running the recipient must meet the classical definition of a hero not a person who camps a pass in the end zone or sets a new athletic record or even one who wears a spandex suit and a cape one of those comic book hero the recipient of this award must be someone who selflessly puts him or herself at risk to the benefit of others. that's the real definition of a

hero and that certainly defines the recipient of our annual american hero award. this year's cpac freedom alliance repeated recipient of that award from cpac nra and freedom alliance repeatedly demonstrated the qualities of courage, integrity, perseverance and honor when he could have done less without criticism. he honed his god given gifts and talents and repeatedly risked his own life to save the lives of others on difficult and dangerous battlefields. he was chosen unanimously by the nra and freedom alliance boards of directors to be the recipient. it's my privilege as chairman of the nra's military and veterans affairs committee to present this year's american hero award posthumously to united states navy s.e.a.l. an american hero chris kyle. [ cheers and applause ]

[ applause ] >> the plaque recognizing his extraordinary service and sacrifice was to be presented to chief kyle's widow, taya. she intended to be here with us this morning buts awegsiññ know the grueling trial of her husband's killer was just completed and now the weather at the end of that trial coming so close together have conspired to prevent her from being here to present that to her in person so i would hold that plaque in

safekeeping and ask that you please keep her and their children in your prayers as they will be in mine. god bless you and prayers as they will be in mine. god bless you and thank you for being part of this today. you're watching c-span 3. up next a conversation at the bipartisan policy center on voting access and elections. followed by a house appropriation appropriations subcommittee on homeland security hearing on the department's 2016 budget. this afternoon at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span we'll be live at the potomac institute for

policy studies for a discussion on global efforts to combat terrorism. in the evening we'll take you live to the council on foreign relations for a conversation on human rights with sara sooul who serves as the undersecretary for security and human rights. she'll discuss the work of the atrocities prevention board, which was created in 2012 to respond to and prevent genocide and other human rights violations around the world. tune in at 6:30 p.m. eastern. tonight on the communicators more on the consumer electronics show as we look at products. >> if there's something you want to capture you'll take it off your wrist and it will be simple to take off your wrist and it will expand and it will be as easy z as gesturing. you'll literally just toss it

and it's completely autonomous. there's no remote required. you don't need to be wearing something. it's smart enough to know the direction you tossed it. it will stay close if it's gentle. it will take a photo and come back completely autonomously. >> the communicators, tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. next white house counsel joined members of the presidential commission on election administration last week to discuss various aspects of the voting process in federal elections. the commission was formed in 2013 by president obama to improve the voting experience and provide better access to polls. this is about 50 minutes.

>> we are welcoming you here today to talk about the president's commission on election administration, which a little over a year ago issued recommendations and here today we're going to talk about progress that's been made and where to go from here. my role really is very simple, to introduce some of the commissioners and to turn it over to them for an initial discussion about the commission and throughout the day we'll have other panels talking about various election administration recommendations made by that commission. so i'm going to start by quickly introducing without long bios the commissioners and then turn it to them. the co-chairs sitting here, ben ginzberg former general council to mitt romney and bob bower,

white house council. if i go down the list here michelle mays was a commissioner. tammie patrick, a former election official in arizona. the commissioners who is the former state director of elections in texas and chris thomas who is the current state director of elections in michigan and in the middle the research director stanford law professor and research director of the commission. i'm going to turn it to bob and ben for initial remarks in this opening session about the commission's one-year anniversary. >> thank you. thank you very much for being here. it's delightful to be reunited with our commission. as you know, the goal of the commission from the very beginning was to gather together views from across the country,

from election administrations, experts, voters, voting rights community, just across the board. on a fully bipartisan basis to determine what could be done to make the voting process more functional for voters obviously, the original interest behind the commission was in the reduction of long lines that became an issue that was much discussed in the political process in the course of the election, but it was widely understood that there were a whole series of other questions questions that fed into the issues of lines, but other questions that was directly on the voting experience, and that's the title of the report. an inquiry into the voting experience and how to significantly improve it. i was delighted to serve with ben as co-chair of this commission. the commission as a whole worked extraordinary well together, but i want to emphasize what a collaborative effort it was

across the entire united states with democrats, republicans and independents all participating in a conversation about the importance of shoring up voting rights in the united states with particular attention to election administration as a sector of public administration. as a means of making elections work and steering clear of other controversies, controversies we'll always have around the process, and zeroing in on the question to improve the basic experience that eligible voters have in registering going to the polls, voting and having significant confidence that their votes will be successfully accurately counted. so we were very grateful for that experience and very grateful that the outcome was as well received as it was. now we're into an implementation phase. i want to thank the bipartisan policy center and the various organizations that have supported this implementation effort. the bipartisan policy center made an excellent decision in

bringing on board to steer the implementation effort. one of our former commissioners, who was here in maricopa county, arizona, and formerly secretary of state in virginia. i want to also recognize the ongoing contributions that our senior research director has made. our view is that there is a conversation now taking place that we were able to feed into in working on the report, that we have been able to take advantage of in writing the report and we are continuing to develop, that will really produce meaningful results for voters across the country. i'm delighted to be here and delighted we have had this opportunity, and i will now turn it over to my co-chair. >> thank you bob. this past year has really been a privilege and pleasure to work

