to that is that they are encouraging so far. let me give you a precise example. >> i don't want to know whether they're encouraging or not. what i want to know is are you on track to meet the 2% by the end of the year? >> they are encouraging right now. >> encouraging is not the -- >> i'll give you an example of why i say that okay? when you look at march of 2014 versus march of 2015, for instance, there were 8,000 more borrowers on fha insured loans. that's just a month to month comparison. we've seen, as the quarterly reports indicated, a significant uptake in refinancing. you have to understand this thing took effect january 26th. with the limited early data that we have, we believe that we are on track. however, we will not get an official number on this, the assessment, until around the thanksgiving time frame when that independent actuary gives us the report.

>> so i think the thing that is troubling, is -- and a lot of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle talk about safety net. to me, a safety net is you know something that provides -- to keep you from failing or falling or hurting yourself. so the safety net that we have today is just made out of string. and i think you would agree that if i had a safety net, i'd rather have one made out of rope. when you have $1 trillion of the taxpayers on the hook and you only have 0.41% equity the taxpayers are at risk. >> yeah. that's apples and oranges. you're conflating two things. that's not -- i don't think that's the way it works. >> i'm sorry mr. secretary, how is that apples and oranges? >> the capital reserve ratio is not a simple ratio on how how much money we have to pay claims. we have more than enough to handle the claims the losses that we have in front of us. the economic present value of

your liability. >> regular order, mr. chairman. >> the chairman can see the clock. chair now recognizes the gentle lady from new york, ms. velasquez. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. secretary, this hearing could not come at a better time. the house unfortunately just passed fy-16 spending bill. which, if enacted -- if enacted, will severely underfund virtually every hud program and jeopardize the housing stability of vulnerable americans. the shortage of affordable rental housing is a huge problem in new york. under the new analysis released this week, brought the severity of the problem home. between 2002 and 2014 rent in new york city rose by 32%.

citywide. even after the effects of inflation were removed. my question mr. secretary what will happen to working families like new york city if we do not have public housing? in new york city, we have 615,000 people who live in public housing and second 8. these are hard working people. i understand that if we want to tackle the issue of poverty, it takes investment. that if we want to tackle the issue of homelessness among veterans, it takes the role of the federal government.

and by the way i am proud to report that in new york city the number of homeless veterans in new york drops by 40% last year and declined 75% since 2012. why? because of vouchers and homeless assistant grants and because the city is putting also resources. that's what it takes. and so we want to tackle the issue of poverty in our country. and then we ask about what is it hud can demonstrate to show effectiveness of the industry? it takes an understanding that for the last 20 years, this one issue that really is impacting

americans. they're working harder they're working two and three jobs but there is one thing and that is wage stagnation. while the 1% is doing extremely well, the rest 99% rr are working harder and getting less. so mr. secretary if the funding bill that passed the house if enacted, how will this address hud to address the affordable housing price? >> if the bill becomes law, it will seriously injury, seriously damage our ability to meet the needs out there. as it is, as i mentioned earlier, we only serve one in four people right now who qualified for hud services. and a couple of weeks ago chairman like meyer had at his subcommittee a group of people to discuss public-private partnerships. which i think is a fruitful

conversation to have. it is was very clear that said if hud doesn't do these things who is going to do them? there is no private market to serve people who are extremely low income. and those are the vast majority of people that we serve. so whether it's traditional public housing or section 8 vouchers or rental assistance, we need to make an investment. if we don't what it means is more people out of the street more veterans who don't have a home. those are the huge issues that are on the table. >> so mr. secretary i would like to ask you about section three. i've been working on section three for many, many years when secretary donovan was there i introduced legislation. and i'm happy to see that some

of the provisions that were contained in my legislation are being reflected in the rule that you are putting out. but my question is if there is a tool that could empower residents in public housing in section three without the proper oversight and we found the proper training and investment, it's not going to work. >> thank you for that. i wanted to ask about the short time versus long time for a

lifetime myth shah exists with people utilizing hud and housing through you. he threw out a statistic of 5.4 years with families for teens. i don't know if that's accurate or where he got that. are you familiar with that statistic at all? >> yeah. that sounds about right, in the five-year range. i think what he -- and i guess ranking member cleburn is not here right now, however. what he was referring to is recall for these folks that we serve that are elderly or disabled, our goal is not just to get them in and out. so they have a longer period of average stay. >> i think that's completely different. but earlier, at the beginning, the chairman was asking you specifically about -- and you couldn't answer, whether we are tracking people from one pha as they exit that, presumably within that five-year time frame to what happens to them.

