today or would do differently? >> the number one thing is the mentor problem broke -- the men. if you don't have follow up in the field, the skills that they've learned will disappear. .

>> we bring law-enforcement personnel to be the instructors. for the field mentor's we tried to get a balance of people who have law enforcement background as well as military backgrounds because it is a much more rigorous environment. compared to the military instructors, that is a critical and -- a critical component. the limitations come down to the laws dealing with it the international traffic in arms regulations. as we want to modify the curriculum at a rapid pace than the rules governing contractors are much more restrictive than of the military. >> the continuity factor. many of our personnel have been underground for quite a bit of time.

the rotate personnel in and out. it would help smooth out that thought. we also provide shortage of skills if they happen to have any. we can adapt. we can react and be very flexible as the need to change out skills sets. we can work with our contract think to do that. >> you are one that does not necessarily believe that the military can train military better than contractors? you do not have to answer that. >> i would love to know the answer to that. he smiled. >> ok, answer it. >> whether or not the military can train better -- >> whether the military can train military forces better

than contractors. >> i think the military as a fantastic job. i do think that contractors to have something to offer, also. in many cases we have experience. >> that is a very diplomatic answer. basic police training? >> yes, sir. my personal opinion is the army is not a core competency for training police or to train law enforcement officials. when you have a contractor and is a professional, dedicated law-enforcement officer that is there to provide that training i think it is a plus. armiger not equipped to do please train and -- our army is not equipped to do police training. they're dealing with police

chief and officials in the have established those relationships. i think the benefits -- we cannot away with them. i those are the two most important things. i cannot come up with a limitation 3 >> i am sure you could not. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. chairman. your statement has a generic, about the -- not about this specific situation. when developing training and mentoring programs excluding industry experts will not provide best practices or best values. i took a look at the top 10 contractors this year in afghanistan. this is my own data not from an

agency or from the commission. your contract, your civpol contract, is no. is no. 6 -- is no. 6. what interested me is that the same type of vehicle you are on and that the next contract will be on is out of the 10, five are also using that. there is not full and open competition but among all limited competition, idiq. 3 i would have to put a question mark next to. the data given to me was not telling. with you explain what you meantr

that contract vehicles excluding the industry experts will not provide best practice or best value? to some extent, that goes against the we have been hearing for a number years -- a number of years about how going towards limited competition, idiq, is the way of the future. >> let me try to address this for the specific contract and situation we are currently in. currently, -- >> why can't you may get generic? what is after we've specifically? >> i thought that was the question, sir. the question was about the contract. my statement was about the contract. >> i am going to be uneasy if we start getting into this specific contract. i am not going to allow us to have that discussion. we will not have it.

you can talk generically about the issue. >> commissioner, my opinion based on the performance of the employees that we have had on the ground, we have demonstrated our subject matter expertise and the performance we have had with training been afghan national police. by not permitting those that have the work to date and are performing to continue that work, why you see my statement that you just read. >> if a different vehicle were used, the previous panel was asked and another of the competitors on the civilian police vehicle witches cpi, would you agree that would be beneficial, too?

>> in generic terms, i think the taxpayer is better served when there is full and open competition for the value of a contract. >> ok. again, in generic terms, i am a government contract professor so i think i can keep this incomprehensible if nothing else. when there is a protest, although it is possible for the military to save there are urgent and compelling reasons not to stay but to go ahead, in general, will it not be open to the incumbent? this is a chess game. there are only a limited number of moves. isn't it a frequent move for the incumbent to say that you could just extend the time a couple of

months that we continue performing opera -- on the contracts. that is why there is not encouraged in the compelling situation. isn't that standard? assuming the incumbent has not been told you have shortcomings. which is usually not the case. >> commissioner, i am not sure if i understand the question you are asking. >> i can ask a different way. >> i think you are asking me if the incumbent can make the case. >> yes. >> my answer to that is that the incumbent could make the case. >> we have a two month extension of your contract in this situation, yes? that is a fact. what's right now, the task order ends 31 january. i just submitted a de-mob

ilization transition that extends to 31 and march which gives as a two month transition period -- gives us a two month transition. >> would you normally provide performance information if you had it? do you have -- and you would know if you have because the black water is in the nature that the contractor is given an opportunity to put in a response, on the most important contract had in iraq, the personal security contract, the vehicle is on is the wpps -- do you have performance information on that contract? >> yes, we do.

it is generally good on that contract. we have transmissions from years ago, but the performance under the contract in iraq, on a whole, we have a performed, i believe, admirably and effectively. that was in accordance with the scope of the work on the contract. >> when the information was developed, did this cover the incidents which is so alienated the iraqi government that they were unwilling to license you to stay? it took awhile to be able to do that, but when they could they refuse to license you to continue. didn't the past performance information include the incident where the 17 civilians were killed and five or six

employees of -- >> past performance of what? >> it to what? in other words, what are you asking me? the past performance in what contract? >> the contract on the wpps vehicle which was the task order in iraq. >> i believe that information, between us and the government, is a protected items. if it is not we will provided to the commission. i think the report that was done after the incident, it was found that the company was not responsible, as a company. there were individual actions being looked at. i think the report is well looked at from the perspective of having personal, department of state personnel, in the

convoy. >> let me follow it up. i am not asking what you submitted in the current contract in process. i am asking when you filled out the exchange with the contract and officer concerning what they would give you for the future past performance information. it is put into a computer system, but the state does not. i would appreciate you -- i am not asking you to provide when you have given on the sitting process. i am asking if you have received and dealt with this in the past. was it in the best interest of the united states to continue your contract? that was left as a question by the report. i do not know what the state department's view is and i do not know it from the report. if you would provide that, i would take my time. >> it gentleman, i want some

short answers. -- gentleman, i want some short answers. i would like to know the difference between being a contractor in iraq and afghanistan. if you could cite some differences, i would appreciate it. what is the difference? is there any? does the government treat you differently? number two, is the challenge of being in afghanistan different than being in iraq in a noticeable way for providing the same service needed? could you start us out? >> there are differences. the security situation in iraq for a while was different than this it -- the security situation in afghanistan. we are seeing some of that in iraq, but that was the difference. the traders, the trainees, the literacy rate was obviously different and in afghanistan.

we have a 12 week program in iraq. we have an 8 week program in afghanistan. >> you have a 12 week program and those individuals tend to be literate verses aliterate. they tended to have a the but more and come -- more income. they were not in this deep poverty you saw in afghanistan. you are saying it was 12 obverses eight. interesting. -- 12 versus 8. >> the same officer oversees both. we have a number of those who oversee the contract. beyond that -- >> i am sorry. i am trying to move quick here. >> i can only speak to afghanistan.

>> we do not have training contracts in iraq. >> you are in both theaters, correct? >> yes. the developing government after the invasion took a while to take place so the process and procedures you would normally see in the government, even just customs clearances and the like, were much more different. in afghanistan they were more structured, at least in our view. that assisted greatly in the process. the other thing is the licensing process. there was an established structure. the have changed over time and allowed a more orderly process for licensing. last, from a government perspective, from our interaction with them, we had a different role in iraq with

protecting diplomatic security. >> let me ask this question. i would like to know your capability to impact policy given that you have information that should be able to influence policy. for instance, and i would like to know if this is different in iraq verses afghanistan, if i were a trader atrainer, -- a trainer, i would be saying there are corruption and a lot of places. he cannot have corruption the police and military because they are your fourth line of defense. i would be saying to the policymakers, wouldn't it be nice to have a loyal army? you have been -- what is your

capability of influence in afghanistan? who would you talk to? can you talk to the afghan government? can you talk to the american government? timmy, that is a key issue. it makes everything you do succeed or fail. -- to me, that is a key issue. >> mr. chairman, our points of contact or entry is purely for the state department. i cannot talk about how i can influence or we can influence policy. we do provide information whether we think the training is going well, if there needs to be changes, what ever we think is going on with the program. we can and do provide that information both to our customer, inl, and to the end user in both countries. i cannot comment what happens with that information and

developing policies. >> can you respond? do you understand the question? >> i can talk about afghanistan. we are embedded in the military. when we mentor training at the ministry level, we are influencing policy. our influence is working together with them. it is not an individual basis where we would walk in and influence. we work with the military on influencing. >> i think an example would be at the adp and our interaction with the senior officers. we do not have a formal mentoring world. in discussions with them, and you can get feedback on how we see their forces working, and then instituting policy down there chain of command, things

like holding their personnel to a greater accountabilityxd, thee push for better accountability and not having the corruption they have today. i think that involvement, our company's involvement, has helped. >> what i am saying is this. you are taking the place of government employees who might have the capability to have ñiaccess. if you are in the government and charged with doing something, you go to your boss and say i cannot get the job done because we can retain police because they are not getting paid. their morale is down and they are not listening. i am wondering if you inherit in -- if you do not have the capability, i am wondering as a commission member if they're not to be certain rights or opportunities or obligations that enable you to pass on information.

çói am absolutely convinced if e could get rid of the corruption's that we would have a lot more loyal police and army that would be much more willing to sign on. some police did not even know they had a pay raise. ñrlet me ask you about the appes process in general. you have been on both sides. do you believe that we can speed up the process? first off, let me ask you this. have you been in any instances where the process was speeded up by the government where they move forward and said they needed to move? have you had any cases? either you or another contractor could resolve the is you sooner.

>> in my former role we were responsible for been a large procurements for guard at military bases. we had multipleñr protests and e did multiple process overrides. the process -- the process override process is very structured in this service dependent. it goes to a pretty high and level. a pretty high level. might it allows, and there are two protests. there are award and pre-award protests. post-award has limitations on performance. they can do it themselves and it allows them to either award the

contract or to perform the service. >> can any of your answer this. i want to know how you think about this process? do you think the government needs the option? >> absolutely. >> yes. >> yes, sir. >> my questions are not company's pacific but i would also like to ask you to be certain questions about essentially the role of contractors operating in a wartime environment. first of all, i would like to extend my appreciation to all of you for the work that you do and recognize when we get into the field with robert bass's work in the theater and you meet contractor personnel doing the day-to-day work in support of our military and our security objectives, we get an education and learn about a lot of well motivated people during a tough

job under difficult circumstances. that being said, there is also the business of accountability for government contractors operating in the war zone. this means having adequate oversight, contrasting representatives available to monitor your work, having a defense contract agency and the joint command and doing the things they need to do. but i would like no from each of you is that, in your judgment the amount of oversight required for contractors to perform in the field, do we have it about right? are there not enough personnel to interface with you and give you the guidance and support that you need? what are the issues is who the -- associated with the business of government oversight of your activities in theater? i will go down the line. >> we do and currently have -- do not hold me to the numbers.

i think there are four in iraq. right now, i think it is four or five boeing 27 or 8 in afghanistan. from myxd viewpoint, we have the oversight -- going to 7 or 8 in afghanistan. >> we have one in the country. i mean the interface with that individual. in the past six months, there was a system into place to observe and reportçó back to thr staff and captor evaluation of our performance. ñr-- to capture each evaluation. there is formal oversight that goes on consistently.

>> thinking. >> i think there are two aspects of oversight, formal contract oversight, and i think in our case that putting -- they are putting more people in place. ñiçóthe more informal and less structuredñr is adequate. xd>> thank you. let me ask in terms of, and we have had some discussion about contractors having the rule to identify better practices and finding ways toñi streamline, improved, save costs, avoid duplication, etc. in your experiences, the you have examples where you have offered up and contributed new and better ways to do things to save money and improve operations? >> sir, i do not have that

information with me to provide examples. as i mentioned earlier, we have the capability when it comes to the day-to-day training in how we do things and how we can do things better. we provide that information to the inl and end users. >> a position or function cut -- when a position becomes no longer needed, they can go back to a contract official in aberdeen and eliminate the position. if the decision is just listed as not being filled because there is a request for a new requirement at the same skill level, they can then reactivate that. >> if you fell one was not needed, you would indicate?

>> we have had discussions on that. when they come to me with the requirement, we discuss what they're looking at. >> probably a good example is how we have dealt with some of the illiteracy programs as well as the linguistic barrier and that is to utilize video modular training. make sure it is available and functions as a tool for remedial training and training instructors. >> my next question has to do with skill and ability. -- scalability. there will be a corresponding

increase for support for the new surge in troops. what are the issues and challenges building of a contractor workforce by some accounts could run anywhere from an additional 30,000 tooth 56,000. what should we be looking at in making sure our resources are used well? is it doable to build up 30,000? how you doing and what are the issues? >> i will address the police side of that. i am not sure i have the fidelity or the clarity with what they're going to do with training the afghan national police. as i see the buildup, as i mentioned earlier, i think the important pieces of being able to drive additional resources

from the grass-roots level, we have the capability to be able to ramp up with the military as they choose to the portions of the force. i think it is doable over time. yes, sir. >> thank you. >> we are fighting on the ground right now. the forces in the theater make sure there are no redundancy with the field of forces. that is something we look at with the command. physicians can be moved or eliminated. -- positions can be moved. >> there are two arguments. there is getting the personnel into the theater as well as the staging and moving them to the various locations. i think there is a significant

number of personnel available to do this based on the people we see that applied. the people that we seeçó that express interest in going. life-support downrange in the capacity to maintain the larger group because you have a short term requirement based on your objectives. >> thank you. >> mr. green. >> could you provide us a breakdown of what training is being provided in iraq that is not being provided in afghanistan for basic police training?

>> i'm going to be wanting to ask questions about how you respond to contractors who are wounded and those who have been killed and what benefits they received from your companies. ñ+wyou have the floor. >> i want to pick up from the questions under the existing statutes. mr. roitz, you describe your significant experience in doing these things. i think what you were talking about and you were nodding yes to, and the competition in contracting act under the last 20 years, there's been a sufficiently high level officials say there are hurting and compelling reasons to

override the state. the contrasting for process goes forward. is that thought -- is that what you thought you were being asked? >> i think the government needs the right to do a protest over rights to continue, especially in wartime, to meet the requirements of the mission. >> and you are talking about the existing statute that has been there for 25 years? >> i do not know how long it has been in place. >> 1984. >> you two were also nodding yes. >> this is above my responsibilities. i am not familiar with the act. >> do you believe the government should have the right to short circuit a system?

ok. >> sir, i am also not familiar with the statute. i think the government in emergencies ought to have that capability. >> are you asking for change in the laws? >> no, i think they should have a right which was the question i was asked to override the capability. >> ok. we have had a lot bit of processes that have been kansas and about the quality and the need for the afghan and national police training program he had not simply to crank out people to keep the quality high even if there are pressures for a more

rapid a process. let me ask you. i think your statement has a couple of statements. as far as barriers, we talked about literacy. you mentioned other things besides literacy. how would lowering the quality of the program leave them unable to deal with corruption, drug use, and the 26% saour attrition rate? >> my comment on the record about quality of is that right now the training we provide in the eight week training program xdis, in my view, basic training that we should not and cannot walk away from if we are going to lead the afghanis ñiwith a lw

enforcement capability. we should not move away from that. that is, in my view, the minimal law-enforcement training that needs to be provided every single day. that is my point on quality. the issues we have with corruption and literacy, we have worked very hard. we have worked very hard to take a program of instruction and take it to a hands-on training where we are viewing the have received it, understanding it, and it is hands-on. the literacy peace is not going to go away. >> from the other side,ñi the afghan national police force of 160,000. >> that has not been agreed to.