with bob and nate and all the commissioners to come up with our series of recommendations and best practices. the truth is that bob and i have battled over many very partisan battles over more years than bob cares to admit. and it really was a tremendous opportunity for us to be able to come together over these issues because the republicans and democrats agree that the ability of all qualified voters to cast their votes fairly and without barriers is a fundamental part of our system and needs to be encouraged everywhere. one of the things that all of you have taught us is that we have a very interesting system with 8,000 jurisdictions that have some responsibility for putting on elections. so that uniformity is extremely challenging, and it was one of

the things that the commission sought. but for. the few number of jurisdictions where there are problems, there are many more jurisdictions who do the individual parts of voting, whether it's lines or registration or proper polling places very, very well. so the great opportunity that we had and the graegs educational experience that i think bob and i were able to share was to talk to so many election officials around the country, see the great skills and dedication that they have to the problem. so i hope our report is a testament to being able to find solutions to problems and then having them implemented in those jurisdictions among the 8,000 that do have problems in one of these areas. to work with my fellow

commissioners and nate and then with all the folks who came and talked to us at the hearings that we had around the country. so i hope this report is the start of something that will now be implemented thanks to the bipartisan policy center and. tammie and don palmer as we go forward. it's certainly true that it is a difficult process to gel get all the elements of this report implemented. that it really is a state by state operation and that's where the successes and the challenges of the bpc project will lie. so with that, let me, again thank john for what's going on and bob for this terrific year and nate for making us all smart and all the commissioners for your wisdom and insights on how

to solve these problems. >> during the day we're going to devil more deeply u into the issues. i actually haven't counted how many literal recommendations there are because there are definitely very specific recommendations, but the four areas we're going to talk about today are improving the polling place experience for reducing polling place lines. second, the voting technology issues associated with the new generation of voting machines and how we certify and test them. the possibility of early voting and how states are moving to that and might move to that more effectively. and a number of issues related to voter registration, including online registration and data sharing across states and working with their dmvs. so we have a little time in this initial panel, which touches things off to say something about those issues and maybe i can ask some of the

commissioners to pick one of those and say a little something about that. maybe the voting technology issue is one that i know our esteemed co-chairs probably department think they were going to come into this commission and say this is the thing we're going to make some major recommendations about, but do you want to say a little bit about that issue or a couple of others of you maybe jump in and say broad things about the others? >> sure, john is absolutely right in the technology and the problems with our existing machines was not something that we -- excuse me, anticipated talking about at the beginning of the process. but in our various meetings and hearings around the country it was clear that every election official faces the problem of machines bought in the early 2000s now kind of running out of juice.

there was an additional problem in that the technological standards that had to be passed to bring new equipment to market had not been updated since 2007, which is before the ipad was invented, and by the way, you ought to be able to cast a ballot on an ipad these days. that's a fundamental problem that we saw that we got a tremendous amount of help to come up with some recommendations recommendations. matt masterson and christy camp campbell and tom hicks have really got a lot of the lions share of getting a lot of this put into place so that there can actually be a solution to it, but i think it is one of the things that came out of the commission was hopefully being able to put some focus on it. certainly, chris thomas who was one of our commissioners has spent a tremendous amount of time in his role in michigan in

dealing with the issue. >> maybe i could turn to chris. i was going to task you with saying something about registration. you care deeply about many aspects of registration, but in particular the department of motor vehicles in michigan is a model for working with the election office and sharing lists. do you want to say a little about that as a key recommendation? >> it is a key, as my co-chair indicated, there's a lot of things on the table. voting systems are certainly one of them that we all see approaching. but an ongoing one has been the full implementation of the voter registration act, which really has not yet occurred. this report helped highlight that. every person who is eligible ought to be a registered voter and have that opportunity offered when they are doing business with department of motor vehicles. what the data shows is that's

just not the case. so we have highlighted that here as a way u really across the board to get a higher registration rate to make it more convenient for voters. what this report is all about is the voter. it's not about political parties, it's not about election officials, it's about the voters making this experience a better experience on election day. the worst thing is you show up on election day and r your name is not in. the book, but your driver's license will have your proper address on it and when the dmvs step up and fully implement, we'll get rid of the share of the provisional ballots which also cause lines on election day. >> would one of the commissioners like to say a little more about the recommendation regarding polling place lines? that was the initial comments from the president. that spurred the creation of the commission. one of the areas and we'll have a panel later, but one of the

areas we're trying to work with specific counties on these issues. do you want to safe something about your findings online? >>,;d/sure i will. good morning, everyone. it's great to see everybody again and to get the band back together here at the top of the table. it's absolutely correct that the lines really spurred the commission's genesis, but what we saw in the executive order was that it laid out ten very discreet areas to look at. one of those tied directly into resource allocation and what causes lines whether it's the inaccuracy of our voter rolls or malfunction of voting equipment. what we found as we went around the country was that lines occur for various reasons at various points in time during election day.