where do they go next? do they go to another public housing authority? do they maybe move to another state? do -- what do they do? and you couldn't provide that matrix. >> well, no i said that we will get information that we have on that. do i believe right now that we're tracking that as well as we would like to? the answer to that is no. >> it seems if we could dial it down, you would be able to make sure that people who are utilizing that service shifts to what is more of my concern which is how do we make sure that we have an opportunity economy that eliminates pofrd and breaks that cycle, that may exist? i was a former license realtor. i started my career in that.

some of my proudest moments that i was involved in weren't with big sales. my first listing was with a two-family house that was very transitional. a hispanic family on top that shafrd a one-bedroom apartment. in fact, will you is and alea are still friends today. and helping them transition into buying their own place. one that i talked about in this committee before is someone else who still remains a friend, jill, whose husband had left the family and she moved from a trailer park into her first home and i was able to help explain to her kids why and how important that was. literally, sitting here 20 years later i'm getting emotional and choked up because that really is why you exist. you don't exist to just make sure that we're taking care of people temporarily. you exist to make sure we are

taking care of people long-term. and i don't mean getting into your system and staying in your system. what is the opportunity? i'm afraid as i'm looking at this report, it seems the solution typically is to then throw more money at it. it's not only about subsidizing the market i would hope with section 8 or other things. it's, you know how do we make sure that as my colleague was starting to go at how do we make sure that the people that are providing that, that are building it, have some assurance and have some understanding of what the ground rules are or what the guide posts are so they're not going to get sued and they're not going to have these questions as they linger over there. that to me is i think vital. the other -- quickly, i want to hit in this remaining minute. on pager 8 and 9 are you

tracking that and can you please provide the matrix on that, as well. is this just web based? is this physical presence people are having from hud? what -- >> yes. >> explain this because that's $100 million that you are putting into there. >> that can provide a whole lot of housing. >>. >> let me say that i agree with you on the premise that for folks who are working age -- and this is what the law requires, that if they're not working they would pursue an education or be in job training. we want folks to be on a path to self-sufficiency. jobs plus does track. we do have numbers and we would

be glad to provide them. >> amen to that. i know my time is expired. i hope that you will get much much better at that and provide that to the committee. >> time of the gentleman has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas mr. hossa. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i ask unanimous consent that my opening statement and my questions be made a part of the record. i'm late for opening a meeting and i must leave. >> without objection, in that case, the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york mr. meeks for five minutes. >> thank you, ranking member mr. chairman. mr. second let me ask you wsh first, let me identify myself as a proud product of public housing. i don't know how my parents

would have done what they did without public housing. and then when you think about my friends, some now who are attorneys and, doctors and engineers, and pharmacists all products of public housing. but had it not been for that assistance so that they could move forward, i don't know whether any of us would be in positions that we're in. so i personally know the critical need and the important of public housing, giving families an opportunity to come together and to be successful in life. and i can't think of a greater investment that we as a country can makes on mistake especially when we're talking about and oftentimes when we're campaigning the average every day person and the poor person in making sure that they have a quality of life. there is nothing better than making sure that they have a decent roof over their head so a child can get an education in a

places that they can grow and become productive members of society. in new york i'm concerned because when i look at the budget that -- and the funding packages that the body is putting forward i can see that it fails to loss sequestration and folks, needed in the national housing month and it short changes several assistance programs with housing. i can see what's going on for a little while. our mayor recently released a new plan to revamp new york city's housing authority and to bring it back into a stable financial footing and to rebuild and expand and preserve public affordable housing. and the plan is dependent on