>> i stand corrected. the recommendation of the gold. region of the goal. i have no doubt that whatever contractor, whoever it is, will stay loyal -- will say loyally they will do what they're called on to do. i'm asking in the difficulty, i see that you have stated as a lesson learned simply increasing the number of recruits and reducing the training cycle will not solve the needs long term. what will happen if you simply increase the number of recruits up to what it takes to get to 160,000 and you reduce the training cycle from eight weeks to six weeks as we heard has

been discussed. what would be the effect of doing that? >> sir, my opinion -- the issue of quality and quantity is two points. you have to do one up -- one of two things. you either have to increase our capacity of the training centers or you have to reduce the program of instruction that you give. those are the two variables you have to deal with. if in fact you reduce the program of instruction which gets to calling. the panel before me talked about not reducing the timeline that actually shrunk by making them work longer each day. i do not know the numbers being recommended. currently, the capacity that they had in the regional training centers training at full capacity for a full year

using 50 weeks, i think you can only get 60,000 to pick 70,000. -- 60,000 to 70,000. if you shrink the course and you pull skills out, and you're going to end up with someone who is not trained well enough in law enforcement. if the strategy is because of the insurgency and needs something more like a our military, then so be it. as long as we understand that at the end of the day, whatever that is, you may not have a trained police force. you will have a paramilitary force. >> am i right that your understanding of what the afghan people want from your program is not merely paramilitary but those policing skills that you try to speak -- try to teach.

>> i cannot speak for the afghan people. they can look at them and say these are people who are here to protect and serve. >> @ thank you for allowing me the time, mr. chairman. >> i thank you for your question. >> i really have one more question which is contract related. it also deals with your experience in theater. it has to do with a concept that is developing and in some places we may be competing with ourself. recording for afghan national police and the army has been a challenge. is part of that because the government is awarding contracts for logistics services,

reconstruction services, and other activities in essence to create a competitive job market. we could potentially be paying more for afghans to be providers of the services they and to serve in the national police or army. from your experience, and you have any indication of that kind of phenomenon? -- do you have any indication? >> no, i do not. >> i do not have metrics. i do know there is a competition, especially if you have someone who goes to police training and is successful. there's the competition of other security companies, other opportunities that pay more than as a police officer. when you see the rate, i do not have part numbers for you, sir.

>> thank you. >> gentleman, if you would be able to respond to the question of the dead and wounded. when we were writing the statement, our staff could not give us specific numbers of the numbers of contractors winded and killed in afghanistan and iraq. that is stunning. in many instances, they are former military personnel. somehow it does not seem as important, evidently. i would like you to speak about that. how can we get an accurate number? how can we make sure they are respected like anyone else who has lost their life serving their country? >> mr. chairman, that is not true for dyncorp. we have lost -- >> i think every contractor

knows. the question is, are you aware of any place that this information is collected? >> i do not know. i can tell you that, as you have heard, we do take it very seriously. people are our most important asset. we do have a civilian employee assistance program that we have internally. >> that is the question i was leading to. >would you specifically, if one of your employees is wounded -- >> the military has a family assistance program. i mentioned -- we make injury visits. we explain the d.b.a. process.

we sponsor memorials for these family members. we meet with them annually. they have an open dialogue with our assistance program office. they handle the challenges of death or severe injuries to help work their way through. we do not have all the answers, but we have a program that we now know what else has to assist. >> what happens if the injury is something they carry with them for the rest of their life? >> we work with that through the d.b.a. process and insurance is there. the assistance we give is to help them to understand because it is complicated and -- complicated. >> we have had a number of people we have had to medevac through germany.

which is that through four -- is that true for all contractors? they go through germany? >> we -- there are a number of ways. depending on the severity of the injury is decided. >> is that your decision or someone else's? >> it is a medical decision. >> the final point is we have lost two individuals. it has been a dual action. >> we have a very similar program with the casualty assistance office. they make official notifications to the families in the event of

death or injury. we have lost 35 people. we have a memorial garden with stones with names on them. that is part of the indoctrination process for the people who come to deploy to understand the significant sacrifices the others have made. >> let me talk about injury. you have employees that are american citizens, european, third-world, indigenous. do you keep track of all of them or just americans? >> i believe we keep track of what we consider ex-pats which are foreign nationals who from europe freed third country nationals, we really do not have interaction with the families. -- from europe.

third country nationals, we do not have interaction. >> do you have something in your contract lines out how you treat the wounded? >> it is part of proposals because it is an important part of the contract. >> in terms of your seeking to recruit, i would think they would want to know what benefits and how the family is treated. i am assuming that is true. i found this panel very helpful and i appreciate the questions. i do not think we are doing enough asking all of you in a public forum when you were dealing with. i would like to see us do more of that. i am struck by the 12-8 we training's -- weekñi trainings

that puts my antenna up. çóif we do not deal with reality and just deal with how we things want them to be, we will not succeed in the wrong -- in the long run. i wrestle with the fact that we want the military to be the ti [ but then we have contractors -- with the military to be a the tip of the spear. contractors cover up a flaw in our military or state where that should be done by the military or state but somehow it is not. we are not as aware of it. those are the kinds of things that the commission wrestles with, as well. i would invite any closing comments. >> to reemphasize the 8 versus 12, not to be a dead horse, but

i think you hit on it. is there going to change at all to work in the war counter insurgency type instruction, it is even more important, i think, that we do not reduce the length of the training ifñi you wantçó to reduce capability. >> i agree. >> any comments? >> gentlemen, anything we did not ask that we should have? anything you would like to comment on? nld just like to think the commission. rigid thank the commission. >> sir, thank you for the opportunity. i would like to address the one thing i was not asked. i am not going to talk about a protest -- >> you are making me nervous.

>> we are, and all of the employees, as you have learned yourself are very dedicated. we will do nothing to impede the mission of the commander on the ground whether it is an ongoing protest or what ever is going on. we're dedicated. >> i believe that is true. i believe it is true for all three companies and i think it is nice to say that you put your country first. we appreciate that. thank you all very, very much. this hearing is closed.

[no audio]

[no audio] bea daut >> the house is not expected to conduct legislative business until january. the senate is hearing -- is heading to its third week of work. and overnight procedural vote is set up for tomorrow morning credit that is said to happen at about 730 eastern. there is -- tamara the current defense spending retires. after that, they may return to health care. each procedural vote requires 60 votes.

you can see the senate live on c-span2. as the united nations climate change summit in copenhagen, president obama and world leaders have held two impromptu meetings to date looking for an agreement. they have met twice with mr. obama apart from the group. this is leading them to obstruct aides to strike a possible deal. the two leaders agreed to start a second time. that meeting started about one hour ago. earlier today, president obama referred to the chinese resistance piece by saying, "i do not know where you have an international agreement where we are not all sharing information to make sure we are meeting agreements." remarks and others coming out. -- coming up. >> he emerged as a nominee at a

time when the party was populated by big figures. >> his mark on history includes manifest destiny. in his biography of james capel, merryñr at the life and times of our 11th president. >> now available, this is a perfect gift for the history buff in your life. get the unit contemporary perspective on lincoln. from his early years into his life in the white house on -- and his relatives today. available in hardcoverñr atçó yr favor bookseller. also available in audio. learn more at c-span.org/lincoln book. and as the -- speeches from copenhagen.

the brazilian president speaks. this begins with the danish prime minister. >> during silences, ladies and gentlemen, -- your excellences, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to this informal events in copenhagen. please accept my apologies for this delay. i would also like to take this opportunity to inform everyone that this, as i emphasized, and formal -- informal and hosted by the english government. later today we will sit in a formal settings. i would like to take this opportunityñi to welcome the government to have joined us in copenhagen for this historic meeting. i am gratified that so many of

you have accepted our invitation. your presence is a major factor in ensuring success and a clear expression of global commitment. the purpose of this informal event is to look beyond copenhagen. we will listen and pose challenges. we will hear suggestions on how to address these challenges. ladies and gentlemen, outside this fall,ñi copenhagen is coved in snow. the cold weather makes for a beautiful almost fairy tale- like setting. we are gathered here today to confront a very, very different reality -- our planet is warming. we are here because only determine the global action can stem this growing challenge.

the impressive group of distinguished leaders presence here send a very clear signal. the level of commitment has never been higher. we must seize the opportunity today. the time to act is now. no nation, however large or small, wealthy or poor, can escape the impact of climate change. global warming knows no borders. it does not discriminate. it simply affects us all. the allusion is complex, but we know what needs to be done. we know the future of our planet events on global commitment to permanently reduce greenhouse gas emissions. you have decided to come to copenhagen. this sends a clear signal that shows the world that climate change is no longer just an issue for environmental

ministers. climate change is real. it is serious. it is urgent. it is growing. it affects our economy. it affects our security. it is an issue of the highest national and international priority. for too many years, mankind has been slow to recognize the magnitude of the threat. our response has been insufficient. today, hopefully this marks a new beginning. the process over the last three years that has brought us here today has already generated concrete political action all over the world. almost all major economies have developed regulations for

greenhouse gas emissions. signs on climate change has evolved. common understanding of the problem has spread to all corners of society. for younger people, climate change is now the prime imperative of for international cooperation. businesses are embracing this at an unprecedented pace. the world is, indeed, changing. we are changing because we have to change. our population is demanded. this is an -- in our fundamental range of interest. i remain that this is what the world expects and what science demands. i hope we can maintain this vision not just to dave but for the years to come.

today does not mark the end of our work but rather the beginning. it is not very often we, as leaders, get to chart out a new course for our planet. . . >> i would now like to invite the secretary general of the united nations, mr. ban ki-moon,

to make a statement. [applause] >> distinguished heads of state and governments and distinguished delegates, ladies and gentleman, prime minister rasmussen, it is a great pleasure and honor for me to welcome you to this very important conference on climate change thank you for taking the time to spite your very busy state affairs. this means you are committed as they national and global leader to address together this climate change issue which is the defining challenge of our era.

excellencies, [unintelligible] our discussions are bearing fruit. never have we been united on such a scale. we are all together here. every sector of society is mobilized, faith groups,ceo's, ngo's, and dividual citizens. the world is watching. we are closer than ever to the world's first truly global agreement to limit and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. just hours remain to close the final gaps. you have achieved much already. if we are to meet the climate change challenge, we must act as

united nations. now is your moment. we are united in purpose. now it is time for us to be united in action, common action. i implore you to seize this opportunity. now is the time and again for common sense, compromise, and courage. common sense, compromise, and political courage and political leadership shall prevail. this afternoon, let me add, conscience. it will be your legacy for all time. it will be the legacy of your leadership as a national leader and global leader. let us seal a deal in

copenhagen on climate change for the common good. let us work together to deliver this for our succeeding generations. let's work together for a better and more prosperous future for all of humanity and more -- and a more environmentally sustainable world. i can't buy your commitment and thank you very much again for your leadership. [applause] -- and counting on your commitment and thank you very much again for your leadership. [applause] >> thank you mr. secretary general. it gives me great pleasure to invite the premier of the people's republic of china, is excellent sacy, to make a state.

your excellency, the floor is yours. [applause] prime minister rasmussen, dear colleagues, at this very moment, billions of people across the world are following closely what is happening here in copenhagen. the world that we express and the commitment we make here should help push forward

mankind's historical process of combating climate change. standing at this podium, i am deeply aware of the heavy responsibility. china takes climate change very seriously. we have made and will continue to make unremitting effort to tackle this challenge. china was the first country to conduct a climate change program. in recent years, we have formulated a series of laws and regulations which serve as an important means for us to address: a change. china has made the most exciting efforts in pollution reduction in recent years. at the end of the first half of this year, the china energy consumption had dropped by 13% from the 2005 level, equivalent to reducing 800 million tons of

carbon dioxide emissions. china has enjoyed the fastest growth of energy and renewable energy between 2005 and 2008. renewable energy increased by 51% and china ranked first in the world in terms of installed hydropower capacity, nuclear power capacity under construction, the coverage of solar water heating panels, and photo opaque our -- power capacity. the use of renewable energy reached an equivalent of 250 million tons of standard coal, a total of 35.5 million rural households gained access to buy a gas, equivalent to a reduction of 49 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions. china has the largest area of man-made forests in the world. we have continued the large- scale efforts to return --

return from my to forests and extend forestation to increase forest carbon. the ctenophores covered registered at a net increase of 20.54 million hectares. the total area of men and forests in china has reached 54 million hectares, the largest in the world. china has a 1.3 billion population and the gdp has only exceeded 3000 u.s. dollars. according to the u.s. standard, which allowed 150 million people living below the poverty line. we therefore face the arduous task of developing the economy and improving people's lives. china is now an important stage of accelerated industrialization and urbanization and given the predominant role of coal our energy mix, we're confronted with special difficulty in emission reduction. however, we have always

regarded addressing climate change as an important strategic task. between 1990-2005, china's carbon dioxide emissions per gp were reduced by 46%. building on that, we have set a new target of 40% to 45% from the 2005 level. to reduce carbon dioxide emissions on such a large scale and over such an extended period time, will require a tremendous effort on our part our target will be incorporated into the china's long-term plans with national and economic and social development as a mandatory one to ensure that its implementation is subject to the supervision by public opinion. we will further enhance of the domestic statistical monitoring

and evaluation method, improve the way for relieving emission reduction information, increase transparency, and actively engage in international exchange dialogue and cooperation. dear colleagues, to meet the climate change challenge, the international community must strengthen confidence, build consensus, make vigorous effort and enhance cooperation. we must always adhered to the following principles. first, maintain the consistency of outcomes. the united nations protocol at the kyoto protocol show's art work of all countries. it serves of the legal basis and cuts for international cooperation and on climate change as such, it must be highly valued. the outcome of this conference must stick to the basic principles in the convention of protocols credit must follow

rather than deviate from the mandates. it should lock up the progress already achieved in the negotiations. ñisecond, all the fairness of roles. the principle of differentiation represents the core and bedrock of international cooperation on climate change and it must never be compromised for it in a dressing climate change, it is inadmissible to turn a blind eye to historical responsibilities per capita emissions on the endeavor levels of emissions will undermine the efforts of developing countries to get rid of poverty. actions in this regard can only be taken within the framework of sustainable development. third, pay attention to the practicality of the target. we need to take a long-term perspective but more importantly, we should focus on the present.

it is necessary to set a direction for our long-term efforts but it is even more important to focus on achieving near term and midterm reduction targets, honoring the commitments already made and taking real action. one action is more useful than a dozen programs. we should give people hope by taking steady actions. fourth, ensure the effectiveness of institutions and we should make concrete and effective institutional arrangements under the convention and urge developed countries to honor their commitments. there should be sustained and sufficient financial support to develop undeveloped countries. they should effectively developed countries especially small island states, least developed countries, landlocked countries, and african countries.

i wish to conclude an underline that it is with a sense of responsibility to the chinese people and all of mankind that the chinese government has set the target may mitigating -- for begetting greenhouse gas actions. this is an action that china has taken voluntarily. we have not attached and a condition to the target. nor have we elected to the target of any other country. we will honor our word. with word whatever outcome this conference may produce, we will be fully committed to to achieving an even acceding the targets. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much, your excellency.

i would now like to invite the prime minister from -- the brazilian president to the floor, mr. president? the floor is yours. [applause] a very warm welcome to -- [applause] bñ>> mr. chairman, ladies and

gentleman, heads of government and state, first of all, a word >> i should say that i am a little bit frustrated. because for a long time we have been discussing the climate change issue and more and more, we see that the problem is even more severe that we could have

ever imagined. thinking to give a contribution to this discussion in this conference brazil has taken a position that i should say was a very bold one. we have presented to our targets to the year 2020 and we have assumed a commitment-and we have passed and our national congress a national bill that brazil through 2020 will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions in 36.1% up to 38.9%.