what we're finding and what we saw in our hearings in some of the local election administrators are here today is that election officials are looking for data to try and discern why these lines are occurring and looking to the facts on how they can mitigate that from occurring in the future. it's one thing to kind of cut through the din of there are problems with a line at a particular polling place because machines have broken down, but then you find out it had nothing to do with the machines breaking down. that it was a problem with co-workers and listening to what they are supposed to do. so there's a wide reason that lines occur. so what we had to do and it was quite the task to sit down and say how can we provide tools to local officials to figure out why they are getting lines and how to address them when they

occur. we did make the recommendation in the report that voters should not have to wait longer than 30 minutes in order to get to a point where they are talking to an election official to get their ballot, that sort of thing. that was really, for the means of when you're doing your resource allocation of how many poll workers to hire, how many pieces of equipment you should have, how many ballots should you order, to try to think about it in terms of i want to process these people in 30 minutes. so we provided some tools that are out on supportthevoter.gov, and there are tools that allow election officials to go in put in the expected turn out or the registered voters, however you want to cut that up and how many things you're going to be allocating. what we found from election officials is there are challenges with resources and in some cases it's a lack of resources. some cases it's the quality of the resources that they have. and in other cases it is the point of the allocation of the

resources. so putting what you have in the right places to best service your public. we're very hopeful that these tools we have provided will help the local administrator in doing that. i think that's part for me, the commission and this report we really saw it as having three separate audiences. some things would require state legislation to enact like online voter registration, but there's also things that state election administrators can do via rules and things that local administrators can do by maybe adjusting some of their processes. that's where we really want to make sure there were tools being provided to everyone engaged to make sure that the voters are well served. >> let me quickly turn to nate, the research director of the commission, because tammie mentioned data and i think this commission was very data driven. if one person made that call more than anybody else it was nate personally calling for more

and better data and get. ing out into the field and engaging political scientists and other scholars and other sources of data. can you say a little bit about your efforts to really make this commission data driven? >> well, thank you, again, for having me here. i'll talk a bit about that. i'm both hoarse and whiskful, bringing the band back together really does overcome me. and i'll say the research effort of the commission was, while i was appointed the research director, was a product of the work of so many political scientists. charles stewart being among them, as i have said on other occasions, there are few people in academia generally who are so invaluable to a professor to the field of election administration that we don't know what we would do without him.

he led a team of researchers, whose research actually is featured this month in the election law journal, so you can go to your local newsstand and get that. and the effort included a survey, a national survey of election officials. it also included a series of research papers on all of the topics in the executive order. we had about a dozen political scientists and others working with the commission to provide them the best data. notably in the report toward the end, there was a plea for more and better data from jurisdictions and to try to sort of replicate what we were doing in the commission to bring information to make it a more professional data driven exercise. there is, as charles is fond of

saying, this is not an area we don't have that much data. there's a lot out there it's just not as easily accessible. let me just say one final thing. this picks up on what bob and ben said about the success of the commission. there is a sense that it seemed like it might be inevitable that the commission would come together unanimously in recommendations, but it really is a testament to their efforts and to the design of the commission that the commission was able to do what it did. and it is sort of unique, i think, in this era of polarization to have two people like bob and ben who are trusted by their parties and who can lead with professionals on the commission to come together really to sort of deal with the problems that are widely known in election administration and to deal with them in a

nonpartisan way. that spirit that you see in the report is one we recommend and hope continues after the report's release. one of the main recommendations, as bob said, was to begin to think of election administration as a profession a problem-solving profession that it is data driven. >> i think we have a little more time if we could -- one obvious point is that the commission itself had had some boundaries and limitations. the parties have strong disagreements about some but there's a lot that the parties could find common ground on. and primarily, the report really looks to state and local changes in law, rules, activities and not really so much looking at the federal role. but there were a couple other areas we could briefly touch on that is early voting and one

other aspect of voter registration chris talked about the dmv aspect, but the commission recommended online voter registration as well as a number of ways in which states could share data across states to improve the accuracy of lists. bob, would you like to say something about one of those areas? ben can jump in as well. >> certainly, one in particular that i think is worth mentioning is the role of voter choice and voter preference. one of the clear cut signals that we got from election administrators and we certainly picked it up during the hearings, is that voters have a certain set of expectations about how they will be treated. they have sort of a e desire in their lives for a certain degree of flexibility. they certainly would like to be treated by the electoral process

as, if you will, customers given the same sort of consideration that our best businesses give the people they treat as customers. so to a significant degree in the course of our conversations it was very clear that the voice that was heard the loudest in the room is the voice of the voters and this goes to the question of multiple opportunities to vote, which is one of our recommendations. early voting, if you will s one way to describe it, but there are a whole host of other ways to cast their ballots in advance of election day and as an alternative to trying to schedule the voting moment during that one tuesday when so many other people, particularly for for example in a presidential election you're maybe voting at the same time. we just found that time and again, the question that we were confronted with is what are we doing to improve the voting experience and are we listening to what voters are telling us,