converting housing units to section 8. so as we move, you know, section 8 accounts for roughly two-thirds of your budget and as more public housing moves through section 8 through r.a.d., i'm wondering how does hud cope with such increased demands for communities across the country and how can cities like my city of new york plan for the future with the uncertainty around increased assistance to preserve federal housing stocks? >> you're correct that we need a certain level of confidence in that investment. r.a.d. is one way we have tried to stretch resources, that we engage with the private sector in this case so they can renovate those public housing units because the fact is we have a $26 billion backlog in

renovation needs in public housing. that is why we're requesting a couple of things in this budget, $50 million for that rearview mirror a.d. program. we're also requesting additional resources in terms of salary and expenses because the cap was lifted in fiscal year '15 to $185,000. we want to ensure that we can meet that demand. by the way, we already have applications for r.a.d. that are around 180,000. so it's a successful effort at getting interesting. public private sector collaboration. and on top of that what we see with r.a.d. is that we leverage for every $1 of public money we spend, we leverage of of $19 of private investment. we need to do it right.

>> as he move forward and we look, i'm worried about the underpinning of the public sector continuing what it needs to match the private sector. what happens to public housing? can you tell me -- >> i agree with you that if we're not careful, then the public sector won't even have the strength to engage the private sector so that we can fruitfully renovate or create new housing. that was the point that was made in the subcommittee hearing was that the private sector needs the public sector to do affordable housing. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. >> thank you for being here, mr.

castro. i want to make a note that homelessness doesn't just exist in urban america. for the last two years, we have held a homelessness and hunger summon in trying to bring in the stakeholders from across our rural community, trying to figure out how we can address this problem more effectively, trying to figure out where the bright spots are, what they do to more effectively tap into resources in the community, how they can more effective lyly tab into resources. i recalled note, though i do hear a lot about the rules and regulations, especially for small providers in our community

and it's -- listen if you're a one or two-person organization, it becomes incredibly difficult for them to navigate the rules and regulations. but i want to move beyond that. you're asking for more money. why do you need more public housing money? why do you need more section housing money when we've had improvements in the economy and in this space? >> well, the fact is, for instance, let's take our vouchers, we lost 67,000 vouchers. what we see out there is that we're able to serve one out of every four people who need it. >> but have we had an improvement in this space? those who are homeless. >> in homelessness, we have seen an improvement. and why was that?

>> but you're asking for that money. >> we dedicated more resources to it. hud vouchers, to the committee's credit, congress's credit and the president's leadership, the reason we have seen a reduction in veteran homelessness is because we invested in -- >> and i appreciate your comments on veterans and that's a nice number. but i -- >> then let's talk about folks who live in rural areas or tribal communities. >> let's talk about it as a whole, then. what success have you had of getting people not just into the system of public housing and section 8, but out of the system? and it goes back to the questions that the chairman asked, that you come and ask for more money but you can't sit here today and say, listen, you guys, there is what we're dining. we're bringing people in. they need help. we all want to help them. >> but that's fought true. i'll give you an example -- >> but here are the facts and the numbers of how we've moved people out of the space of public assistance and into

self-sufficiency. but if you don't track people, you don't know if the numbers that you give us are people who go from assistance to sustainability themselves or to another public housing authority. you can't actually give us the right numbers. and you're asking for more money. >> i gave an example earlier, a good -- >> i'm looking at numbers. >> a. example of what we've seen is through our jobs plus initiative that -- >> jobs plus is the 9% increase asked for by the president is that going to the programs that you say work like jobs plus? >> what we're asking is we're going -- >> across the board. >> we're going from $15 million to $100 million. that's what the request is. your question is -- mr. secretary, hold on a secretary. if you -- >> requesting jobs plus? of course not. >> so if you have programs that work jobs plus, i'm not arguing your stats on that. why aren't you saying, congress listen, let's talk about

programs that work that will take people off assistance and into the -- into sustainability. >> that is what i'm talking about. >> no, it's not. you're giving me a small section. is everybody -- the funding that asked for funding across the board, not to be driven into jobs plus not to programs that actually move people to sustainability. it gets back to your original point. i think you just success by how much money we spend. >> no, that is not true. the other day i was -- >> tell me the number -- hold on, there is my time. tell me the number with with regard to -- >> there was a group of -- >> hold on a second. >> order. regular order. >> mr. secretary, the time belongs to the gentleman from wisconsin. please add 10 seconds to the clock. >> if that's not how you judge your time or your success, tell me the percentage of people that go into section 8 housing and move out into self-sustainability. >> as i said earlier we would love to get you the information. >> you don't have the numbers on that. >> what i do know is we have --