there are some things we consider that are truly important. changes in the brazilian agricultural system, we will have to make changes in the steel industry. we will drop to make changes and improve our energy matrix that is already one of the cleanest energy matrixes of the world. we have also taken the commitment to reduce the deforestation of the amazon rain forest by 80% by the year 2020. we did that building through economic engineering that would oblige a developing country that faces many economic

difficulties like ours that we will spend until 2020, $166 billion which is the equivalent of $16 billion per year. it is not an easy task. it was necessary to take these measures to show to the rest of the world that we are only half or the and with bargaining, through words are bargaining, we would not find a solution in the copenhagen conference. i ho participate last night until 2:00 in the morning in a meeting where sincerely, i should say, i did not expect

that i would be participating because it was a meeting where many heads of state or theiwere, very prominent figures of the political world or at the meeting but once again, frankly, to submit heads of state to certain kinds of discussions as the one we had last night for a long time, i have not seen such a meeting. yesterday, i was in a meeting and i remember my times as a trade union leader when i was at the bargaining table with the business representatives. why did we face all the difficulties? because we did not take care before in advance to work with the responsibility that it was necessary for us.

the danger is not only the money. some people think that only funds or money will solve the problems. it did not solve the problems in the past credit will not solve the problems in the present and it even less it will solve the problems for the future money is important. the underdeveloped countries need the money. to keep their development going. , to preserve their environment, to take care of their forests, that is true. but it is also important that we, the developing countries and the rich countries, when we think in money, we should not think that someone is paying us

a favor. let's not think that they are giving something to is that we are begging for because the money that will be put on the table is the payment of greenhouse gas emissions that were done -- they were a missions that happen to from two countries because they had the privilege of industrializing themselves first. [applause] so, does not a bargain between those that have the money and those who do not. it is a much more serious commitment that we are discussing great is a commitment to see if it is truly true or not what the scientists are saying that global warming is not reversible.

if that is so, those that have more resources and better possibilities should guarantee to give a contribution to protect those that are more in want. everybody agreed that we needed to guarantee the two degrees of global warmingz 2020. everybody agrees with the two degree celsius. everybody has the consciousness that it is only possible to build this agreement if the countries take with great responsibility their targets. even those targets that could be something that would be a simpler issue to decide on,

there are many people that want to bargain with these targets, all of us. we could offer a little bit more if we had assumed through good will in these recent times. all of us, we all know that was necessary to keep the target commitments and to keep the commitment with financing in any paper debt that would be pessimists conference, we would have to keep the principles that were adopted by the kyoto protocol. and to keep those conventions for the truth of the matter is that we do have common responsibilities, shared responsibilities, but differentiated responsibilities.

i never forget that when i took office in the year 2003, my commitment was to try to guarantee that each brazilian could have breakfast in the morning, lunch, and have dinner. for the developed world, free meals are something of the past. for africa, for latin america, and for many asian countries, this is something for the future. this is light to the discussion we're having here. it is not only discussing the climate change issue, we have to discuss development and opportunities for all countries. [applause] and i had conversations with important world leaders and i reached the conclusion that it was possible to build a

political base that could explain to the rest of the world that we, heads of government and heads of state, experts, we are highly responsible people and that we wanted to find a solution. i still believe in that. because i am excessively optimistic. it is necessary for us to play a game, not the king who will be the winner and the losers, it is drew that those companies -- countries that will come up with funds, they have the right to demand a transparency. they have the right to demand compliance of the policy that was financed. it is also true that we need to be very careful with this intrusion.

or intervention in the developing countries and the less-developed countries. the experience we have from the past, either from the international monetary fund, the world bank's and our country, is not recommend a ball that we should continue with those old policies in the 21st century. what we need and i will say this frankly in public something i have not said yet in my own country, i have not addressed by congress, it is necessary for us to make more sacrifices. brazil is willing to put money in to help other countries. we will do it [applause] we are willing to participate in the financing mechanisms if we

reach an agreement on a final proposal from this conference. what we do not agree is that the most important figures of the planet earth sign any kind of document or paper just to say that we signed a document or paper. i would love to leave copenhagen with the most perfect document signed in the world. but if we do not have the conditions to build such a document until now, i don't know, if we could manage to draft a document, i am not sure if some angel or some wise man will come down to this plenary

and put our minds the intelligence that we lacked up till now. i don't know what that will be possible. [applause] i believe, since i believe in god, i believe in miracles. the miracle can happen. i want to be part of that miracle. so that this miracle could happen, we need to take into account that we have twotpñ worg groups working on these two papers that we cannot forget all their work. the two working papers are important and which addressed a political statement that could serve as an umbrella statements. we can also do that if we

understand at least three issues. each country has to have the competence to do its oversight and at the same time, that the money is being put tfor the les- developed countries. brazil did not come here to bargain. we don't need foreign money for our targets. we will do it with our own resources. but we are willing to take one step further if we manage to solve the problem that it should meet the need for maintaining the development of those developing countries.

we stayed one century without growth while others were growing a lot. now that we started to grow, it is not fair for the developing countries that we go back and make more sacrifices. in brazil, we still have a lot of poor people perished in brazil, we still have a lot of poor people and in africa there are many poor people, in india, in china, there are many poor people still very we understand the role of the richer countries. they also cannot be those that will save us. what we want is only that we can work together, rich and poor, and to establish a common ground that will allow us to leave this conference with great pride and to say to the four corners of the world that we are concerned and to preserve and conserve the future of the planet earth without the

sacrifice of its main species which are men and women and children that live in this world. thank you very much, ladies and gentleman. [applause] >> thank you very much, mr. president, for your statements and your very wise remarks. [applause] which proves that you are one of the wise man required for agreeing and to reach a powerful outcome of this conference. now, i would like to invite the president of united states to take the floor.

please, mr. president, the floor is yours. [applause] >> it is an honor for me to join this distinguished group of leaders from nations around the world. we come here in copenhagen because climate change poses a grave and growing danger to our people. qall of you would not be here on loss you, like me, were convinced that this danger is real. this is not fiction. it is science. unchecked, climate change will pose unacceptable risks to our security, our economies, and our planet.

this much we know. the question then before us is no longer the nature of the challenge, the question is our capacity to meet it. while the reality of climate change is not in doubt, i have to be honest, as the world watches us today, i think our ability to take collective action is in doubt right now. it hangs in the balance. i believe we can act boldly and decisively in the face of a common threat. that is why i come here today, not to talk, but to act. [applause] now, as the world's largest

economy and as the world's second largest emitter, america out bears our responsibility to address climate change. we intend to meet that responsibility. that is why we renewed our leadership within the international climate change negotiations. that is why we work with other nations to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. that is why we have taken bold action at home by making historic investments in renewable energy by putting our people to work, increasing efficiency in our homes and buildings, by pursuing a comprehensive legislation to transform to a clean energy, me. these mitigation actions are ambitious and we are taking them not simply to meet global responsibilities. we are convinced, as some of you may be convinced, that

changing the way we produce and use energy is essential to america's economic future, that it will create billions of new jobs, power new industries, keep up competitiveness and spark new innovation. we are convinced, for our own self-interest, that the way we use energy, changing it to a more efficient fashion, is essential to our national security because it helps to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. it helps us deal with some of the dangers posed by climate change. i want this session to understand that america will continue on this course of action, to mitigate our emissions and move toward a clean energy,. no matter what happens, in copenhagen, we think it is good for us as well as good for the

world. but we also believe that we will all be stronger, all be safer, all the more secure if we act together. that is why it is in our mutual interest to achieve a global accord in which we agree to certain steps and to hold each other and accountable to certain commitments. after months of talk, after two weeks of negotiations, after innumerable side meetings, bilateral meetings, endless hours of discussion among negotiators, i believe that the pieces of that accord should now be clear.

first, all major economies must put forward the size of national actions that will reduce their emissions and begin to turn the corner on climate change. i am pleased that many of us have already done so. almost all the major economies have put forward legitimate targets, significant targets, ambitious targets. and i am confident that america will fulfill the commitments we have made, cutting air missions in the range of 17% by 2020 and more than 80% son by two dozen 51 with final legislation. second, we must have a mechanism to review whether we are keeping our commitments and exchange this information in a transparent manner. these measures need not be intrusive or infringe upon sovereigncy. they must ensure that we are living up to our obligations. without such accountability,

and the agreements would be empty words on page. i do not know how you have an international agreement where we are all not sharing information and ensuring we are meeting our commitments. that does not make sense. it would be a hollow victory. number three, we must a financing that helps developing countries to adapt, particularly the least developed and most vulnerable countries to climate change. america will be a part of a fast start funding that will cramp up to $10 billion by 2012. yesterday, my secretary of state hillary clinton made clear that we will engage in a global effort to mobilize $100 billion in financing by 2020 if and only if it is part of a broader

accord that i have just described. +[mitigation, transparency, financing. it is a clear formula, one that embraces the principle of common but differentiated responses and respective capabilities. it adds up to a significant accord, one that texas farther than we have ever gone before -- one that takes us farther than we have ever gone as an international community. this plenary session, we're running short on time. at this point, the question is whether we will move forward together or split apart. whether we prefer posturing to action. i am sure that many consider this an imperfect from work

that i just described. no country will get everything it wants. there are those developing countries that want aid with no strings attached and no obligations with respect to transparency. they think the most advanced nation should pay a higher price. i understand that. there's are those advanced nations that think developing countries either cannot absorb the assistance or will not be held accountable effectively and that the world's fastest growing in matters should bear a greater share of the burden. we know the full lines because we have been imprisoned by imprisonedfor years. these international discussions have taken place now for almost two decades. we have very little to show for it other than an increase,

acceleration, of the climate change phenomena. the time for talk is over. this is the bottom line. we can embrace this accord, take a substantial step forward, continue to refine it and build upon its foundation. we can do that and everyone in this room will be part of a historic endeavor, one that makes life better for our children and our grandchildren or we can choose to delay, falling back into the same divisions that have stood in the with action for years. we will be back having the same stale arguments, month after month, year after year, perhaps a decade after decade, oil while the danger of climate

change gross until it is irreversible. ladies and gentleman, there is no time to waste. america has made our choice grade we have charted our course. we have made our commitments. we will do what we say. now i believe it is the time for the nation's and the people of the world to come together behind a common purpose. we are ready to get this done today. there has to be movement on all sides to recognize that it is better for us to act than to talk. it is better for us to choose action over inaction, the future over the past, and with courage and faith, i believe we can meet our responsibilities to our people and the future of our planet. thank you very much. [applause]

>> you watch the president's climate change speak tonight at 8:00 eastern. "impromptu meetings were held today. the pri chinese premier met twice with mr. obama apart from the group. a white house official described the first meeting is a step forward leading them to instruct aides to work and a possible deal. but tv this weekend, it is suggested that president obama is a champion of big business and wall street. his book is "obamanomics."

get the entire weekend schedule at booktv.org. >> still in time for the holidays, american icons of dvd, as he spends three original documentaries on the icon, the three branches of american government. the special three-disc collection is only $24.95 plus shipping and handling. you can visit c-span.org/store for more information. >> now discussion on the obama administration's education policy with the president of the national education association. this 50-minute event is hosted by a washington d.c. consulting firm called the reagan group. -- the raven group. >> good morning everybody. i want to welcome you to this

policy breakfast. for those who don't maumee, i am joel packer. robert raven, our president, is sitting back there. this is his house and he makes it available. this is one in a series of policy breakfasts. the raven group is a public affairs firm. we are majority-minority firm and have a whole range of clients and issues including education. we are very honored to have this morning as our guest speaker, the president of the 3.2 million member education association. for those d who don't forennis, he is a high school math teacher. he thought math for 23 years.

that tells you a lot about him. he is a very precise person, as a result. he grew up in paradise valley, ariz.. he has been president of the nea for about one year. he previously served as treasurer and other posts. let me read three quick quotes from him that the fine his views and sets the stage for some of what he will talk about. of his official bio on his web site says," the mission and vision of an 8 organization defines who i am and what i care about and what i believe in."

taser promised to fulfill the promise of public education and to prepare every student. i am proud of that and i want to continue the journey. dennis also said,"nea's vision is for great public school for any student. unfortunately, despite the commitment of members, too many students in communities do not enjoy the benefits of a great public school because their schools are often chronically underfunded, understaffed, and others supported. this is simply unacceptable." one issue that has been controversial in the education committee and dennis said desk," the time to fix the flaw

of education law has,. we cannot afford to start another school year beginning with the unintended consequences of a lot that is schools and students based on standardized test scores and a narrow curriculum at the expense of students with 21st century skills." that is the backdrop but i will turn over to the president of the nea. [applause] >> normally i don't get to stand in my living room at home. when i stand, they say sit down dennis. i am pleased to be here and i thank you for the invitation. that was a very nice introduction by no joel a long time and we kissed him -- we kid him on his slide show. his ability to re-digest and bring to all the rest of us the

absolutely incredible information through the special statutes is amazing. if they put out new regulations one day, he can do a power point presentation the next day. [laughter] he is good at that. i was thinking this morning, in december, 2009, november, 2008. i don't know what i expected, during the next year but i know it was not desperat. not this. i did not anticipate this. this economic crisis, even a year ago today, what we were talking about compared to our current reality, we did not say those things. the intensity and the impact on individuals and on state and local governments is so amazing.

who lost a job or lost a house and then on top of that i read a recent article about the rage in america. i related when i read that to all the things i see, the intensity of the tone is so different. i do not think i am different from any other american right now. i thing most people realize these are tough times as a nation. how is it that we find our way through this and build something we talk about all the time. he wants me to talk about three topics in 10 minutes. i will attempt to do that. we want to turn around low performing schools. in our language at nea, would

call a low-performing, wehps cal the high-priority schools. they should be a high priority. in this area of trying to turn around schools, this is not a new topic since the 1980's, we have been about trying to change education. we have done a lot and we have seen success and failure and what we have seen most is that we started and created " campfires as excellent. ." we build these campers but the design of a campfire is that it should not spread. we need a brush fire. we need something moves across the system. we have been in this a long time. more than 10 years ago, we developed a report called "high- priority schools." it was about the schools that are not serving students. we're not giving students what they want. what is exciting looking back,

in alabama they passed a state law way before "the child left behind, "where they did the same thing for the measure progress and if a child failed, you would move to a different level and at the third level, you qualify for state takeover. after three years, they have seven schools that qualified for state takeover. our of the elliott, the alabama education association said would you be willing to part with us? they said yes. they conducted a training with teams from all seven of those schools. they went back to their schools with a commitment that they would do the training for them using our high preschools model. in one year, all seven of those schools won from the lowest to the top tier. the most important lesson in that is that it takes collaboration. everybody has this idea or that idea and they think it is an activity if you have uniforms. if you just do best that will transform the school.

it is not what you do. is. i firmly believe that unless you have management, the school board or the funding entity and the employees and their union, you cannot change that system. the people in the system are part of the system and to ignore one of those three groups, it will not work. is a waste of time, effort, and money. having those three is necessary but not sufficient they must reach out to the parents in the community. you cannot do without them. even if a school is perfect, not taking into account the environment, the parents, you cannot change a school. i contribute examples all over the country from california with the schools where they put the money to make a difference in low-performing schools, colorado, connecticut, new york, evansville, indiana .

where they are changing things as with collaboration. in this environment, with improvement grants, the greatest challenge for us is that it is a time of incredible opportunities. secretary page at $70 million for innovation. arne duncan has close to $7 billion. there is opportunity to do things we have never been able to do before. the contradiction for all of these people who work in schools is they are also fighting to survive. with the cuts and budget at state level and laying off people on furlough days, how do you inspire people to take a damage of an opportunity when they are trying to figure out how to survive? in that context, we want to be a part of that challenge and to take it on.