and we found that sensitive on a bipartisan basis to blue or red states or in between or what they were saying about what they needed. the multiple opportunities to vote is a good example of that. however, it's structured. those are choices that voters are asking for. that, along with making sure that our decisions were data driven, wouldn't have to worry about that because we were driven to make them data driven. we're listening to the voter. >> a few comments about early voting, which bob explained. but what was interesting was that no matter where we went, we goat got uniform consensus that it would be good to alleviate the congestion on election day. if you have to force all voters to vote within a 12-hour period on a single day that's an

invitation for problems and can contribute to long lines. what e we saw was not one size fits all. some states have expanded and created early voting in person, which gives voters multiple opportunities, chances, not multiple times to vote, but multiple opportunities to take advantage of early voting when it's convenient for their schedule. we also heard from northwestern states and colorado that have had huge success with voting by mail. so the recommendation from the commission was not just saying has to be early voting by personal aexperienceppearanceappearance, but what works in your jurisdiction. what we also heard was that in addition to alleviating the pressure points on election day, voters really love the opportunity, as bob was saying. voters appreciate that choice. in texas we have been doing early voting since 1987 and could never do away with it because the voters would demand

it. that was the highlights. >> just to emphasize one thing, multiple opportunities to vote means getting to vote once, but having lots of different ways to do it. sometimes gets confusing. and we did find very interestingly that different jurisdictions have preferences about what that means. so that what one jurisdiction means by multiple opportunities to cast your one ballot, in one part of the country is quite different in another. and that just emphasizes the local nature that we have of elections generally and that solutions or fixes to the problems we articulate do have to come state by state and jurisdiction by jurisdiction.

that made this an ongoing challenge for election officials and people who care about the issue. the other issue i might note where we found a large degree of agreement was the need for clean voter rolls. that, in fact, republicans and democrats agree that the election process works better there are fewer long lines there are fewer confusions over who should be able to vote and not vote if the rolls are clean. so one of the things we did agree on in the report is that there are two programs out there that help states clean their rolls so that when voters go into the ballot box to cast their votes that there are not confusions over whether they should be there or not. and i think those are important bipartisan improvements that can

be made. >> great well, we're going to shift to a second part we're not going to have a break, but shift to a succeed part of this session. we have a visiting speaker who is the white house council, who is going. to be with us. i'm going to do a brief introduction. we're not going to break, but a quick shift of some seats where neil will come join us and talk to us for a few minutes and have a few questions and wrap up the session. so neil is the white house council and previously served in the clinton administration. also is assistant u.s. attorney in the southern district of new york and formerly a partner at kik land and ellis. so we are pleased to have neil with us. again, this was the president's commission on election administration. the president appointed this commission and we are happy to have you here and love to hear from you. >> so thank you very much, and thanks to bob and ben as well

and to the bipartisan policy center for this. whenever i see bob, i think to myself that it's clear that i wouldn't be white house council without bob's support and there are many days i thank him for that and many days that i curse him for that. so it's great to be here and next to bob. so thank you very much for that kind introduction. it's a great pleasure for me to be here today. this is a matter and issue of important to me and obviously a matter of significant importance to the president. i know it's important to everyone in this room. first, i want to take a moment to thank the bipartisan policy center, both for hosting this retrospective and for taking initiative it to assist the commission on election administration in working with states and jurisdictions across the country to advance the commission's important recommendations. let me go off on a riff that i'll come back to in a second,

but. i read this report when it first came out and read it again in connection with today's appearance. i was heavily involved in selecting people to be on the president's policing task force of the 21st century. as i was asking those people to serve, i said two things to them. we want this done quickly, this is a matter of enormous importance, and the second thing we said was that we want this to be practical recommendations that can be implemented. as i was reading your report again, in preparation for today i was struck how much that this report actually accomplishes those same two goals. it was done quickly with a lot of input, but in addition, the recommendations that you came up with are the kinds of recommendations that can be implemented and are important and the kinds of nuts and bolts running of the voter system that are so important and very thankful for your work on that. in america, obviously, there are moreke?9 opportunities to vote than

in any other country in the world. but more and more as this group is all too aware, americans are making the decision to not show up at the polls, particularly in nonpresidential election years. as you know in the 2014 midterm elections, voter turnout reached its lowest point since world war ii. i find that astonishing. it's something that we simply cannot tolerate. but maybe it's not so surprising in some ways because of the kind of work you have been looking into that in the 2012 presidential election over 5 million voters waited in line for more than an hour and many waited in line for six hours to cast a ballot, some studies have said that 750,000 people did not vote because the line was too long and simply going to take too long. as americans we set the gold standard for election administration and statistics show that we are not there yet and hopefully with the work of this commission and the kind of recommendations that you've made