>> my time. if you were judging success by getting people off assistance and into self-sustainability, you would be here today telling us those numbers. this is not how you judge success in your agency. >> representative i just did tell you some of that. >> you didn't give me the numbers. >> i did. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. sherman. >> mr. secretaries i want to recognize with you that housing programs are successful in every one of our districts, that a housing program has to chiefly be vaeltd on whether or not it provides housing. getting people off the streets and into housing is a good thing. whether or not they then get into a well paying job is a little bit outside of your department. i look forward working with the last gentleman to defeat fast

track so we can get the high paying jobs that will lead not only to successful housing programs but success frl economic futures for those you benefit. but i think it's -- it's wrong for us to say we're going to cut back on section 8 until you give us perfect numbers and until you establish that providing housing means somebody gets a good paying job, too. >> well, what i said is that -- that one outcome is -- and it's an important outcome is that somebody has a proof over their head. that is what the department of housing is for. we are first and foremost about housing. however, to the second question, do i believe that we should make investments and we are making investments that seek to get folks to a stronger track so that they can achieve the american dream? of course i do.

and should we look at the outcomes of that? yes, we should. and i think we can work together on that. but to say that it doesn't count at all that somebody has a roof over their head that's just ridiculous. >> well said and i -- i now want to move to fha and a couple of technical areas. where fha has a rule or a policy that clashes with another federal rule. and hope that fha moves in the direction of the other federal rule. the first example of this is with properties subject to transfer fees. now, 99% of transfer fees are terrible. thank you at fha for working to prohibit them. fhfa, which of course oversees fan fannie and freddie. instead of prohibiting all of them, they've only prohibited the 99 that are bad. the 1% that are helpful are

those that benefit the property that are a key to the business plan of homeowners associations and fund homeowners associations by a reasonable amount when the property is transferred. so i wonder whether you would look at a technical tweak to the fha regulations and see whether the fhfa's very similar regulations, but a little bit more nuances might be better for both similar federal programs. >> thank you very much for that question. we want to continue to play that countercyclical role and on top of that, we are interested where it makes sense and possible that encourages neighborhood stability and we are looking at

matching fhfa on this issue that you brought up. so we would love to follow up with you and with your staff on that and give you an update on what we're up to. >> it's similar agencies trying to carry out the same policy and they ought to have identical or close to identical roles. in this one case, your sister agency has a more sophisticated role. federal statute generally requires that you have to stop paying mortgage insurance once you have a 78% situation. you've got a situation where borrowers have to keep paying each other forever except if they don't, they to refinance. if they have to pay forever i'd say maybe you're going to get the money. but if you're not going to get the money if you're going to refinance, it's a lot of paperwork. and then it would be easier for

borrowers the they're trying to compare fha insurance with private insurance. if you were offering the same products. when you take a look at that. we are always, of course looking at how we can be sensitive to the continues out there. as you know, this life of loan issue came to pass. during the last few years, there is a need to do everything that we can to ensure that we built up our ru serves and we want to do what is prudent. always willing to look at this issue. >> thank you. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. king. >> thank you, mr. secretary. >> i admit that i was not here for the opening statement. i want to thank you for baggy here today.

and generally, when i ask a question, it's not written out, but this one i am going to read as it's written because there's a lot of specifics involved. in regards to west chester county in new york which is not in my district, but it's adjacent to it and the implications of what's going on in west chester could well impact my district. i'd like to ask a question. if you're saying you can answer it today, type. if you have to get back to me in writing, i would agreely appreciate that. i understand that in 20309, hud reached an out of court settlement with west chester county settle ago 2006 civil lawsuit alleging the county failed to consider race to fair and affordable housing and finally its analysis of impediments document which is filed with hud when seeking cbdg block grants. it's my understanding from talking to the west chester county officials, i would say at this stage i don't see this as being a partisan issue since the original settlement was the democratic county executive is

now being implemented by republican county executives. i don't see this as being a partisan issue. before you from talking to the county executive, he believes that the county is ahead of schedule and implementation of the settlement terms. 469 of the 750 required public housing units have been financed. 424 have building permits. and so far, the county has spent $37 million and leveraged another $112 million from different sources and at least $6 million was great upon. so you have 37 and 112. yet the county believes hud is not recognizing this progress. in response to a hud request, the county included in its analysis of impediments the examination of all of its 853 local zoning districts from all of its exclusionary practices based on race ethnicity and found none. each time in consideration of more data as requested by hud. the most recent ai was more than