we take our models and are committing $1 million per year in a high priority schools campaign. we want to work with any and every state that its money through race to the top for school improvement grants with locals to ask what we need to do to turn the schools around. i am excited about that. in addition, we discussed $8 million grant from the ge foundation over a two-year. along with the $358,000 planning grants. that is for building a local association capacity. that means their ability to be part of designing and implementing the plan to turn a school run. i urge every local in the nea, some 14,000, if you're in a bargaining state, bargained away. let's sit down and bargain language of what we will do to turn the schools around. if not, send a letter to the

president of the board to develop a plan. i believe that collaboration, we have an opportunity to change things. the secondary he asked me this begun was improving teacher quality. this is near and dear to my heart. it is very discouraging to me when i hear people who have their several bullet. if they made it easier to get rid of bad teachers, that would solve the problem. i look at them in law and wonder. i speak with policy makers and ask them to give me the percentage of bad teachers that thinks exists. whatever number you say, i will take. let's suppose we could wave a magic wand and they all disappeared. do you honestly believe you have solved the problem? how did they get there? if you tell me there's a terrible teacher and have been there for 10 years, how did they stay there? there is a system of recruitment, training,

induction coil licensing, evaluation, professional development, national board certification. it is a system. when you think you can tweak one activity and it will change the system, you are wrong. you have to look at that system starting with the recruitment. finding well-prepared science physics teachers and it's difficult. instead of finding people in physics, they are taking people in education and getting them a college degree in physics to come back and teach that. grow your of. that is a different strategy. it is very successful. they have already made a commitment to education so let's bring them back into that. the wholeñzi teacher training amazes me that you don't have to be accredited. anyone could say i'm a teacher training institution. why do we not acquire -- require accreditation?

when i get into a licensing -- when they get into licensing. i was getting my hair cut and a barber inspector came in and he was talking about how barbershops are springing up everywhere people are trying to make a living. he is shutting them down. i am listening to this conversation i think this is amazing because you cannot cut here in arizona without a license for it was the worst that would happen? you get a bad hair cut. it grows back. yet, we will allow someone on licensed to rock into a room of 35 kids to say they are teacher. how can we tolerate a system that we give young people five- seven-year old or high school and they are not even licensed. i understand that that is part of that whole system. and in the evaluation. in most states, it takes a three-five years before you have the right to due process.

in those three-five years, what do we do? in most state laws, it says the purpose of teacher evaluation is for the improvement of instruction. if that is the purpose, why would you design a system where somebody comes in my room for 20 minutes, once a year, and writes a report at the end? that will not improve instruction. if there is a teacher evaluation system that is not absolutely connected to and part of a professional development system, you have missed the point. my first year of teaching, i was not as good as i was later. in fact, by about february or march, i could not wait for the second year to start. i have learned so many things not to do and what a new class to start over. it has to be built into professional development. in three-five years, you ought to know whether that person ñishould be a teacher in the classroom. if they can't or are unwilling to learn, they should not be in teaching. the idea that we don't do that

in the first three-five years and blame due process, is wrong. we have to do it and we are getting at this. the gate foundation has committed about $355 million to do a deep learning experience in four school districts. .

the last thing i want to set about improving the teaching profession, i do not miss an opportunity critiwhere they talk about a teacher quality that i do not say to them that i want you to know what an insult it is to me, as a professional, that you think anyone with a degree in math can do what i do in the classroom. i do not think i can do every job that requires a degree in math, but did not say anyone with a degree in math can do what i do in the classroom. there are professional skills involved. if it was only content delivery, really would not need people. what is so amazing to me is that with our own children, we already know all the things we did wrong, so we tell them that.

so why do you think of master it will listen to everything i said? -- math student will listen to everything i have to say? you cannot build a profession that does not honor the recruitment, training, and the professional development. it is a profession, and once we recognize that, i think much will change. this is incredibly needed. the 53 billion at the the recovery investment act went into the stabilization fund. even saving all of those jobs, and we have class sizes and the 40's and in california, up to

50. can you imagine our room at that is built for 28, who had 45 kids in that -- have 45 in there? if i have 100 kids, there are certain things i must do in order to survive and teach. if you give me a class size that is reasonable, there are many things that i can do that i cannot do with a larger size. damaged goods. there is no federal law that is better known to 3.2 million members than "no child left behind" and the reason they know it so well is because it has impacted their dearly -- daily

life of for seven years. i cannot tell you how many teachers i have talked to personally who say to me i could not believe at our first faculty meeting at the beginning of the year with a principal explained the strategy for the year. the kids who passed are ok. the ones who were way low, and we are not going to get them and they're in the year -- we're not going to get them there in a year. they say all year long we will focus on this band at children. as a teacher in professional, that cannot be our philosophy in the school. we have to be for every student. it is just wrong to do that. i was in tennessee. they were showing the scores of

states, and up until 2001, the state scores work on a pretty good incline going up. then they really leveled off. i said why do you think that is? what is going on? then you look at the national assessment of educational process. what does it measure? we are not doing some of these things anymore. we are cutting them out of the curriculum. they are measuring things we no longer a focus on. we have to get back to an assessment system and an understanding of what we should be doing. for our teachers, d.c. the curriculum being narrowed. -- they see the trick dilemma being narrowed. -- the curriculum being

narrowed. let me give you an example. they all take a test in a class that i have. there is a number. what is my number? how are you going to label me? is the average of all the 160 students? how are you going to aggregate all of this course for me? -- all of the scores for me? the good thing that i understand see coming at of the administration is there cannot be a single score.

the other thing they have done is understand that assessments have to be made better. all of the talk we hear -- assessments are the foundation. the other thing we are talking about is the idea of developing a data system that makes sense. comparing this year's third grade with last year's third grade does not make sense. the idea that everyone by 2014 will be at proficiency does not make sense. i remember a state legislator telling me that he wanted everyone above grade level. i said to you understand what a test is? even if we triple the knowledge, there will be half above and half a lawyer. -- and half below.

you cannot have that mathematically. we will see what comes out at this, but at least we are addressing it. we need to look at assessments that informal instruction. we're talking about growth, not just a steady course, not just a score you got on april 7. the growth over a year. i know i went over 10 minutes. as dole indicated, -- jole indicated, i drew up in their a rural community and iowa. what was so powerful for me is that my parents, my teachers and

the employees in the building kept you on the straight and narrow. as well as everyone in the community. wherever it is you want to go, adulation -- education is the way to get there. what ever you would like to do, education is the way. first i decided i would be a teacher. i thought, what would i teach? assaad english. -- i thought english. history does not cut it for me. mac, that is easy. i will be a math teacher. -- math, that is easy. for 23 years i got to do what i started dreaming about in seventh grade. i believe back then what they're all saying to me, the way to make a difference, is through

education. i believe it then and i believe it now. the richest, most powerful nation in the world, we have designed a system that for the last 25 years guarantees that 25% of kids will not graduate from high school. it happens every single year. that system is designed to do that. iwe have to transform the syste, not reform it, transform it. molded into a system that is designed to do what we need for the young people. in 10 years, 12 million americans from the age 16 to 24

are out there trying to find their way to the american dream with al a high-school diploma and. what will you say to them? what encouragement would you give them? we have that status ". we have to find a way to do this. what also makes me proud is to be part of the national association -- national education association. we have looked at ourselves very closely over the past seven years. when we recognize that the world is changing. how we have to look at ourselves. part of the assault analysis was to look at our purpose, our mission statement. if we disappeared tomorrow, what would happen? blog could no organization and we did what could no acorda --

what could no other organization do if we did not excess? ist? as a classroom teacher, i need someone advocating for me. it does not end there. we will prepare every student to succeed. i am proud of that mission statement. now many here predict no matter how many obstacles there are, -- no matter how many obstacles and there are, that is where we are headed. thank you. [applause] >> we will open it up for

questions now. are there questions or comments? >> [inaudible] ñrñi>> we were very supportive f president obama running for president because he gets it. it is hard to get people enthusiastic because the payoff is not in a year or two. we believe very deeply in the very importance of early childhood bueducation.

teac>> [inaudible] one of your affiliate's has done a great job. we want kids to graduate from college. we need to get them ready this way. we need to make sure they haveña good early education experience. i note you guys have been great on the early education. what do you see the opportunities are to really make sure that school districts like, the emirate county -- there are more of them? >> montgomery county hispanias e

employees, management, and board all committed to making a difference. one of the things we mentioned to people at the white house and the department of education -- president obama talk about parents and early childhood education. there has to be a way to provide assistance to states. they have to provide something -- would it and be nice if instead of saying you have a barrier to say you cannot use test scores, why don't they say you will not get funds unless you have early childhood education program?

>> [inaudible] putin lache @ gering directly

>> i have seen the 50% rate stayed the same. i'd like to know if you can do something different? also touch on language education, and there are areas along the border where for years it has been the practice to let kids from the other side of the mexican border come in, go to school and in some of the

communities north of the border, and now people are trying to cut that out and not let them go to the schools anymore. those are small towns or villages on the other side of the border. should they be allowed to go to school loug? >> this change with integration policy. i think this will play very heavily into what is allowed and not allowed. that will be thawed out in congress. -- fought at in congress. the world is really changing. as we become more a nation of immigration again, and not from an english-speaking country, it is happening all over the country. " we have found is s huge demand to know more about teaching the english language

learners. in most places it is a variety of languages, not just one. now it is multiple languages in schools. what we have developed our good training modules, and now we are saying, how do we make these available? we have to get these out because educators are hungry for good training about techniques, a practice that makes you more successful with english- language learners. we will continue that effort for sure. we recognize the dropout rate has stayed pretty constant, although, in some localities the percentage of hispanic students who are taking advanced placement courses are jumping. the other thing is the high- priority school campaigns. these are often predominately hispanic or african-american. i think this will have their

real impact. people often think hispanic parents think their kids should get a job and not go to college -- not true. they believe very strongly in education. they want their children to have more education opportunities than they had. we need to use that. >> i have one question. in rural areas where there are students from the other side of the border, do you feel they should be allowed to attend the school's? >> in my own state there was a very positive experience from that. there are so many different ideas of how to do that. we have schools in arizona where students come in speaking only english and spanish. by the end of sixth grade, and they are all bilingual.

we organizationally do not have a position on that. we do believe all children should have access to education. >> my name is joe taylor. for the past 55 years, when the supreme court decided brown vs. the board of education, i have been working on civil rights matters and a variety of other civil rights positions. what i would like to appear at this point is -- like to hear at this point is what your objectives are in the areas that most concern me and a lot of other peoplehoo, and that is

whether you agree or not with the goals stated in "no child left behind" that the achievement gap should be closed between white kids and black kids, between kids of color and white kids between the kids with disabilities and kids who do not have disabilities? whether the access to resources that will permit equal opportunity can be meaningful caused? whether the resources gap, which is still tremendous, should be closed? whether abandoning the objectives of no child left behind, we should abandon what

we have not enforced -- and that is not equal access to resources. and i think that will be much more -- i remember the days when n.e.a. supported segregation in a number of places. i remember the days when they supported integration. will be moved back in that direction or continue to convoy? >> we do not disagree with their rules of the objectives of "no child left behind." we supported that the segregation of the data because that shunned a light on it. -- that shone a light on it.

no one did anything with it. i understand why the federal government did what they did. they said we should do the gaps and educational system as a whole did not respond. they said, and now we have this system of accountability. we do not disagree with the goals. what we disagree with is how the implemented it. we think it can be implemented differently and make more of a difference on closing the gaps. on equity of funding, we have never left that. within our budget we have three strategic goals. three focus areas. why have five areas of ongoing programs that we do. -- we have five areas of ongoing programs that we do. we take this as a package

because you have to look at the whole system of taxing, and many of the causes of this incredible inequity in terms of funding schools has to do with their funding and revenue policies. we have been fighting this. we actually have a pretty good success. in the western states we have done pretty well. you bring policy makers and opinion leaders together and show how these things are tied together for economic development, and i think we were stalled in making progress because of the economic turndown, but i had real high hopes that as policymakers tied those together -- you cannot have economic growthñr without a good educational system. you cannot have economic growth if you are creating a minimum- wage jobs. the best return on your investment is to keep them in your state with high-paying

jobs. the better than average income is, the greater the tax revenue. any state should be working all the time to maximize the percentage of citizens to have a college degree and good jobs. that is the foundation of good economic growth. we're working very hard in that area. in no way, i believe, although people have problems with "race to the top", but i can make the case said it is going back to the original intent of the national education association. by the improvement grants, they are putting resources and focusing on that group of students. i think there is real possibility there that we can make a difference.

yes, we will continue to fight that. >> [inaudible] >> i'd like to follow up on a couple of things he saiyou said. you mentioned that the education system was designed for 25% of the students to drop out of high school. this is at a time when it was not necessary to get a good education. i believe that is true. [inaudible] there was a report that recommended a to-back system. -- two-fact system.

it was not thought that most kids needed a level of education that would prepare them for college. that system took over the whole country for about 15 or 20 years. if you see this in academic class is and general education classes. that has become the norm all over the country. when of the things that has happened is now we have honors class is in high school who. typically they are grade-level class is. class is that if you take them and pass them, you will be prepared to go on to college. there are lots of class is that are with blooay below honors cls

is. -0- classes. my question is, with the national upheaval education position be in favor s.e.a. requires the states that are going to get federal money to eliminate tracking, except for the relatively small group of students that are so seriously unable to function that they could not function at grade level? >> although we do not call it detracking, i think what you are describing is exactly what we're moving towards.

we are in an industrial age. there were a lot of good, middle-class jobs in factories and industrial settings that you could provide a good income and family -- and provide for your family. that has changed in the 21st century. we do talk about that every student has to graduate. it is a very different world. we need to transform that and look at what it is we are requiring. one of the things that is so powerful to me is the purpose question. there is a hierarchy of choices. you start with your mission and move into strategies and activities. one of the things he often says if you are not getting consensus, go back to the purpose question. in 20010, what do you believe is

the purpose of education? some say it is to prepare them for a job? -- is that it? what about civics education? we have to decide the purpose of that and did sign it. i think out of that discussion but we will find is based on the purpose in 2010 and beyond, we cannot allow 25% not to be prepared for that level. it will change the standards and expectations, but it is also building them a realistic picture of what is coming down the road, the need for creativity and flexibility. we're not doing that right now. i think it is the whole look at ourselves as a system that you are describing has to be the natural result of that discussion. we are starting to engage at the federal level, that kind of question.

what is the purpose of public education? from there, you can talk about their role of the federal government and what they should do to assist. i do not think we will ever get rid of the state-based local education system in america. that does not mean we cannot change their role and function of different entities to say how can we support this and delivered for kids? >> we have time form one more question. -- for one more question period to cove. to cov>> this may be a longer-tm question. we are very involved in having a local school districts -- at the research university is also involved in research. we're trying to get more funding [inaudible]

, but we want to know more of the questions that we should be researching or what kind of research would help inform instruction. that is something your organization can help. maybe over time and through your staff we could get some of that related. they are looking to answer the questions. kiko's let me talk about two things. i mention collaboration. i think circumstances are driving collaboration that was not there before. one of the things in the funding mechanism is states are cutting back so much on high your education, tuition is going up into double digits. kids cannot afford higand

education. community colleges are turning away hundreds of thousands of kids at a time when because of unemployment people need to minute ecologist. -- people need community colleges. they are really connecting. they are understanding it is not pieces. the one area i see gaining the most momentum is the transition from high school to college. if kids are ready at age 16 or 17, why do they have to wait? i think you will see more of that. the last thing i will say to you about the research is there are two examples going on. one is in connecticut. it is called a compact. they took eight of the lowest performing schools in urban centers. in partnership but the university of connecticut's --

with the university of connecticut, the college of education foundation put in a quarter of a million-dollar, and we put in a quarter of a million to do the research component, but it is taking the research and actively putting it in the schools. they had people from the university working with the schools to say here is what the research shows works best, what do you want to do? working with them in doing active research three years so we learned from that and have better majors. the other thing going on in new york, was started with four little pilots, where it is a partnership between syracuse and university, the mayor's office, everyone. abbas that one of the meetings and the woman in charge what the county economic services said we have a budget of $800 million.

the school district has a budget of 400 million. every one of my clients is in those schools. we need to figure out a way to better deliver services to these kids. that is another area where i see the research going into the schools and turning them around. i could go on about this for 20 minutes. it is one of the most exciting things i have seen because they are doing it for the entire system. every student who qualifies for college is guaranteed tuition, fees, and books. we will find a way. they are transforming an entire community. they believe within 10 years the money will disappear, that it will be self sustaining just i eat better use of the resources that are there.

that is a partner between higher education and the community. i think that is where we're going if we want to turn the system around. >> [inaudible] they are in a duke -- a unique position to build partnerships. one last question. to co>> [inaudible] i am interested in [inaudible] .

i see so many parents choosing between public and private schools. i am interested in hearing what a parent who did what the national education association says when a parent comes to you. take it away. >> i do not think you should have to wait. your child is in second grade right now and you want to do something. i think what we can do right now is bring the groups together and say what will we do differently next year? i have watched it over and over, the power of that. and all the years i have been in education, never once did they ever bring us together as a faculty for two or three days to say here is where we are as a school.

here is what we look like. what is it that we will agree to do together to make it better? we can do that right now. you do not need anyone's permission or a change in the law. you just have to have the will to bring parents, administration, staff together to say let's change the school. you now have made a huge of them and to change in what is happening in the school, not just for your kid but for every student in the school. i want for it to happen tomorrow. if i can get these other groups there, would you come to me and let's do it right now. between allahnow and the springf next year we can put together a new plan. we do not need to ask anyone's

permission. they will stop you when you ever gone too far, but until then do not ask for permission. [applause] it is amazing, at the national education association will not listen to me for this long. >> we will have a whole series again next year. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

>> he was not an imposing figure. he emerged as a nominee at a time when the party was populated by big figures. >> in his new biography, robert mary looks at the life and times of our 11th president sunday on q&a. >> now available, see stance book -- c-span's book "abraham lincoln." from his early years to his life in the white house and his relevance today. abraham lincoln in hardcover at your favorite bookseller. now on digital audio to listen to any time.

available where digital audio download are sold. >> the u.s. house is not expected to conduct of legislative business until next month after the holiday break is over, but the senate is heading into its third consecutive weekend of work. today the defense spending bill is on the floor and overnight procedural vote set up the final vote for tomorrow morning at 7:30 eastern. afterwards, the senate may return to health care with three procedural votes required to move forward. each required 60 votes to pass. in about 15 minutes, jack reed and the mark on defense spending.