we can get much closer to that gold standard. in the 2013 state of the union address and executive order, the president established the commission of election administration and task it with identifying nonpartisan ways to improve american election administration, to shorten the lines at polling places, promote conduct of elections and provide better access to the polls for all voters. i was struck again as i recently read the report the accent on the necessity to have poll access for americans with disabilities, who obviously need as much accommodation as anyone else to be able to vote. today i would like to congratulate the commissioners and the many who contributed to your report and to sellcelebrate what you have already accomplished, particularly with the help of the bipartisan policy center. after six months of public hearings and briefings from election officials, academic experts and representatives of

various organizations and associations, many of whom thankfully are in the room here today, the commission developed a set of practical, achievable recommendations to improve the voter experience at the polling place. you recognized and promoted the view, which i share, that the administration of elections must be viewed not as a partisan exercise, but as a subject of good public administration. in doing so, you focused on various aspects of voting from registration to ballot design to polling place management and many others that work individually and collectively to create each voter's experience. that seemed to me what you focused on what is the experience of the voter and that's really the focus of your report. recognizing the similarity and goals you approached your view of the voting experience in the same way that private companies evaluate their customers' experience. i heard you went to disney world and looked at their famous line

management system. they are always down there improving. i don't go as much since my kids grew up, but i remember years ago the system was great and a lot to learn from private industry, which focuses so much on its consumers. recognizing the importance of this work and the ability to affect real change, the commission did not stop at just providing recommendations. you went a step further by providing an election tool kit containing real workable data-driven tools. with help from rock the vote, you provided open source voter registration software that states can use to create their own online registration systems. you provided election administrators with tools to calculate the numbers of polling booth and staff they will need to achieve targeted wait times as well as the effect that adding or subtracting staff will have on those times and ultimately on the voter experience. these tools are precinct specific and if dofted would

make a significant difference in the ability to tailor its voting practices to the specific needs of each community. you showed that good election administration is good government. you and the bipartisan policy center are now helping to bring these advances to fruition all across the country, working hand in hand with folks on the ground who have been doing this hard work year in and year out. i can't help but be impressed by all that's being done to use technology to improve public administration. it's worth highlighting and particularly the great work that's r already underway to response to one of the chief recommendations. adoption of online voter registration that ben mentioned a few minutes ago. the commission's report called for the expansion of online voter registration as a method of reducing error saving money, reducing delays and providing the voter with immediate

feedback on registration status. since the report was published last year, five states have passed legislation to create online voter registration and additional states are likely to adopt this reform in the coming year. of course, there's still a lot of work to be done. in the year since releasing the report, the commission has continued to study the administration of elections around the country to understand how local administration officials can better serve the needs of their communities. during the 2014 general election, the commission teamed with a policy center to study line length, ways to streamline voting process, and use of suggested resource allocation tools in counties in florida, south carolina and in virginia. while states and local officials must continue to confront the issues raised in the commission's report and evaluate their own needs, the federal government must do its part to ensure that election administrators are given the tools that they need to run smooth efficient elections. last year the president

nominated and congress unanimously confirmed three new commissioners to the election assistance corporation. i think i heard you were here today. should have googled what you look like so i could have confidently pointed at you. apologies for not doing that. at last month the eac was able to meet with commissioners for the first time in four years and immediately took action to address some of the recommendations raised in the commission's report, including accrediting a test laboratory, considering updates to the standards for testing voting systems, and used throughout the country. we thank you for your immediate action so quickly after being confirmed. earlier this month the president joined thousands of americans in

selma to mark the anniversary of the march from selma to montgomery that led to the voting rights act of 1965. 50 years later the members of this commission and the work that you do to serve as prime examples of how we can come together from different parties and different political persuasions to make voting easier for every american recognizing that citizen participation is the core of our democracy. i'm honored to be here with the members of the commission, particularly with the co-chairs and to kick off this important conversation. i thank you for your attention and for inviting me to speak today. [ applause ] >> thank you, i know you're going to have some time for a few questions. i would start with some of the commissioners if the commissioners would like to ask a question of neil while we have him here. bob, you used to sit in the same

chair. >> what question could i ask that would be thankful rather than a curse. i do think that i appreciate the stress on the question of implementation and also on the effort on the commission's part to make practical recommendations. i think the commission would hope also that we're going to have and expect to have the continued support of the administration sort of steering this bipartisan path toward election administration. how do you see the various ways that this administrations can tie into this effort and continue to bring home the point there may be other issues or controverts that can be developed on a bipartisan basis. >> so in some sense this commission started through an

executive order by the president. i bob knows this as well as i do that he's quite committed to this. he at selma and since selma he's talked about issues with regard to americans voting and he cares a lot about the issue. i think you'll hear him continue to speak about it in a nonpartisan sense. the kinds of things that this commission is doing and the real need to, as i said, to make the voter experience such that voters will go to the polls. we can't reward them for going to the polls, but we can make it not so hard for them to go to the polls. i think he will continue to speak out about that and be a pretty big mega phone on those issues. he's very appreciative of the work of this commission. as i say, i really meant as i reread your report, i was struck really that the kinds of recommendations you came up with are many of them not terribly expensive, very pragmatic. the disability recommendations