700 pages and each time the conclusion that has been supported by an independent authority. hud, however disagreed with the county in 2011 and began cutting off housing grants. two kwns. can you say why hud as summarily rejected each of the eight analysis of impediments submitted by west chester county in the past six years and all entitlements that they are quote, affirmatively inquiring fair housing and in order to meet these fair housings grantees must conduct these. what is the average length and how often are they rejected and what is used to determine whether or not ai is acceptable and as i said, this case as it goes forward could have implications in my district and other districts in the region. and, again, any testimony you can give today. >> yeah. i appreciate very much the

opportunity to address this briefly. i would love to get back to you and your staff with the specifics on west chester. let me begin by saying that, of course, we take the issue of fair housing very seriously under the fair housing of 1968. it requires that the secretary further fair housing. there has been a tremendous amount of work that hud staff has done to try and resolve these issues. what i have told my staff is that, of course, there is a time when we're punitive and this is one of those cases that developed and went into litigation. but we often sooem seek what i call mission driven flexibility to work with communities to meet the goals of the programs, but also to ensure that they can

undertake feasible actions to get into compliance. having said that, i would like to get back with you on the specifics and an update on where we're at with regard to west chester because i know my staff has been working hard on that. >> and, again i don't recognize in west chester. i do know the officials up there, they believe they are attempting to comply in good faith. they don't feel hud is anling that. i'm not getting in the middle of this, but i think it's important we set some parameters because i know there are other pending actions in the region which could have an impact in my region. local government ves to try to comply and again there is very expensive and, again, it can be complicate. so whenever you can get back to me on it i would truly appreciate it. >> the time of the gentleman has expired at the request of the secretary. the committee will stand in recess for five minutes.

>> this weekend c-span partnered with comcast to learn about life in key west, florida. >> they found this how will house for sale. they bought it for $8,000 in 1931 and pauline converted this hayloft into his first formal writing studio. here he fell in love with fishing, how fast he was producing the work. he knocked out the first rough draft of a farewell to arms in just two weeks when arriving in key west. he once had a line that if you want to write start with one true sentence. for a true writer, each book should be a new beginning for he tries again for something that is beyond the payment. he should always try to

something that has never been done or that others have tried and failed. >> president truman regarded the big white house as the great white jail. he thought he was constantly under everyone's eye. so by coming to key west he could come with his closest staff, let down his hair. sometimes some of the staff would let their beards grow for a couple of days. they certainly at times used off color stories and they could visit back and forth without any strutny from the press. a case of hawaiian shirts to the president with the thought that if the president is wearing our shirt, we're going to sell a lot of shirts. so president truman wore those free shirts at first year and then organized what they called the loud shirt contest and that

was the official uniform of key west. >> watch all of our events from key west saturday at 5:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2's book tv and sunday afternoon on c-span3. >> now, energy secretary earnest monise testifies outlining the findings of the administration's quad republicanal energy review. this report provides modernizations for the infrastructure. it calls for billions of dollars in federal spending to improve pipelines, electric grid, transmission lines and energy storage capacity. the hearing included discussions on proposed energy legislation and the potential for u.s. oil exports. this is about two hours and 30 minutes. >> i'd like to call the allergy to order this morning and the

title today is the hearing on the quadrennial energy review and related discussions. we'll have two panel of witnesses this morning. and, of course, on the first panel, we have our secretary of energy, mr. moniz, who is no stranger to this committee. or to congress. so we appreciate him being with us so much. look forward to his opening statement. and then we'll have some questions relating to his testimony as well as other issues. and at this time, i'd like to recognize myself for five minutes for an opening statement. everyone is very much aware that this subcommittee and the congress has been working on a bipartisan energy bill for several months now. many people are even asking -- not surprisingly is there enough common ground between our