>> good morning, everyone. the majority leader has signaled that he will unveil the significant piece of legislation and memory. his goal after introducing that measure in the morning will be to force a vote on it 36 hours after that. what we know for sure at the moment, we have seen the nancy pelosi bill and the reid bill, but none of my constituents, none of his constituents, none of you, in fact, no one who could not be collected in a phone booth has seen -- if i can find it -- here it is.

have seen the missing bill. this is a mystery to virtually everyone. up to and including the assistant democratic leader of the senate. this missing bill will be sprung, presumably, sometime in the morning. in 36 hours it will begin to run. as we have pointed out repeatedly, this massive piece of legislation that seeks to restructure one-six of our economy is being written behind closed doors without input from anyone in an effort to jam it passed the senate and the american people before christmas. an artificial deadline. every american will be affected by dismissing bill. every single american will be

affected by this. no one will have had an opportunity to read it and understand it. let me turn to senator mccain. >> i want to thank senator mcconnell and the leadership and all of the republican members who have spoken out so strongly and so steadfastly and with such solidarity. let me mention how far we have come. look how far we have come from october a year ago, october 9, 2008, when the president of the united states said on the issue of health reform, i will have republicans and democrats sit down together with c-span cameras in the room so the american people will know who is on the side of the pharmaceutical companies into is on the side of the american people. where did we end up? we end up in a bizarre situation where even the number

to lowo senior democrat says he does not know what is in the bill either. do you remember the commitment that legislation would be online for 72 hours before we would take up the legislation? what ever happened to that? you talk about change, you talk about change -- it is not change you can believe in, it is change that is astonishing. we all know promises are made in political campaigns, but this is a complete reversal. there is no change, this is business as usual. tomorrow there will be a snowstorm and we will be coming in and everything will be paralyzed as our nation's capital always is when there is a snowstorm, but the fact is there is a firestorm out there

in america. we want to know what is in this legislation. we want to know about what will happen to one-seventh of our gross national product. the fire storm is about to overwhelm the democrats in the united states senate. again, we want to sit down, we want to do what the president pledged that he would do. we want to sit down and negotiate. we want the c-span cameras in the room. we want to do something bipartisan, which is good for america. we know we have to address the issue that medicare is going broke in five years, but the fact is this is in contravention in contradiction to how the united states has acted to every reform bill and united states. there is no bipartisanship here. there is no negotiations in

conversation. no one knows what is in this bill, except one senator. included in that we have no cost estimate from the cbo, and apparently it will all be sprung on us tomorrow morning in the middle of a snowstorm. that is not what america wants. >> when bush was president and democrats would play any kind of politics for the defense appropriations bill as you showed outrage that they would do that with truth funding. why are republicans doing the same thing? >> if you will examine my record, i showed average over the pork and earmarking that was on the defense appropriations bill and the spending was out of control and that the american people would reject it. when you say we, do not include

me in that group. >> let me also address the issue of -- the majority leader is in charge of the schedule. he is the reason we are doing the defense bill in the middle of the health care bill. i think we have made a rather clear we're not going to expedite consideration of the health-care bill. he is in charge of the schedule. he has the defense bill to pass. he is trying to jam the american people on this mysterious bill that no one is saying before christmas. -- that no one is seeing before christmas. >> senator byrd had to come back at 1:00 in the morning and cast a vote. why the decision to hold back the republican votes when you new --

>> every senator makes a decision on whether they come to a vote. it is not uncommon for them to miss votes. it happens from time to time. we make our own decisions on whether we come to a vote. as i said, every individual senator makes a decision on that. >> can i mention one other aspect of this debate that is really unfortunate? i have been around here for more than 20 years. yesterday on the floor of the senate the senator from connecticut was finishing up his remarks, and as we always do, he said i would like an extra minute to finish my remarks and it was subjected to buy the newest member of the united states senate. that is how the comedy in this body has deteriorated. we have to stop.

we have to stop this kind of behavior. i have never seen anything like that, and i hope i do not see it again. deegan >> [inaudible] >> it is our intention not to pass this bill easily. i think we made it pretty clear. i have had a practice of not telegraphing procedural moves that might be available to us, and i will continue that practice, but i do not think anyone in the room has missed it -- we do not think this bill should pass and we are not in a hurry to complete it. >> if we have not seen it, don't you think we should have time to at least examine it? sci do not think it would be outrageous to ask that we read this bill.

>> given the senate's track record on that secrecy, -- >> there are bills and there are bills. this is a major restructuring of 16 of our economy. a manufacturer deadline, which senator snowe has pointed out four weeks, it needed to be dealt with in a more deliberate and bipartisan way. we are in this position because of their desire to back us up to christmas, and not the only role of the opponents of the bill but to roll and deceive the american people. that is why we are in this position. >> [inaudible] >> i do not think so. we have not had a bill like this since you and i have been here. >> i have never seen a bill with

the details were not given up until it was time to pass it. i have been here for many reforms, welfare reforms, so security reform, campaign finance reform -- i have never seen anything like this. i have not talked to anyone who has seen anything like this. >> [inaudible] >> everyone knew what the bill was. there was debate of course. everyone knew what the bill was. >> [inaudible] >> to say we are going to have everyone in church, that is one thing. how do you do it? -- to say we are going to have everyone insured, that is one thing. i think it is more vital when you are talking about massive

changes that this legislation and taientails. >> your job is to ask tough questions. that is not a tough question. i do not think you can argue with a straight face that an issue at this magnitude should be dealt with this way. we will have to end up spending two bills of amending this bill. -- we will end up spending two weeks amending thsis bill. this bill is much bigger than any of the things that i mentioned. >> what is your response to

that? >> it is beyond fixing. it is not fixable. it needs to be stopped, and we need to start over as senator snowe has repeatedly reminded us to do these major bills in a bipartisan way. this was an effort from the very beginning to unify the democrats and do it in secret. >> it is not taxable, why should democrats -- >> >because we want to do what the president said he would do -- we will sit down together and negotiate else so we can fix what is the feeling financially health care system and preserve the highest quality health care in the world. that is what we're asking for. we are not saying do nothing. we have good ideas, let's sit

down and negotiate together. >> [inaudible] >> i am not going to ask a hypothetical like that. every single survey, everyone, shows either fairly significant opposition to the bill were overwhelming opposition to the bill. the american people are virtually screaming at us, please do not pass this bill. >> unfortunately, if not the last few times, we would like to wish you a merry christmas.

>> later, democratic senators spoke about the fiscal year 2010 defense spending bill and health care legislation. this is just over 10 minutes. >> good morning. earlier this morning we were able to invoke cloture on the defense appropriations bill, giving resources to men and women that are crossed the globe this holiday season defending us. i found it quite interesting that so many of my republican colleagues who were criticizing the president for dithering on his decisions decided that they were not going to act and fund the troops this morning.

i think that suggests something else here. all i know that is 60 democrats along with three republicans decided that the welfare of our military forces were more important than legislative gamesmanship with respect to health care and other issues. secretary gates was very clear that we are running into a position where the lack of funding could begin to interfere with operations. i think we all took that to heart, and hopefully as this bill comes up for passage, that message will get through to all of our colleagues. i was also disappointed when senator durbin ask for unanimous consent to proceed for the bill and that was denied. in the past we have had folkvot

but generally it moved very quickly to get the resources into the fields. the bill also includes important aspects for americans here at home. the extension of unemployment benefits for two months. also, additional resources for nutrition programs across the country. for many families in rhode island and across the nation, during this holiday season they are doing what they thought never in their life they would do -- exist on unemployment benefits, need assistance to pay their health-care insurance and in many cases actually need assistance to buy food and put it on the table. i think the difference last evening of some of our colleagues to their plight is also significant. a lot of what has been said about the reason to obstruct to

move to the appropriations bill was about health care. . . and why i hope that the delay that was demonstrated this

morning will not continue. we can move forward to a final passage. with that, allow me to introduce my colleague. >> thank you very much. beei served as mayor of alaska d this is linked to the military. we have over 4000 of our troops across the state of alaska. we also have a significant amount return and had become veterans. this is very important. i want to emphasize last night when i came in, a reporter asked me, what is like coming in. it was early for me. the fact is that we had to be

there at 1:00. what i decided to go into this office to serve, the reason that i did so is because i believe that the system has to change. this is another example of why americans are outraged by what is going on in this important piece of legislation. the system here, this is a very simple piece of legislation. secretary gates is concerned that if if this is not passed, what the impact would be. it is critical that our troops have the resources. in this bill, i want to emphasize not only is it important for the troops on the ground.

for me, this is a very frustrating time. senator durbin tried to get people to move forward on this legislation. earlier today, at a press conference that was done by a minority leader, it was made very clear. why not just do it? let's do this for our troops. let's have a debate and the decision with regards to health care. they are using the soldiers as pawns in this political game. that is not why i came to washington, d.c.. i came here to get business

done, support our troops. if it means we are here every hour, i am here. i sent my family back to alaska this morning bright and early at 7:00. i am here to do what i can to do the business of congress. it is somewhat shameful to see the press conference that was done this morning. there will be votes. they will cause a 30 hour delay for no other purpose than to drag it out as possible. the people that they're making a pawn in this is our military. i want to thank the three republicans for stepping over the line and coming over and being part of 63 votes to support the troops.

ñiwe hope that more wouldñi come forward and move this. thew3ñv last commentñiñhk,ñi ty that are taking credit for some of the great things in the bill which is unbelievable. it shows that the american people are fed up with here. i want to join it senator reid to lay out my thoughts. this is significantly impacted by the military. we see this every time. thank you very much. >> i think it is important to note that among those making comments last evening was russ

feingold who has made it very clear that his opposition to military operations in afghanistan and iraq. he understood that this was a way in which the republicans are trying to undermine health care, undermine the process, undermined the essence of why we are here which is standing up and voting for the measures that are important to the country and armed forces. the leadership and inspiration and a vote yesterday was a significant. any questions? >> then we must have done a great job. >> senator, you sent your family home to celebrate a holiday, have you made any plans to come back to do work? are you just kind of on guard in case something happens?

>> one thing i have learned is that you have to live with regards to time. the schedule is changing every moment. i heard the minority leader say it is all up to majority leader. it is not. by the actions and the delay tactics, they are setting the scheduling. i think it would be great for all of us, even the folks in the audience, to be home with your families. the defense authorization, we will be here until it is done. i am to is on hold. i will call them the when i get back to alaska. i will call them and wish them a happy birthday. they will be watching tv as we get two or 3 feet of snow. you get 1 inch, everything shuts down.

>> i am a little bit close to the mark and it is easy to get home. like him, i am prepared to be here. this is a critical. i'm prepared to get here and continue the work. thank you all very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

>> president obama spoke at the climate change a summit. he had a number of world leaders harbor cold -- world leaders hold impromptu meetings. one of them was with the president hu jintao. ñithis was described as a first step forward. >> this weekend, timothy carney suggests that the obama is a champion of bit business. then, greg morton since setting up all girls' schools in remote areas of pakistan and afghanistan. get the entire schedule at our website along with lists of the best books of the year. >> ñistill in time for the

holidays, "american icons," on the iconic homes of the three homes of the government. -- of the three branches of government. >> african american leaders met this week with the commerce secretary to discuss the census. there are efforts to ensure an accurate count of african- americans. this is about 50 minutes.

>> we want to ensure that the undercount that took place in 2000, that steps are being taken to ensure a full and complete account with the 2010 census. that undercount is one part of the story. the other part out of 2000 is that there was an over count of the country's white population. i need not emphasize that the census is a critical, constitutional imperative to. that is utilized to determine apportionment and reapportionment of legislative districts in congress all the way down to the county, city, town ship, and state levels. secondly, the census is used by the congress and the federal

agencies in the distribution of almost half a trillion dollars each year from the federal budget. also, the numbers are used by any number of private sector academic nonprofit institutions in the work that they do, a complete count, a reliable count, a full count is essential to the 21st century democracy that we are all committed to in at the meeting this morning, but a few highlights that i want to share. first of all, we give secretary log and the obama administration great credit for taking steps to improve the plan for the 2010 that they inherited. those improvements included a commitment of additional

dollars, a more substantial commitment to a partnership efforts. a strengthening of the department and the census bureau's plans to reach the hard to count communities, many of whom are the constituencies that we represent as national organizations. that notwithstanding, we share a number of areas of concern. we think that while secretary and the obama administration have taken important steps in the right direction to make the plan a good strong and effective plan, we steal -- we still filte field there are steps to be taken. in today's press conference, we will outline and talk a little bit about those steps and to those suggestions that we made today to secretary lock b.

as a combined leadership group, our organizations, our local affiliates, chapters, networks, we are committing to raise awareness, motivate people, to encourage people, to impress upon people the importance of participating in census, 2010. we now and that an accurate count and a complete count where there is no undercount is essential to the maintenance of some very important gains we have made it politically and economically in this nation. it is doubly important at a time in this nation with high unemployment, at a time with the subprime housing crisis, the distribution of many of the federal investments, to stem the tide of joblessness.

this is determined by the information contained in the census. the plan is designed such a way as to reach adequately be hard to reach her been in committee is a through the houston media that is focused on those communities -- through the media that is focused on those communities. -- adequately reach of burban

communities through the media that is focused on those communities. third, there is a continuing concern about how this nation is incarceration rate and the citizens included is counted. there is a built in undercount because of the large amount of african-americans who are in prisons and jails outside of the neighborhoods where they reside. they are counted as a part of the area, the county, the city, the election district where the prison is located that shortchanges the communities. that shortchanges them in terms of representation, that shortchanges them in terms of dollars. that remains in a continuing

concern for all of us. we have a number of areas of concern. the meeting today, the commerce secretary, remained with us a half hour past the scheduled time, delayed another meeting, listened intently, and took notes. we expect that there will be a very important follow up. our message today is one that is designed to be constructive. our message today is one of seriousness. we think that there are important things that must be done. we want to ensure the census results in a complete and accurate count, especially for african-american communities and urban communities and those that are sometimes disenfranchised. i would like you to bear with us. we will hear from some important leaders.