are ones that just have to be thought about and dealt with. and the use of technology, these are just the kinds of things that are implement tall and can have enormous impact. whether you're republican or democrat, we want our citizens to vote. if they don't vote, we'll continue this spirit of unhappiness in the electorate. we need to make sure they vote and commit and they are part of the process. it will make our government better, our democracy better and so i thank all of you for your work to achieve that goal. >> other questions from commissioners? >> neil, thank you for joining us and coming and for your kind words about the commission. one of the really sleeper issues in the report in many ways is communities having adequate facilities in which to let their citizens vote. and as we looked at this one of the best common solution and the

most communities is really public schools. there are safety issues with that, of course, if you have lots of people from the outside coming in to schools when children are there, so the recommendation that it be an in-service day. it is, of course locality by locality agreement that you need for that but i wonder if the president weighing in on schools as terrific polling places in each community wouldn't have a qualityive effect on helping this get achieve edd. >> sure, so i mean i won't -- i may be counselled but i don't actually speak r for him. but i completely agree with your notion that we need places where people both feel safe and comfortable.

and people are typically comfortable with our schools. many of you probably live in montgomery county. this last election i voted at a community center that was really quite close to my house in an early voting situation, but another kind of situation where i was comfortable. when i lived in new york in the '80s, it seemed to me i voted at the lobby of an apartment building nearby, which surprised me that but lots of people voted so it got done. so i think that part of the voter experience is to have them in a place they feel comfortable going. a lot of people have kids and are familiar with a school situation. you're right that if you're going to do that, it almost has to be a service day because you wouldn't want people not affiliated with the school to be in and out of the location, at least in a way that wouldn't provide for the safety of the voters as well as the safety of

the kids. it would be quite disruptive. but let me take that back. i think that's a very important idea. >> other questions from this side of the table? >> i have one. i guess i think back to how the commission was created, and i know you're not in the white house at that time. first, the president had the interest in lines, but i think wisely broadened that interest. that was an issue, but there were many other issues relate ing to the voting process and laid that out in an executive order with clear instructions for the commission. two, i think one of the reasons the commission succeeded is because you had these two respected leaders in their parties, at the top of the commission and then the experience of election administrators. so it really was a combination of a lot of things that made it

a defined agenda, both parties represented and the real experience of people there. so i guess i'm throwing a compliment your way in how it was designed, but if you had thoughts on that was all intend intended and whether that's a good model for other efforts. >> my sense is it was an excellent model. what it seemed to me it attempted to do was to define, again. i keep going back to this and partially because this policing task force. obviously, ben and bob are cooperative on this issue, but they are not cooperative on lots of other issues. so there are lots -- >> words you were looking for is antagonistic. >> sitting between the two, i thought i would go with not cooperative. but i think that sort of the success of this is because it defined the issue to be solved

as the practical issues of improving the voter experience. so i mean obviously if you had gotten into a lot of the other issues that divided the parties nothing would have happened and it would have been an unsuccessful enterprise, i suspect. but by really looking at the voter experience, on which everyone agrees regardless of which party that that's something that needs to be improved, then the problem was defined in a way that you could come up with real solutions. then i think actually the decision to not, again i'm sure there are academics around the table so this isn't anti-academic, but to not have just academics, but also people who voting administrators who are actually out there whose voting machines break just as the poll is supposed to open and now what do i do? and the poll worker who was supposed to show up doesn't show up and now i have a line i didn't anticipate dealing with.

so it's a deal with those kinds of issues, which you really couldn't do only with academics. so by having a a blend of people, then you did a terrific job with holding six months of hearings to deepen your knowledge about what actually happens out of the field really helps your ability to come up with these kind of practical solutions6d&f solutions. so i thought it defined a problem as to which real recommendations could be made. then i think that the commission gathered the right tools and the right people to be able to address that problem. i thought it's a a terrific model. >> tammie? >> i'll just chime in very quickly. i think part of what was successful about the process and the report also was that we didn't get together and say if we were going to start from scratch what would we do. is instead we served as a

continue wit for sharing what's already being done in in country. so every single recommendation, in most cases, there are multiple jurisdictions who have implemented it well, are willing to share their story with the rest of the world on how they did it and in most cases almost every one of our recommendations is scaleable so in that case kind of one size does fit it all. it might be. a large mu mu, but it is scaleable. so the largest jurisdictions, i know what a visual, right? so i have to point directly at the largest jurisdiction. your muumu, is kind of tight, but small jurisdictions really appreciate having this material available to them. even though we sent it out a year ago every time i go out in public and meet with election administrators, i talk to people who are hearing it, seeing it, feeling it, excited about it for the very first time. because the truth is in election administration, it's that we

brought. together the a-team at our hearings. we heard from fabulous administrators, we have many[v ñ of them here today, but there are many more who don't have the resources to go to national conferences or even to their state conferences, when they have that available. so having this as a resource to them is very, very helpful. that's why i think it's really critical that we do have the eac reconstituted. we relied on in the report, we mentioned it numerous times about the guides and some of the other things so i think that's been really gratifying to see people are using this as a tool. from montana to connecticut they are using it to measure lines, to come up with new processes, to see if there are lines, how they can address them when they do occur. it's very exciting. >> can i say one more thing and then i'll have to go. there's one other thing i wanted to say about this which is it's