efforts and the obama administration to enact meaningful energy legislation? and i do believe that this question was answered with a clear yes when the department of energy's first installment of its quad deny rennial energy review was released last april. this detailed study focuses on the infrastructure implications of america's new energy boom and many of its recommendations overlap with provision ss of our draft energy bill. and so we are excited that mr. moniz is here today so that we can explore the perspective of the department of energy as the country makes dramatic changes in its energy distribution production, transmission system. we have a lot of infrastructure needs. we are focusing on the diplomatic -- diplomacy aspects

of energy which is becoming more and more important to our friends in the european union who find themselves reliant on natural gas coming from russia. and so we have many opportunities in the united states to come forth with a good energy policy. and i think that most of the provisions that we're focused on in this energy bill, democrats and republicans agree that they need to be addressed. and one of the biggest is infrastructure needs and trying to improve the permitting process for an example. so i look forward to the testimony of all of our witnesses today. and we have a real opportunity here and we don't want to drop this ball. so we're getting close to the end of drafting this legislation, coming up with a final product, and we look forward to moving it in a meaningful way. and at this time, i'd like to

recognize the gentleman from illinois, mr. rush, for his opening statement. >> i want to thank you, mr. chairman, for holding this important hearing to be able to lay on qer and as well as on a variety of other energy issues covered in the discussion. mr. chairman let me first begin by welcoming the honorable and distinguished secretary of energy, mr. moniz, here to the subcommittee. welcome, mr. secretary. mr. secretary, let me commend you for the outstanding work you have been involved in on a myriad of different issues all important to the american people. mr. chairman, with -- mr. secretary, you might not accept this. you might not -- you might think that this is not something that you think, but in my mind and in the mind of a number of my constituents, you are indeed a superstar secretary.

we are proud of your work on behalf of our nation. mr. secretary from your leadership in the historic nuclear talks of iran to establishing the much needed minority and energy initiative at doe to the development of the comprehensive qer, among your more important accomplishments and i have no doubt that you will go down as one of the most significant and effective energy secretaries of modern times. you see i'm a fan mr. secretary. mr. secretary, as you made me aware, i have a bill that i would soon be introducing that will amend the department of energy organization act to replace the current requirem for a byannual energy policy

plan with quadrennial energy review. it is my hope that this bill like its senate counterpart that was recently introduced my secretary kunz of delaware as senator alexander of tennessee will attract my partisan support. in fact, mr. secretary, i have held on -- introduce the bill as of yet so my office can continue to hold talks with a in order in order to find language that both sides can agree on. and mr. chairman, i will continue to reach across the aisle for support on this nonpartisan issue of kwod phiing energy review and i hope that we can find common ground. mr. chairman in qer, addresses many areas that are coming in

the discussion draft of the comprehensive energy bill we have all been working on. issues such as increasing the resilience reliability and safety are discussed in both passages. initially, there are many similarities in qer regarding integrating north american energy department, modernizing the grid and enhancing employment and workforce training. how far mr. chairman there's still much work to be done in bridging the gap in areas where there is some disagreement such as in signing and permitting and addressing the environmental aspect of transportation -- of transmission storage and distribution infrastructure. specifically in the discussion

before today, i have some concerns regarding the cross border approval process described in second 3104. under this section, the burden is shifted away from companies and on to agency officials to issue so-called -- of crossing unless the official finds the project -- and i quote -- is not in the public interests of the united states. another concern that i have, mr. chairman, is in second 2102 set up an interagency task force to evaluate north american energy flows. however, the past is missing representatives from the council on environmental quality the environmental protection agency as well as the department of

interior or transportation among others who weigh in on environmental issues. mr. chairman, as we move forward with the goal of putting forth a truly bipartisan energy bill, it is my hope that a majority will work to find common ground for most of these issues and put precedence and join the right thing above joining quickly. mr. chairman i thank you and i yield back the amount of my time. >> thank you, mr. rush for that opening statement. at this time i'd like to recognize the chairman of the full million, mr. upton for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. i just want to say in response to mr. rush's comments i look forward to working with him and mr. palone to do this right. and i appreciate those kind words. we're delighted to work back