>> we have a real situation on our hands. we have the opportunity to have the best census count we have ever had. there is the opportunity to keep this moving in the right direction. if we will do that, this situation has to be taken very seriously. the count was too low for the country. the differential was about one

to 1.5. in 2000, it was 0.1. the national and it cut was 2.1. the differential was 28. if we can get the national undercount down 2.1%, we can do the same thing in the black community. what we asking them to do? specifically, with the issue of prisoners, which affects all communities. this is not a problem that is just a black problem -- not just a black problem -- this is not a problem that is just a black problem. they will require the town to separate the inmates. we will know how many are free citizens, how many are inmates. we are asking them to go one step further which is to assign

those that to the communities. tell us where they are from. tell us how many people in the county where those inmates are from and the census tracts where those inmates are from and they're in prison. that would empower governors and states with a real perspective of the who is in those neighborhoods. with regards to media, the realities is that they do have a firm that specializes in minority communities. this is a minority-owned firm that is a sub contractor but the prime contractor is calling the shots. they are still living in the 1960's. the reality is that 5% of the managers are black.

15% don't have any black employees. if they're calling the shots over the subcontractor and directing them where they are going, the value of having a sub contractor is greatly diminished to the overall effort. they really need to make sure that the firms that no these communities best are calling the shots. the reality is that this is a plan, a very robust plan, an aggressive plan but it relies on government workers. government workers going into neighborhoods where there are high levels of distrust of government workers. they have credibility and plans for doing effective not reach to the communities.

we are working together to make sure that this country gets a full count. we need to be very serious could to we can have the best sense is we have ever had. -- we need to be very serious. we need to have the best sense thit census we have ever had. >> i am the ceo on black participation and diaspora coalition. thank you for being here today. what we gained from concern is that the black population is not monolithic.

it is made up of a melting pot of the diaspora. it is made up of different types of immigrants. part of what our concern is is that we cannot fix this time but we need to start the process is that the only minority community that does not have the opportunity to identify itself with a country of origin is the black population. all others are able to do that. that gives us an additional challenge. what we're doing is building this coalition and some of those folks that are part of our coalition, this includes impact african federation, the national caucus of black mayors, and others.

most of us are national partners. many of our local affiliates are part of the process. we are part of the process. we also know the count, what is this made up of? it is made up of children under 5, immigrants. young black men. we will do all that we can through the coalition to try to help to close the gap down to zero. thank you. >> i am al sharpton, national action network. let me begin by commending mark for convening all of us for what is a very critical issue. as we continue to fight for equality and fairness for

african americans, we cannot do that without an accurate count in the census next year. this must be communicated unequivocally in terms that we understand in our community. -9çói want to began by joiningd commanding secretary lock and his staff for taking this task seriously and for trying to grab the tail of the tiger that had gone awry under the previous administration. we had a very candid conversation of where we have areas that we need to come together on as has been outlined. the undercount of blacks in the last count and to the over counting of whites by 1% is not

just a washington beltway statistic. that manifest itself in goods and services, representation, that costs us. we cannot have some over counting, as our community undercounting and we are already a minority. this is a double whammy that we must correct. we must also have trusted voices to do that. this cannot be an entertainment driven campaign. it entertainers are good but too many times, government and the media act as the entertainers are also our leaders. entertainers are in entertainers, we love them, we looked up to them, but when we want trusted information we go to people like these organizations represented that address our issues so that when we see those voices, we know is serious. when we see an entertainer, we

know that we can relax. this is a serious time. also black media, we communicate through our own radio, newspapers, radio, television stations. we cannot get a real count if we don't have included in the process of those that address our issues, grievances. if it was not for black newspapers, we would not know who died that week because this is not make the regular papers. we need the contractors to understand this to be in charge. the politics of this is that there are many in this country that cannot care about a real count. there are those of us that cannot afford of having and

black president and want to act like blacks that should be satisfied and that is the only counter that we should be looking at. we want everyone counted, not just the first family. every black, every asian, every hispanic must be counted. we are committed to say to not undercount us, to not count as out. when you're counting us out, you are counting out services, education. we need the prison population to be counted. i have in the jail for civil rights causes. they will count you in the morning and count at night but did they give that town to the wrong people. if that should be part of the overall count.

it is our position to leave here and make sure that we have a fair and equal count. be bibli>> iñr represent over 1k newspapers across this country. we are very excited and we think the urban league for the leadership they have been providing to bring this altogether. we do thank the secretary for his patience and his attention and understanding our concerns.

we are disperse about a plan that is presently in place. we have over 200 like newspapers and media partners in this country. we have been allocated some meager amount, $2.5 million. we have 16 markets that have been identified to advertise in. this leaves out newark, çómississippi, east st. louis, oakland, places where people of color have burgeoning populations. ñri]we cannot afford for this tt count the maximum amount of black people in this country.

we have the core of what can be the most accurate count in the history of the united states. yes, we had a black president, we know what his count is in his home. we don't want to embarrass that black president by not having the most accurate and prolific count in the history of america. we have got to get this right now at this from a business standpoint but from a political standpoint. what happens in the census will haunt us or benefit us for the next 50 years. it is imperative, it is important. we and our communities, in the african-american community are asking for reciprocity, we are not asking for a handout, for a bailout. we are to asking for an accurate count.

>> my name is ron daniels, president of the institute of the black world 21st century. we have with us as well the black leadership forum and the black african union. the secretary was willing to sit through the meeting. he took seriously the concerns that we raised. unimpressive plan was laid out that reflected their having received recommendations about how to improve the census. -- oan impressive plan was laid out. there is a state of emergency in the black community. some communities, unemployment is as high as 50% when you take

into account those that are no longer in a the job market. the sub crisis market falls into this equation. therefore, we have a concern that an accurate count would end up in a fair share of resources. it is a cruel irony, to some degree, that the conditions that have propelled many people to the industrial complex, the ways and is counted, means that they cannot go back to those communities to ameliorate those conditions. it is tantamount to a new version of the 3/5 compromise. black people are being counted as less than a human being. it is important that we have community based organizations, groups that will be part of the equation. at least the media is crucial in terms of making sure that this is not just a media plan.

the plan is culturally sensitive to the various diverse groups in our community. i am very optimistic that we will get this job done. there are crucial issues that have to be addressed. it is not like we can get this done wrong and correct this tomorrow, this will be around for a decade in terms of the resources that will be allocated. we need to the representation to resolve critical issues facing us. >> i want to express my thanks before this group of leaders convened and for the secretary

talking to us. it is christmas time again. there isn't over count and an undercount. there is nothing more illegal then citizens who are in prison. losing their citizenship counts.

they are counted in side of the walls. the families of the black homes, they are accounted for the local population. the families back home that need the food and the bread, they cannot be counted because they're in another town. this involves some commitment by ñithe department of justice. violation. we have the civil right to be counted. we cannot go through a process that in fact eliminate people from the count and therefore from resources. given the foreclosure crisis, blacks and browns are severely

affected. tens of thousands of blacks and browns living in relatives homes to have up and over to people in the same house who run at the real risk of not being counted because of the impact of people living in the same house. there was a meaningful session. the issue of the count of those families. thank you very much. >> thank you. we ask you to identify if you are from a media organization. >> is there anything that

suggests that the census bureau is considering making a change in how they will count the prison population? did you come away incurs with more -- in courage to with more? >> we came away with the understanding that we would make some suggestions in terms of what they can do to fix it for this particular census. there might be something difficult. there are many african- americans.

this represents a 3% under cut. what we had in the prison population issue is a built in undercount meaning that if a person is in a prison. if there is a person who is in a prison but to their permanent residence is in baltimore, they will not be counted as living in baltimore and therefore not utilized in how many seats or allocated. we think that this is the kind of issue that is important

enough for us to press on. understanding the numbers. if you put it to decide and say that we cannot deal with it, we are not going to deal with it, then what we have done is acknowledged that no matter how successful we are, there will be a 3% or so undercount. we will press forward. >> there are some people were getting meals every week. the families have not been given the resources to survive while they're in prison. it might take some legislative action to change that and tel.

the everyone and their families must be counted. the resources must be allocated. that is compounded by the issue of those who are living triple and double the cost could tel. many of them would get free money and then they would not honor the civil rights law for housing. and mom jones university, you cannot get the money with federal law, you cannot say that it applies to bob jones and then

another standard for other companies. >> let me say this, i don't want us to give the wrong message. i think it is important that you understand that the issue of prisons was one of the issues raised. secretary lock cannot answer that. that might require legislation. the main things that he can answer in terms of how the media is used, trusted with community organizations in dealing with the undercount of blacks in the past and the over count of whites. in addition, we might have to litigate or legislated the

prisons issue. that was not the only issue. >> based on what hav you have h, will the count to be addressed? >> we will await the statements by congress. it is premature for us to say that the issues are prettgoing e addressed. the president took our concerns very seriously. the combined our concerns again with our commitment. we want this to go right. when we make an offer suggestions, they are offered in the spirit of by changing this, the ultimate outcome will be good. i expect there to be an opportunity to report back. we will have a follow-up conversation with congress right after the first of the year the

in response to the concerns that we raised about babbitt bu. >> was there any concern about how to count katrina victims? >> that did not come up. there have been some special steps in the case of katrina. there have been some commitments

that have been made with respect to katrina and while it did not come up. we think that the committee leadership in new orleans and the gulf coast is very assertive in pushing forward in pushing the census to take additional steps. the commitments there, we will hold our fees to the fire and make sure that those commitments are honored. >> one of the things that were unified in that meeting was the necessity to invoke and commit additional resources to this effort. all of the things that we are

all talking about, all of the things that we are concerned about has to do with resources. if you have the political will, put up the money. we have many many illustrations. this is in particular if you are dealing with things like katrina, things like this happening to african americans. barbara lee, the oversight chairman of the census are committed to finding additional resources and to mean thacommung that. the understand the issue. -- they understand the issue. >> historically, the black community has had a distrust of the government.

what steps are being taken to make them, for all with at a filling out the forms? >> we have a coalition made up of trusted leadership, national and local partner in together so that we can address those concerns. it is an interest of trust. everyone knows that if you live here in d.c., in maryland, in this area, there are large ethiopian populations. the people who know who our folks are our people from the community. this is a partnership. with the government, also private and with ourselves. we are committed to this. they are from all over the country. the leadership from the caribbean. we have been working all year.

the immigrant population would like to be sure that they are not going to have difficulty in the process.

>> one of the things that we have emphasized is that the census has to emphasize in its messaging the confidentiality and the information. this is an ironclad law in this nation and the information is confidential. it cannot be shared with anyone under any circumstances. they have to emphasize that in their advertising and their messaging to overcome the trust problems that people have. we have to do this on our part. we have to emphasize the value of the senses when it comes to diminish traded power. this is not just the account for the sake of account.

this is a count that has a purpose that determines the allocation and political seek, the allocation of money. we have to emphasize that as well as the confidentiality to ensure that people overcome the trust divide and the trust issue. >> a question, there have been a number of press conferences dealing with hispanic organizations. i'm wondering if you are working with hispanic organizations and what results and do you have that. do you feel that working together with them will strengthen your base? >> that is an excellent question. we are working together with the leadership of latino organizations.

coming out of this meeting today, i will take this as my responsibility to reach out to the leaders of the latino community to prepare. you're right, the concerns are similar. we in our community, there are mixtures of african and latino. if you are correct to point out the similarities of concern. you are correct that we need to work together in order to be able to insure that there is an accurate count. any other questions? >> it is there a plan in the works to utilize the power of black radio to get this message out?

>> yes, we have formed an allegiance with black radio and we are working with members of the congressional black caucus. black radio was front and center. they had the same concerns that we had in the black press and making sure that thatñi market s fully funded back. you have to have repetition in terms of putting theñi message n front of people. ñithe black press is the most trusted message bearer in our community. to not put the message there is not to city don't care about the count, the ultimate objectives. yes, we are very much in concert

with them. we have to get moreçó money. 2.5 for us. we needñiñi 11 million to put a newspapers throughout the country every week for 12 weeks. if that's what it takes for 12 weeks, which is only three months, which would bring you right to the press is of the actual count, but with 2.5 million get you? >> let me say this also because it was stressed in the meeting that we are not talking about putting psa is on the radio or television or newspapers, we are talking about paid advertising. some congress people fought to get an increase in funding but there was no increase in what was given towards the black press that an increase but the

budget remained the same. secondly, they cannot count black press is how many blacks watched the super bowl and they bought an advertisement on that station. we are talking about targeted black press. >> any other questions? >> when you are talking about getting more resources, are you talking about the more resources that you have and that in the budget? >> the most important thing is that the resources be devoted. the census received additional funding from the stimulus. they also received additional funding in the on the bus that passed this week. at the end of the day, the

important thing is that we are talking about a communities and populations that historically are hard to count. when they are hard to count, there has to be focused to ñah!3 sure that those communities are counted. our suggestion is that this is a decision by census to how they approach this. properly, she was in the meeting with us. the chair of the census subcommittee was also in the meeting. and they committed to help the secretary in any way that they could to ensure that what we are seeking, commerce has the opportunity to do. let's look at this. this is the largest single

advertising campaign in the history of the u.s. couldn't sell it isñi nearly $200 million when you add it. -- this is the single largest advertising campaign in the history of the u.s. it is nearly $200 million when you add it together. it is i the concentrated. the census will be the largest advertiser in the u.s. there is ample opportunity to increase the focus, the resources that will be devoted to our community. gary lauck and president obama

took to the important steps on the census. we are confident that this can address the historic undercount in the nation. the final thing i want to emphasize, we have been talking about a number of things and a number of areas of concern. that is to emphasize that we are committed and many of us are already working doing out reach in local communities with a few if any resources. this is important. we are working in communities. the urban league, the naacp.

we are working on our reach, motivation, awareness, information, organizing. we want them to understand how they can do their jobs better. we have to get this right. when mistakes are revealed, we could have had a press conference. we decided to go in and get together a coalition.

this is unprecedented. historic civil-rights organizations, people who have worked for years, new voices combinedñi, unified with a singe message and a single meaning. . .