so terrific that you're having this conference a year later because that proves -- so the other advantage to what's happened here is you have come up, as i say, implementable recommendations, but you're not suffering from the problem of no follow-through, which can happen in connection with these kinds of reports. so you have continued to work on implementation, continued to study the issues and. having the conference such as this to ensure that there's real follow through and there's being implementation. as you all know, it's great to have a report, but for something like this, you need administrators and actual locations to read it, think about it and then have the resources in order to develop it. it's just terrific that you're doing this kind of follow through to make sure these great ideas are getting adopted so i applaud you. so thank you all very much for inviting me. i'm honored to have appeared

here today and look forward -- and i hope you sort of keep having these. it's so important a topic that you have agreed to address here. so thank you all very much, really appreciate it. this afternoon at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, we'll be live at the potomac institute for policy studies for a discussion on global evidents to combat terrorism. in the evening, we'll take you live to the kouncouncil on foreign relations for a conversation on human rights with the state department's undersecretary for civilian security democracy and human rights. she'll discuss the work of the u.s. atrocities prevention board, which was created in 2012 to respond to and prevent genocide and other human rights violations around the world. tune in to c-span at 6:30 p.m. eastern. tonight on "american history

tv," programs on the 50th anniversary of the selma march. at 8:00 p.m. selma 50th anniversary commemoration ceremony with president obama and one of the participants in that march congressman john lewis. at 9:10 p.m. abc news footage of 1965 voting rights rally in montgomery, alabama. after that president johnson's address to congress on voting rights. then the selma 50th anniversary u brown chapel church service. niger all of this it coming. up tonight on c-span 3. with live coverage of the u.s. house on c-span and the senate on c-span 2, here on c-span 3 we compliment that coverage by showing you the most relevant hearings and public affairs events. then on weekends c-span 3 is the home to "american history tv" with programs that tell our

nation's story including six series the civil war's 150th anniversary by the visiting battlefields, american artifacts touring museums to discover what it reveals about america's past, the presidency looking at the policies of our nation's commanders in chief, lectures in history, with top college professors and our new series reel america featuring government and educational films from the 1930s through the '70s. c-span 3 created by the cable tv industrial and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. homeland security secretary jay johnson testifies on the 2016 budget request to the house appropriations subcommittee on homeland security. texas republican congressman john carter chairs the committee. this is a little more than two

hours. >> all right, i'm going to call today's hearing to order. mr. secretary welcome, we're happy you're here today. it's good to have you back to testify on the president's 2016 budget for the department of homeland security. last year you testified on a budget that was already

developed at that time before you came on the job. this request, however, is a true reflection of your priorities and we look forward to having a robust discussion. the budget for dhs is $41.2 billion, an increase of $1.7 billion above fiscal year 2015. mr. secretary, there's a lot to like in this request. and i have some concerns too. but for the first time since i've been chairman, i'm pleased with many of the recommendations in your request. the request prioritizes dhs's front line operations and personnel. doesn't include a lot of unauthorized fees as an offset. and complies with the law by funding 34,000 detention bands. with a focus on preventing terrorism, securing the border, administering immigration laws, safe guarding cyberspace, and strengthening national

preparedness, i believe the request is a very constructive first step in the appropriations process. i would like to include $9.1 billion for cp's position of protecting america's borders while still allowing the flow of free trade and travel is vital to our economy. $3.3 billion to deter legal entry into the united states with full funding for the 34,040 detention beds, 129 fugitive operation teams and the increased use of alternatives to detention. $4.4 billion for tsa to fund screening personnel, training equipment and other resources in support of more efficient and more traveler-friendly screening methods.

and $1.9 billion for the united states secret service, a $273 million increase to improve perimeter security of the white house or better training, and to cover the costs of several upcoming events including the 2016 presidential campaign. it's worth noting that the budget propose -- this proposal mirrors recommendations made by the united states secret service protection panel. and $818 million to protect and strengthen the government's ability to counter cyber attacks on critical information, technology systems and infrastructures. funds are included to care for at least 58,000 unaccompanied children, and i look forward to

hearing from you on the latest apprehension trends for whether the $162 million contingency fund is required. i want to commend you for making management reform a top priority. improving decision-making improving decision-making processes and strengthening back office functions is never easy, yet the department is making progress under your leadership. i am pleased to see many senior level vacancies have been filled. even gao gives dhs positive marks in their latest high-risk report. so thank you, and keep up the good work. for all that's good in this request, there are some problems. to begin with, 1.5 billion increase absorbs almost 75% of the non-defense discretionary spending available under the

limits of the budget control act of 2013. mr. secretary, the congress intends to live within the confines of the law even if the administration does not. as a result, i doubt dhs's budget will rise as steeply as the request proposes. within fema, a new $38 million climate change is proposed as well as state and local grant programs. across all dhs components, hiring front line personnel is not happening in a timely manner, resulting in large carryover balances. i.c.e. and secret service aren't keeping up attrition. nppd has major staff shortages, cbp continues to struggle to hire the 2,000 officers funded in fy-14. i understand only 700 are