secretary moniz so work on the first installment of the -- that focused on energy transport. america's energy structure is rapidly changing and our laws need to change with it. it has erased by rap idealy rising oil and natural gas production. 2013 alone, the u.s. added 1.2 million barrels per day of oil production, a record increase by one country in one year. the record production of natural gas and related liquids has experienced equally dramatic rises in recent years. unfortunately the scarcity mind-set is still embedded in our energy policy. what i have called the architecture of abundance. both the energy legislation and the qer include a number of

ideas for upgrading and expanding the nation's energy infrastructure. and in light of the recent pipeline spill in california, i would add both im to ensure that this new infrastructure is built with state of the art technologies that reduce the environmental and safety risks. but our energy abundance can be more than just an economic success story. it indeed can be a foreign policy success story, as well. and that's why recently released discussion draft of our energy demroemsy title is to responsibility. the discussion draft deals with the numerous hearings over the last couple of years. we've heard from many of our allies around the globe who said they would rather get their natural gas from us than the likes of russia or iran. that message was underscored last month when i led a high level delegation to serve of our european allies, including

ukraine. we came away from a profound new understanding of just how vital these new partnerships can be. in established parts of the eu, leaders are coming together to promote a unified energy market because of its potential for security affordability and affordation. in ukraine where the committee to freedom and democracy is hard fought each and every day, their energy aspirations are fundamental for their dreams for a peaceful future. while our discussion draft encourages north american cooperation and cross border infrastructure opportunities for energy demroemsy extend well beyond our own continent. for example, there is broad recognition that the exports will benefit the u.s. economy, our consumers and yes, our allies. while the same could be said for oil exports a statutory ban has prevented us from pursuing these benefits for the last four decades and it's time that congress considers revising the ban on crude oil exports.

as with natural gas, america now has enough oil production to make energy export feasible, including the lighter grade notes the most rapid supply increases. economic and foreign experts across the spectrum believe expanding markets for american oil would be a net jobs creator at home. and at the same time reports from gao, cbo and energy information administration all point to reductions in the price of gas as a result of increased oil exports. oil equities ports can bexports can be a win for the american people and its allies. it has been the most significant job creator in recent years. but with the drop in oil prices, as many at 100,000 energy positions have been lost. the case for creating more jobs by expanding the market is the key reason why oil exports should be on this committee's

agenda this year. and while we're not currently considering any such provisions in this legislation, i do look forward to working with my good friend, mr. parton, and others on both sides of the aisle to ensure that we get the policy right. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back at this time recognize the gentleman from new jersey, mr. palone for five minutes. >> thank you, chairman woodfield and ranking member rush. let me begin by welcoming secretary moniz back to the committee and congratulating you on completing the first installment of the quadrennial energy review. its recommendations will help us chart a path forward in the rapidly changing energy sector. this installment relates to the transportation storage and distribution of energy. these ts and d connections between suppliers and users can impact our energy reliability and security and affect our

ability to meet environmental and economic goals. ts&d infrastructure is vulnerable to a wide and expanding array of threats to natural disasters to physical and sign er attacks it's important that we understand these vulnerabilities and how to mitigate their act xwas. at the same time, its modernization can help meaningful greenhouse reductions and our environmental goals while enhanceing safety, security and reliability. ultimately, the oer represents the forward thinking we need to ensure a smarter more resilient, cost-effective and environmentally sound energy system for the future and you look forward to working with you, mr. secretary to translate these important ideas into legislation and law. i wish i could be as upbeat in the discussion draft. rather than building on the strong relg relationships with our north american neighbors the majority has chosen to resurrect controversial legislative proposals that have

drawn democratic concerns and presidential veto threats. for example, the bill would eliminate the current presidential permitting process for liquid and gas pipelines and electric transmission lines across the u.s. border with mexico and canada and it replaces the process with one that effectively rubber stamps permit applicationes and eliminates any meaningful environmental review. now it would only take effect after president obama leaves office and specifically excludes the keystone pipeline, it still appears to allow trans-canada to avail itself of the new process by reapply a revised route. incident limits environmental review to a small segment of the environment that physically crosses the national border. it creates an assumption that the projects are in the public interest shifting the burden of proof to project opponents. this all but guarantees permit approval and virtually