>> let me thank everyone for coming. let me thank everyone in the media. we will follow up to do interviews with anyone today. happy holidays. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> from the united nations climate summit in copenhagen, they're reporting that the u.s., china, india, and south africa have leached a meaningful agreement. ñrthey say is not enough to comt climate -- climate change. president obama is negotiating with a number of countries. earlier in the day, you can -- president obama spoke at the conference. you can see his remarks later tonight. >> he was not an imposing

figure. ñrand yet, he'll emerge as the nominee at a time when the party was populated by big fears. >> his mark on history includes "manifest destiny." robert merry looks at the life and times of our president. >> there is just about one month left to enter c-span's student cam contest. the top prize is $5,000. this trade a 5-8 minute video on one of our country's greatest strength or the challenge the country is facing. it must present varying points of view. winning entries must be -- will be shown on c-span. don't wait another minute. >> the u.s. house is not expected to conduct legislative business again until next

month, january, after the holiday break. the senate is heading into its third consecutive weekend of work. today, a defense spending bill, at a final vote tomorrow morning. afterwards, the senate returns to health care with three procedural votes required to move forward. each of those are requiring 60 yes votes to pass. more now from capitol hill reporter. >> as you probably know, the senate is still involved in their health care debate. we wanted to get up to date with the managing editor of "congressional quarterly. where is the senate when it comes to health care? >> de turns to night and turns today again. ñithe action is clearly off the floor. outliars who are with holding their vote.

not so much for the bill itself but procedural votes to let the bill come up for a vote. as a result he is in a series of negotiations trying to get to that magical number of 60. sort of the same situation the democratic leadership has faced for nearly a month now, and until then we don't quite know but it looks like there will be -- drama will come to a close christmas eve after they overcome what is expected to be a bunch of republican hurdles thrown up. host: what is going to happen today? guest: basically today we're in a period called post closure. what happens is around 1:00 this morning they voted to limit debate on a fiscal 2010 spending bill. and it's not just money for the pentagon in this bill but a bunch of expiring programs. programs that would continue, for example, unemployment and

health care benefits that were part of the economic stimulus package that was enacted in february, so under senate rules they've agreed to limit the debate. and they expect a vote on this spending package maybe 7:30 a.m. saturday if the republicans decide to use all of the 30 hours of post closure time they are allotted. once that's done, they can try to turn back to health care, which is the elephant, you know, in the room. and basically, if senator reid that the point feels he has the votes to try to limit debate on that, he will do so and file a series of motions and pose a manager's amendment that will make some major changes to the original bill he offered in early december, and we'll see what happens. host: do you expect the senate to be in session all weekend? >> uh, yeah. guest: that's almost for sure. they have 20 dispense with this pentagon spending bill, because the funding kind of expires on

midnight saturday. they could of course if they can't agree on this particular bill with the all the add-jans they could pass a continued resolution but they have to do something otherwise the pentagon goes in shutdown mode, and i don't think either party wants that to happen. so early next week, i guess the third consecutive weekend they will be in session and that debate just kind of goes on drip-by-drip-by-drip but the action is not so much on the floor but off the floor as reid tries to negotiate a compromise and get this number one legislative priority of the democrats done. host: two issues in the papers this morning, br mr. bettelheim. a lot are calling what's going on right now a liberal mute any with regards to the health care bill by the senate majority leader, and two, the republicans may call the bluff.

the bluff of the majority leader about a christmas vote. guest: right. well, in a lot of health care debates we've covered over the years in washington, there's always this sort of procedure wall -- it's funny that so many people thought the democrats had supreme power when they got 60 votes in the senate. but senate rules require that you need 60 votes just to get past the filibusters. in effect what it's done is it's made every senator in the democratic caucus fight and if one of them decides to peel off or withhold his or her support, they have incredible leverage. so reid finds himself in a real procedural bind and republicans know that and they are trying to run the clock and force him to abandon this effort this year. the republicans likely their support with the health care bringing it to a vote. they feel they are not given

enough time to read the -- so you have this sort of standoff. and at the same time the clock is running. reid had set a christmas decline -- deadline to get this work done and it's really crunch time. tever next three or four days. adriel bettelheim, as always we appreciate you givinge)&1 c >> timothy carney suggests that obama is really a champion of big wall -- a big business and wall street. and after words, greg mortenson is interviewed by california congresswoman. did the entire schedule at booktv.org.

along with lists of books of the year. >> capitol hill lawmakers criticized the government's efforts to stem the tide of home foreclosures. the treasury department's modification program was the main topic of this house financial services committee hearing. we will hear from a panel of industry witnesses followed by government officials. barney frank of massachusetts is the chair. this is about three hours. >> we are a little busy. we will convene this hearing today. we have had a series of conversations, obviously, on an ongoing basis with tha variety f people. let me ask the -- we have a great frustration that the failure of the combined efforts

of the elements of the federal government can make a substantial impact on the foreclosure issue. foreclosure issue. programs have been put forward but no one can think we have done a satisfactory job. part of it this mistakes of the past and one of the things we're determined to do going forward, it is to change so that some of the problems that we have now will not continue. namely, we will not have a continuation where there are mortgages that we believe in the public interest to modify and no one has the authority to modify or if they do, he or she will dodge the responsibility by revoking some share responsibility that cannot be allowed to continue.

we will straighten that out going forward. but we're in a current situation and many of us feel the bankruptcy from press their residence is ultimately going to be necessary to have substantial improvement and those who disagree, i think a particular burden in my mind to show it is possible to show foreclosures with all of the negative consequences through society without it. do want to stress what we talk about mortgage foreclosure, we're not talking about compassion in this circumstance, some were misled and others were irresponsible part of the problem is even if people want to say they made their bed and let them live with it has reverberating consequences for the whole society. foreclosures create a circle of harm to the individual

family to the neighborhood and municipalities and the whole economy because of the widespread disparity of mortgage-backed securities. slimming down the rate of foreclosures is important. this week we will be including a provision that will deal with a new class of foreclosure, those who took out mortgages who are unemployed and do not want to make an issue if it is your sole source of and come. there is another program from philadelphia that will lend money to those unemployed and face the loss of their homes for the duration of their unemployment or some other point*. but we still have a problem of the mortgages that need to be disentangle.

the we're doing with that the housing subcommittee has 10 minutes on each side is been i thank you for holding this hearing this morning. i share his frustration we're both well aware of the very issue of tracking progress with the head ministrations program. . .

>> then it not be capable of handling the volume of the borrowers, nor does it suggest that they will be able to benefit from a modification. there should not be a push to achieve these targets at the expense that ensuring that modifications are being processed in a manner that ensures the lender has the complete picture of the bar or's financial situation. to this end, i was troubled to learn that they were being performed with minimal documentation. it was this practice of no or low documentation that helped create the housing crisis we face today. we should not be in the business of perpetuating this practice. according to the treasury department, 375,000 trial

modifications will be converted to permanent modifications by the end of the year. the j.p. morgan chase disclosed that at the end of the year, a percentage has failed to make the first payment. nearly 50% of borrowers failed to make 03 payments. the federal reserve bank of boston size that 35% of are worse that receive modifications and the been the fault in six months. this raises significant concerns, i think, about the ability of these programs to ñimeet the long-term expectatios outlined earlier this year. these challenges are greatly compromised by a shift in the root cause of foreclosures. it with the downturn in the economy, as the chairman mentioned, we are facing more traditional causes or foreclosure like the loss of a job. we must have a realistic understanding of their capability, and an obligation to our taxpayers to focus our efforts on families that truly need assistance.

i look forward to hearing from our witnesses this morning, and i think the chairman for holding this important hearing this morning. >> the gentleman from georgia for two minutes. >> i can't think of a more pressing issue for us to deal with at this time than the foreclosure situation . it is alarming. in the third quarter of 2009, my state of georgia had a 25% increase in home foreclosures in 2008. er the third quarter and 2008. that is a total of over 36,000 foreclosure filings. that means one for every 98 households. that is absolutely devastating. but i want to turn just for a moment about what i think is an even more devastating situation. perhaps the most insidious side

of the foreclosure process and one modification process and that is the unfortunate saddam of vulnerable homeowners in desperate need of assistance and saving their homes. it is one of the most tragic aspects of human existence in my opinion that whenever and wherever people are downtrodden others will move in and prey upon them and worsen their condition. i was just contacted last night by a constituent who had contracted with a group called prodigy law group, a firm an urban california just to help him navigate the loan modification process else. and unfortunately what my constituents did not know, that's this firm had a reputation as being scam artists. in fact the better business bureau of california as well as other numerous people had the prodigy law group as a known as gemmer. as well as we debate this issue not only must we deal with this

before us and we are doing but we have to find a way to put these predatory beasts that are prebon people who are already in bad conditions out of business. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. mr. hensarling is recognized for three minutes that actually i think a little bit more than that. i'm not sure exactly how much time is left. three and a half. >> thank you, mr. chairman. by any standard of measurement the foreclosure mitigation programs of this administration and this congress have been abject failures. hope for homeowners $300 billion authorized at least as of some of the latest data available 1,000 applications, 50 loans closed by july. , affordable modification programs 75 billion-dollar cost supposed to help three to 4 million homeowners, 650,000

modifications' trial modifications. home affordable refinance program supposed to help four to 5 million homeowners, the latest numbers available 116,500. yet, we know that for closure rates and delinquency rates continue to rise for 9.9% in the third quarter of 082 now 14.1% in fluff third quarter of phone line. the government tax payer funded foreclosure mitigation programs have been an abject failure. on the other hand, those who actually hold loans have a financial incentive for the borrowers who can work out to make modifications. and of the hope now program, as of the latest available datacom 4.7 million have been afforded

workout plans since august of 07 with no cost to the taxpayer. there is no better foreclosure mitigation plan them a job. and unfortunately, the job creation program of this administration has also been an abject failure as we suffer through the highest unemployment rate that we've had in a generation. 3.5 million fellow countrymen having lost their jobs since the president took office. the best way to foreclose, to have a foreclosure mitigation plan, again, is to create a job. and the best way to create a job is to tell job creators that they are not going to have to contend with the trillion dollar nationalist takeover of our health care system. that a 600 billion-dollar threatened energy tax to our

economy will not take place. that the tax relief in this decade that brought upon one of the longest period of economic prosperity will not be allowed to expire so that tax rates on income and dividends, on capital gains increase. that some certainty will be brought to the market and the bill that chairman frank would bring to the floor tomorrow, which will be a job crashing bailout bill that too will not become law. that is a plan. that is a recipe to create jobs in our economy. to take away the looming storm clouds of obamanomics and with this economy create jobs, and if you create jobs, then people can keep their homes. nothing short of that will work. we have to signal to those who will ultimately have to pay the bill that this is a congress, and this is an administration ultimately that is going to be serious about the debt and deficit.

throwing more money out programs that do not work is absolutely insane and they do not work. why we are reconsidering more money to the same program is beyond me. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman's time has expired, and i recognize myself for two minutes and then i will go to mr. klein as our final opening statement. let me just say that it is obvious that we have a serious foreclosure problem, default problem and that has come home to all of us with the nature of the calls that have come into our offices generally before this economic meltdown was to intervene with the federal government on behalf of constituents to get social security checks or va benefits

or travel documents. the bulk of the business that we are now doing calls for people trying to get credit and get out from under and survive the credit they were already extended disproportionately calls of that and i have an even greater appreciation for that this past weekend when mr. marks group, the neighborhood assistance corporation of america bought their road show to my congressional district in charlatan and well over 45, 50,000 people showed up from all over the country seeking to have their loans modified, and we are in a serious problem, and the programs out there even when

they are working are not working on a scale that's large enough to have the impact that needs to be had, and then on top of that the loss of jobs has added a whole another wave of foreclosures and defaults that made the problem worse. so i welcome this opportunity to hear from the witnesses today and my time is expired and i now recognize the gentleman from florida, mr. klein, for two minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and for putting this important hearing. i am from south florida and we face serious problems with housing market as many other parts of the country do. and i think we all understand its essentials for banking and services as well as federal government to implement effective programs to increase loan modification and prevent foreclosures where they can be prevented. i'm pleased to see increase focus on foreclosure prevention

from the obama administration and they've taken some steps in the right direction but we have a long way to go. one of the problems with the home affordable modification program, and other initiatives is incomplete paperwork and we hear this over and over again. documents are submitted and for the loan modification and we keep hearing it's not the right documents and that for the borrowers side we hear that they've asked over and over to prevent the same documents. it's a communication problem tracking of the feet problem and some cases problem of the services and banks not having adequate personnel. quantity and quality to service these loan modifications and address the problems. i also concerned about the process of short sales, and i appreciate the new treasury guidelines that have come to play to expedite the closings on short sales. but i still have concerns that don't go far enough to address some of the issues complicating execution of short sales particularly secondary limbs and investor interest which my attitude is where there is a

will there is a way. i think these are things that can be worked through. another issue is appraisals. this seems a constant issue working for difficulties in loan modifications because some properties will overvalue on the we have and because there's little activity at the ground level right now the appraisals are coming in while and not necessarily reflective of the value. again this is something that is deepening the problem and prolonging the agony. last i want to point out that in many cases banks are also sitting on foreclosure proceedings. so they don't have to miss a surly right on the acid or take title and step in the shoes of the bar and that is creating another problem in the communities because people are not keeping up with mortgages, not keeping up with taxes and with their homeowners' assessments and condominium assessments and it's creating a whole problem in terms of the market ability of properties in those communities and value of the properties. so, i just want to say we have a lot of work to do and i appreciate everybody coming here

today giving their thoughts and ideas and we need to move expeditiously on this important issue. i thank the chairman. >> chernow recognizes ms. sheehan. i'm sorry. >> good morning. my name is moly she can. i work for the home lending division of jpmorgan chase. as the executive responsible for housing policy. at chase we have been working very hard to help prevent foreclosures and keep families in their homes. since 2007, under a more expensive programs we have helped prevent over 885,000 foreclosures. since january 1st, 2009, chase has offered over 568,000 modifications to struggling homeowners for a value of over $100 billion in mortgage loans.

we have approved or completed over 112,000 permanent modifications under hamp comegys proprietary modification programs or other programs offered by the gse is and fhfa. we did give some specific details of all of that activity in the written testimony for you to review. this year alone we have opened 30 chase home ownership centers in 13 states. over 60,000 struggling borrowers around the country have been able to meet with trained counselors face-to-face. we plan to add additional 21 sites early next year. we have added over 2500 loan modification counselors in 2009 bring the total number to 5200 loan modifications counselors and 15 sites across the country. we have haulier over 2800 additional mortgage operation employees to handle the unprecedented volume so we now

have nearly 14,000 home lending employees at chase dedicated to helping homeowners. we have handled over 12.8 million inbound calls and our outbound foreclosure prevention calls increased to 4 million in 2009 at from 400,000 a year earlier. and we have had 3.6 million visits to the dedicated website for love modifications where the borrowers have been able to download 1.6 million modification packages they can provide to chase. through hamp alone we have offered trial plans to over 200,000 homeowners and are working hard to make those modifications permanent. based on our experience for every 100 hamp plants initiate from april for september, 200929 borrowers did not make the required payments under the trial plan making them ineligible for a permanent modification under hamp.