currently on board. hiring problems doesn't just have -- doesn't have just budgetary implications. at dhs, an inadequate floor w: 5u ould lead to public safety concerns. mr. secretary, this is a problem we need to fix, and i think you're the man to do it. however, i would be remiss if i did not mention two major frustrations. last week in the press, i read that ice released 30,000 criminal aliens into the united states in communities in 2014. once again, the releases were made without notice to congress, and we don't know whether the releases endanger public safety. what really annoys me, however,

is that many criminals in their country of origin would not repatriate them, and that's a problem. we need to fix it. they were surprised by the release of approximately 36,000 criminal aliens. we had a pretty good discussion about that at the time. and 2014, dhs appropriations bill, we had language requiring the department to notify this subcommittee prior to the implementation of further releases. we had the same language in the 2015 dhs appropriations bill, yet your department gave us no notice until after the fact. this committee is concerned about the department's failure to inform us as required. quite honestly, as i've told you already, i'm getting real tired

of learning about these releases in the press rather than from the department as required. concerned about that. lastly, mr. secretary, you know that i'm completely opposed to the executive actions issued by a memo under your signature last december. those memos jeopardized the fy-15 conference agreement and transformed it from a law enforcement and public safety measure into a battleground for a fight between the executive and legislative branches of government. though the legitimate use of legislative process, the actions caused unnecessary decision and partisanship, and it is damaging dhs's mission to protect americans from terrorist threats and securing the border.

i directed this subcommittee staff to report to me on departmental actions that appear to violate the injunction issued by the federal district court in brownville, texas. i'm telling this to barbara, and as an attorney you know and i will that you will respect the authority of the court and that you will demand the same from your staff. with that, i would like to recognize ms. roybal-allard, our distinguished member, for any comments she might make. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good morning, mr. secretary. and welcome. i would like to commend you for your efforts of making the homeland security more cohesive and better focused on budgeting performance, joint requirements and acquisition best practices. those kinds of processes and capabilities are sometimes overlooked, but we understand they are ultimately the foundation for almost everything the department does and that you need to get them right.

your efforts are all the more compelling because they are the y:ç beginning of long-term endeavors, the full payoff which will likely be enjoyed not by you but as your successor as secretary. we have just come through a very difficult appropriations cycle for the department. frankly, congress is not doing its job when an agency's funding remains in legislative limbo for the first five months of a fiscal year. i know the basis for that delay was the disagreement over the legality of your immigration enforcement approach, even though the federal courts are the appropriate place to sort that out. and i hope we can avoid any repeat of unnecessary delays to appropriating your funding for fy-16. fiscal year 2016 net discretionary budget requests

for the department of homeland security is $41.4 billion as scored by the congressional budget office. this does not count funding building that does not count towards the cap. the total is 1.7 billion above the current level. a significant portion of that increase is needed for second-year funding and step increases for cbc personnel, addressing protecting mission panel recommendations and other needs of the secret service and for federal cybersecurity enhancements. much of the budget requests for the department seems well justified, but there are some areas where i am concerned about cuts, particularly for the grant programs. if the committee is forced to do its work within the constraints of the budgetary cap, we will be hard pressed to address the department's needs, funding grants and other purposes for the coming year. before i close, i want to try and frame the discussion we may have this morning about immigration. mr. secretary, we know you have

a tough job to do. and perhaps the toughest part is the enforcement of our immigration laws. it is tough because it exposes a tension between values we as americans hold dear. we are a country of laws and respect for the law is paramount to our democracy and our way of life. however, we are also a country that values human life, humane treatment of every individual and due process. we value keeping families together, protecting children, and we believe in second chances. while it is essential that we protect our borders and enforce our immigration laws, we must grant all people due process and treat them with fundamental human dignity and respect. and i hope in our discussion this morning, we can keep these american values in mind. mr. secretary, i look forward to your testimony and our

discussion today, and i look forward to continuing to work with you this year in support of the department's important missions. >> at this time i'll allow and yield to mr. rogers, chairman of the full committee for an opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, welcome again to these premises. i'm pleased we finally managed to pass a full year spending bill for your department to support our men and women on the front lines and bolster our critical security agencies and fund vigilant anti-terrorism and law enforcement efforts on our home turf. i'm absolutely committed to moving all 12 of our appropriations bills through the regular order process to ensure that we responsibly fund all federal agencies, including homeland. mr. secretary, in years past, my colleagues and i have expressed

disappointment in budget submissions from dhs that were political in nature, not reflective of the security needs of the country and chock full of budget gimmicks that made our job on the appropriations committee needlessly difficult with a few exceptions that i will highlight later. i am happy to say that i cannot make those criticisms about this budget submission after cbo scoring. the requests has a $1.7 billion increase of active levels, it includes active motions including a 98.8 million increase to support 2,270 border patrol agents, and essentially level funding for coast guard operations.