eliminates the opportunity for protective permit conditions. the draft bill also recycles lng export language designed to address nonexistent delays at the department of energy. in fact, doe recently testified, and i quote, right now, there are zero applicants sitting in front of us for a decision. the last application that came out, we turned that around in one day. nonetheless, the bill would make changes to an otherwise success frl process. finally, another provision would create a task force burdening federal energy regulatory actions with additional red tape and undermining considerations. in fact, it speaks volumes that the very agency is tasked with natural resource and environmental resource like epa and doi are excluded from the task force. so i hope this committee can start to work towards consensus legislation instead of resurrecting problematic issues of the past. but thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. that concludes the opening

statements for today and, mr. secretary, once again thank you for joining us. we do look forward to your insight on these important issues. i'd like to recognize you for five minutes for your opening statement. >> well, thank you chairman upton and woodfield and -- >> i'm not sure the microphone is on but -- >> the light is -- yep. okay. start again. okay. again, chairman upton and whitfield and ranking members palone and rush distinguished members of this subcommit, thank you for the opportunity to be with you today and i really appreciate the leadership this committee has shown in working towards comprehensive and bipartisan energy legislation that includes many of the topics in the qer first installment. i look forward to working with you to move these ideas forward. and really appreciate in the opening remarks the statements

about common ground and the opportunities we have to work together. as was already stated, the u.s. has reaped enormous benefits from our energy revolution the last several years which i point out includes hydro kap carbon production, but dramatically increased renewables to energy productivity gains. this revolution has produced changes that are challenging our energy infrastructure and to be direct, we need to modernize and transform our energy infrastructures and our shared commodity infrastructures. this will really major new investmentes and we have to get it right. we should knowledge ta while the choice he we make and the decisions we take today in the near future are critical, we also have to acknowledge that the choices and divisions that we fail to take in a timely way are very important for generating our infrastructure for the 21st century.

to help guide these investment choices, the qer provides recommendations based on a 15-month recommendation process that included 14 public meetings across the country in consultations can canada and mexico. the qer focuses on ts&d included the network of pipelines wires storage, railroads and our facilities that form the backbone of our energy system. i ask the chairman's permission to submit the summary version of the qer. let me take the opportunity to highlight five crucial task that's we need to take. first, our infrastructure investments must serve energy security in a broader sense than the oil sent rick focus of the last several decades. an example is found in the definition of energy security that the u.s. and our g-7 allies developed after the russian

aggression towards ukraine. supply diverseifyicationdiversification, for sure, but transparent markets, greenhouse gas ee mrigzs reductions enhanced efficiency clean energy infrastructure modernization and emergency response. this doesn't mean that global oil disruptions are not a concern. indeed in the context of the qer and its recommendations modernizing the spro, both from a physical distribution standpoint as well as the authorities for its use is a major area of focus. through its analysis of resilience and infrastructure modernization, the qer goes beyond global oil supply disruptions as the single focus of energy security policy leading, for example, to recommendations related to regional fuel disruptions as we have seen across the country. more coordinated state planning is also essential and most notably, we feel that state planning grants to help states update and expand their emergency repairedness and security strategies and exercises to enhance electricity

reliability, to accommodate several changing factors are all critical. other ways to improve energy security improve programs to make our energy instructs more resilient to a range of hazards and vulnerabilities, these are addressed in part for a predisaster hardening grant program, options for transformer reserves and a systemic program to replace aging, unsafe natural gas distribution pipes. second, here we are in its recommendations, underscore the indispensable role of states. these really are test beds. we need to advance studies such as a new framework for evaluating energy services to help things like rate structure development. third, the qer analysis showcases the importance of complexity of how our energy revolution chaings challenges are shared transport infrastructures.

frankly, when we started the qer, we did not anticipate that we would end up with this as a major area of focus. however, the dramatic oil production increases in unconventional locations coupled with things like the rfs and spending exports of natural gas, have placed strains on those transport infrastructures, rail, barge, locks port facilities and the like. the qer includes recommendations focused on innovative funding mechanisms for these infrastructures and, for example, recommends a program for port connecters being stressed by new energy supplies.