71 for worse made all three payments under the trial plans. of the 71, the 24 worst did not submit to get all the documents required for underwriting. required for underwriting. 31 customers have submitted thã >> and out of those 20, 16 will likely be approved or will have already been approved for permanent hamp modification. to the extent of the bar were not approved, we have other alternatives available to them under chase modification programs and programs offered by the gse's. right now, we're very focused and helping the 51% of our words that are paying the need help completing documents and have implemented new aggressive initiatives. initiatives. a coordinated program to call

the customer is 36 times reach of by mail 15 times and make at least to home visits if necessary to help complete documents, ordering key documents earlier in the process so they are ready with the border was documents come in to exploit underwriting, targeting outreach efforts to the borrowers that live near the chase home ownership center so they can come and in person to get help completing the document. assigning specific pools of accounts to the loan modification counselors to provide continuity in dealing with the customer and end processing. under this program, recently launched have completed over 400 million calls, letters and home visits on average of 27 activities per borrower toward the end of november to help the conversion process to permanent. we are also paying special attention to the 31% whose documents are in but don't meet hamp requirements. and we will be working on very specific initiatives to get that

process completed with the treasury in order to simplify the documentation for the barbers to the-borrowers. thank you very much. i would be happy to answer any questions you have. >> the chair next recognizes jack schakett, risk mitigation strategies. >> chairman, congresswoman capito and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to update you on bankamerica's loan to the kalona modification on areas where we can work together to help homeowners still in their homes. i am jack schakett, bank of america risk mitigation and i've been working for the mortgage servicing portfolio over 14 years. bank of america is a proud partner in the administration's, affordable program, hamp, with more than 160,000 customers currently active in the charnel modifications hamp as provide valuable tool to that complements aggressive loan modification programs that bank of america already has in place.

over the last two years, bank of america with combined effort of hamp has offered help to 615,000 homeowners. and over 100,000 calls a day we hear from customers. the concerns and frustrations. we believe we have improved significantly ability to handle large volumes associated with calls. we also believe much more is meeting to be done. we fully share the treasury commitment to convert a successful trial modifications to permanent as quickly as possible. in support of that commitment bank of america is focusing on assisting customers providing the necessary documents for the underwriting process. otherwise homeowners are at risk of missing this opportunity to obtain a hamp loan modification and out, that none of us want. as this committee knows from prior hearings, in addition to the customers making three timely trial payments, the servicer must fully underwrite the permanent modification. this includes verifying income,

occupancy status and tax returns. specifically, bank of america has approximately 65,000 customers who've made more than three trial payments on time. these modifications are set to expire on december 31st. of those customers 50,000 have either not submitted some or all the required documents or the documents they have submitted revealed discrepancy the need to be followed up on with the customer. for these customers, bank of america last week sent by overnight mail an urgent request for the documents needed to be completing the process and set up a time frame required to avoid losing the treasury modification program benefits. we included a return prepaid express mail envelope to make the process as easy as possible. this is addition to the previous reminder calls and baling at temps. we have dedicated substantial resource to these efforts in concluding the expansion of the fault management staff to nearly 13,000.

all the customers that have now submitted documentation we are confident we can meet the treasuries requirement to fully underwrite 100% of these loans before the trial expiration. but despite these efforts it was clear that some portion of these customers were facing a similar expiration would not be able to complete the process and would miss the deadline. late yesterday after meeting the treasury department where we discussed our concerns about the expiration date the treasury released new guidance to prove to be very helpful and relief to the customers that have submitted all of their documents and where the servicers are still working on completing the underwriting or the process. we think that this new guidance will go a long way to a limit fallout on technical ground and we appreciate the assistance from the treasury board. today i also like to offer several areas of consideration where hamp can be enhanced to help our customers. based on the treasury survey data, the total customers eligible today for assistance of

the program is estimated to be 1.5 million. bank of america's share of that is about 340,000. bank of america has made offers to 74% of the population and has started the trial modifications with nearly half. this compares favorably to the latest treasury report for all servicers participating in the program. we believe this demonstrates hamp is an effective program in reaching certain bars however the program was not designed to assist borrowers who vacated homes or no longer occupy their home as a principal residence. nor as a program structured to assist for the unemployed or those already over relatively affordable housing payment of less than 31% of their income. we encourage treasury to expand hamp to assist meeting some of these challenges. specifically including a program for the employed and allowances for housing ratio less than 31% for the low to moderate income borrowers. and in any case, bank of america will continue to provide solutions to these customers

that fall outside the reach of hand. at bank of america, our goal is to keep as many customers and their homes as possible. we understand the urgency of solutions not only for the customers we serve, but to further encourage the housing recovery that has begun to take root. we appreciate the continued strong support and partnership from the head and attrition and congress on this very important issue. thank you. -- before, mr. schakett. the chair next recognizes for testimony mr. gordon for the responsible lending. you have four minutes. >> good morning mr. chairman, ranking member capital and members of the committee. thank you for inviting me to talk about stopping foreclosures. without stronger policy intervention, not only will millions of families lose their homes and necessarily, but foreclosures will continue to destroy communities especially minority communities. hampered housing market and slow or prevent full economic

recovery. ye serve as a senior policy council of the center for responsible lending and non-partisan research and policy organization dedicated to protecting home ownership and family wealth. we are affiliate's of self-help, nonprofit financial institution that makes mortgage loans and lower income neighborhoods and is consequently grappling with many of the same issues encountered by other lenders. and my testimony is informed by this experience. the government's principal antiforeclosure program, hamp, has not reached its potential. one obstacle impeding hamp's success is the private service industry as a whole is either unable or unwilling to do what it has agreed to do. to address this problem, congress should mandate lost mitigation prior to foreclosure. for many servicers, only a legal requirement will cost and to build the systems and safeguards

necessary to ensure such evaluations occurred before the home is lost. one relatively simple way to improve the hamp program would be for treasury to require servicers to stop all foreclosure proceedings while borrowers are being ivan related fer hamp modification. right now foreclosures may proceed to the point of sale on a parallel track with lost mitigation discussions. as a result homeowners receive a confusing mix of communications from their lender. some of which tell the bar where they are being considered for modification but others of which warn of impending foreclosure may fail to send in their documentation comedy called early on a trial modification, may not answer the phone when their service or calls or they may leave the home which makes them ineligible for hamp. it's also crucial for treasury

to make the npv model public so that homeowners can tell whether the hamp evaluation was done correctly and for treasury to provide full public access to the hamp database to encourage evidence based program creation and ideas similar to the way that we get full data under the home mortgage disclosure act. only that data will be able to tell what works and what doesn't, what servicers are giving the best job and other minority homeowners are being held to the same degree as white farmers. the foreclosure problem has evolved and we must expand hamp to meet new challenges such as negative equity and unemployment. others on the panel will talk more about the importance of principal reduction, something we believe would be enormously useful under this program. and we also should expand hamp to assist homeowners who've lost their jobs and may not have the nine months of guarantee of employment income that the need

to be eligible for tar and this is what would be done through chairman frank's t.a.r.p. for mean street. we must left one person to the principal residence mortgages. this solution costs nothing to the u.s. taxpayer. it's the only solution that cuts through the gordian knot of second liens, securitization, negative equity and backend consumer debt. it would also serve as a stick to the carrot of the hamp incentive payments. finally, we commend this committee for its work on legislation to create the consumer financial protection agency, and we urge the full house to pass the bill this week. we now know it is much less expensive and much easier to prevent these problems than to clean up after them. thus if p.a. would gather in one place consumer protection authorities currently scattered

across many different agencies and would remain fully focused on the sole mission of protecting our families and economy from the dire consequences of predatory lending and consumer abuse. thank you for inviting me today and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much for the test and, as gordon-reed next is anthony sanders distinguished professor of realistic finance school of management at george mason university. you are recognized for five minutes. >> mr. chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to testify today. according to the treasury service performance report through october, 2009, 920,000 charnel modification plans were offered to borrowers and 651,000 trial modifications have been made. given the fall off the cliff of housing prices of many states the surge of unemployment and evaporation of liquidity for banks and institutions in the second half of 2007i am frankly surprised at the servicing industry has moved so quickly to make the loan modifications in

such large numbers. with 14.4% of the border was in foreclosure or delinquent on their mortgages this creates incredible challenge to the servicing industry. it is a challenge to the server serves to make loan modifications succeed when 70% of loan modifications that have already interest rate cuts have gone into default after 12 months. if the loan modification affordability calculation is done under hamp only use is firstly mortgages the failure of these modifications is not unanticipated. and as i mentioned in the house t.a.r.p. hearings of november 2008 to negative equity problem in the states of california, arizona and florida is we to be very, very challenging for the servicing industry, loan modifications must take into account consideration for the negative equity position of households to determine the likelihood of success when making these payments why are so few loans expected to be permanent? for several reasons. first is the reason for the projected failure rate is a

great to which many residential loans of the united states or in a negative equity situations. according to the age of bank research report they are expecting 25 million homes to be a negative equity position. the second reason is unemployment rate while 10% of unemployment rate is bad enough, the truman played including the wage and salary curtailment is closer to 17.5%. this is a very challenging obstacles to overcome for the servicing industry. third is the documentation problems we've heard about. to qualify for trial loan qualification for a temporary loan modifications is ground for moral hazard problems, where borrowers and applicants are insulated from west -- risk. borrowers may not want to submit the required documentation since they need to be denied for permanent modification.

-- since they may be denied for permanent modification. the demand for growth has ramped up their servicing efforts to meet the demand. borrowers are having trouble making the three consecutive payments because they either have to much in come, not enough and come, or a house that has fallen too much in value. the making a home affordable program provides a service report that ranks orders in the service report. the higher, the better. it does not control for services that are servicing particularly hard areas like bubble states of california, arizona, nevada, and florida. çóthey're going to be heavily challenged to perform these modifications. modifications. when you add the already high unemployment rate in the states

these are indeed a great challenges. in addition the highest on in planning rates by the metropolitan area as of september or detroit, 18.5%, bordon the suburb come 17%, riverside, 14.1%, less vigorous, 13.7%, and los angeles, 12.7%. while arizona has only a month when a rate of 9.1%. the difficulty of the modification to cons%/d%g@ @ @ r in determining the loan modification success rates. my recommendation is for the treasury to account for loans that are serviced in a bubble states and the midwest economic states like ohio and michigan. in short, modified loans and nebraska will be far easier than in arizona and nevada. one thing that we should consider is to allow financial

institutions -- rather than take immediate hits to their capital when we have a modification or default, allow them to advertise their losses over a five-year period. that would enable some of the distressed assets to sell like heart was originally meant to do. that includes conversions to leases. ch fannie mae is considering and brought loan modifications that a particular sense. particularly in the vacancy rates in many states in the housing market conversions make some sense when the comparatively low rental rates compared to mortgage payments. i welcome any opportunities and appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. >> thank you, sir. the chair appreciates the testimony and next recognizes for five minutes mr. goodman -- ms. goodman. the senior director of

securities llp. >> mr. chairman and members of the committee i maundered to testify today. my name is lori goodman senior managing director at amherst securities, leading broker-dealer specializing in the trading of residential mortgage backed securities. i am in charge of strategy and business development. to keep abreast of trends in the residential mortgage backed securities market we do an extensive amount of data intensive research. i will share some of our results with you today. as a result of my testimony, i hope to leave you with two points. first, the housing market is fundamentally in very bad shape. the largest single problem is negative equity. second, the current modification program does not address negative equity and is therefore dustin to fail. and there is no single solution the arsenal measures must include principal reduction and must explicitly address the lost allocation between first and investors and secondly and investors. in order to place today's topic in this context let's look at the housing market. the mortgage bankers delinquency

survey for q3 shoes 14.1% of the borrowers are not making their mortgage payments. this is 7.9 million homeowners. this dramatic increase from several years ago is the result three things. first, borrowers are transitioning into delinquency at a rapid rate, second, rates are extremely low and feared the time between when a borrower first goes in delinquent and when the hamas liquidated has lengthened dramatically. given the current introductory we estimate approximately 7 million of the 7.9 million homeowners will be forced into vacating their properties and this estimate of 7 million units includes only the borrowers that have already stopped making their mortgage payments. it does not include the 250,000 new borrowers per month for going delinquent for the first time and modifications they can't help considerably as their

success rate has been low. the real problem is many borrowers have negative equity in their home. most borrowers don't default because of negative equity alone. generally bar were experiences a change in financial circumstances, this is a payment on their mortgage and then reevaluate their financial priorities. if the home has substantial negative equity they will choose to walk. if you numbers will help illustrate this point. at and hearst we did a study looking at all prime borrowers 40 days delinquent on their mortgage six months ago. six months later, we found through the prime borrowers with 20% equity only 38% had become 60 plus skilling quit. for the prime borrowers with substantial negative equity, 75% had become 60 days delinquent. there is a substantial group of people who've argued that the primary problem is not negative equity, it is unemployment. this is not supported by the evidence. first, the increase in delinquencies for subprimal,

alt-a began to accelerate in 2007. bye contrast we did on begin to see a large increases in unemployment on till q3, 2008. further evidence of the importance of negative equity comes from another study we've recently completed. we found evidence the combined loan-to-value ratio or cltv please a critical role. fer alt-a in a prime loans and low unemployment areas the default frequency was at least four times greater for the bar was under water by 20 per cent and it was for the borrowers with at least 20% equity position. we also found if a borrower has a positive equity unemployment plays a negligible role. we found that all borrowers with positive equity perform similarly no matter what the local level of unemployment. indeed negative equity is the most important predictor of default. when the borrower has negative

equity, on employment act as one of many possible catalysts, greatly increasing the probability of default. hamp modifications or, as you are aware primero the payment reduction plan. hamp has three false. first, the gentry team to make the modification is a mortgage servicer rather than originator. second, it only considers the first mortgage payment taxes and insurance. it does not consider the bar were still financial circumstances. a third and most importantly the program does not emphasize the three amplification of the bar were. what can and should be done? here are some imperatives. first there is no one-size-fits-all approach to the modifications. second, moving principal reduction hi year in the hamp modification waterfall will be the most natural way to raise the success of the modification program. what investors support this type of program? absolutely. all for the pleasure is devastating to a more work is

also devastating to investors because recovery rates are low. the interest of the first we investor and of our work are totally aligned. third, any principal reduction program requires the had been attrition to address the second week problem head-on. fourth, we endorse three hamp bouck for homeowners programs. fifth, we need more transparency on the data. we are concerned if policies continue to kick the can down the road working with a modification program that does not address negative equity, delinquencies will continue to spiral with no end in sight. thank you very much for allowing me to testify today. i am happy to answer any questions. it has been an honor. >> thank you, ms. goodman. we recognize mr. marks, corporation of america you have five minutes. >> thank you very much. it is very good to be here. my name is bruce marks, ceo and founder of naca, neighborhood

assistance corporation of america. we have an interest in pan also want to respond to legally binding agreement with every major servicer and the two major investors in the country to do foreclosure prevention. so we have be of a custody, saxon, fannie mae, legally binding agreements, with him, p.m. ac, freddie mac, one west, chase, wells fargo, we've got american homes, hsbc -- again, every one of the major servicers of the country and every one of the major investors in the country we have a legally binding agreement. there's only two real solutions out there. one is to restructure the mortgage for someone with a stable income to make a mortgage affordable, not to refinance, to restructure by permanently

reducing the interest rate or the outstanding principal and make it affordable. and i say permanent. that means not a free set in five years to make the payment affordable. and we agree with what laura and some of the other people from the panel say. we should do more principle reductions so you can keep the interest rate at the market rate, make it affordable by doing principal reduction that clearly hasn't happened. when you do the other option is when someone does not have stable income because they are unemployed is a forbearance agreement and lenders have been doing for parents agreements for many years and continue to do that. certainly we have homeowners here and some of them, dena holmes in the audience as well as paul roberts, dena went to the same the treen event, we've done 12 eatonton of the country each one has about 40 to 60,000 people come. and he has reduced his mortgage

payment by $1,400 a month. he said in a fixed rate of 3% locked in. paul has gone to one of the save the dream even seating $183 to read again in the audience with interest rate of 43% fixed as well. we have to of the major servicers year, bank of america and chase. but the things we've heard about was what's not working. let's take the hit singles of what we have here. we've got think of america. what they've done at the scene of the dream even to is they are doing on-site mortgage restructures, that means they get all the documents. the verification of income, they get that piece donner and they actually have homeowners signing of the legal documents signing then at the fence so people in one place or walking away with the restructure saving $500, $1,000, sometimes $2,000 a month

getting a job done. and they are close to almost 50% of the people who are coming through doing that. then you've got chase come out of all these servicers here is the worst. the fact of the matter is when you look at the documentation and what they are doing they are playing you. the fact the matter is when they say they are doing these trial modifications and all that and all of a sudden it is the borrower's fault because the homeowners can't get the documents it's because why? the our underwriting then after three months. so, they are all -- the refuse to do onsite permanent restructure's. they put people through the process. they are impossible to work with. talk to the homeowners about that. so i think it is an interesting contrast that you've got the one who does the best and that's bank of america and the one who does the worst and that is chase. so when you get jaime dimond up here asking for the facts of that. let's talk about what the solutions are and what they

should be. the m. h. es, the administration has to stop pleading, begging and bribing the server servers to do the right thing. because the fact of the matter is a lot of business models don't work. they are in the collection business. they are in the business of remitting that money to the investors. they are not in the hour origination business which is where we are now. the fact of the matter is where is the occ and the federal reserve? they should be requiring to surface to do the mortgage restructure's, to do with the should be doing. that's the job, if that does not require t.a.r.p. money. clearly when we had a financial crisis we've required the lenders to take the t.a.r.p. money because there was a safety and soundness issue. we could have the same standard to say let's require the servicers, lenders to stop foreclosures to restructure the mortgages and make them affordable without the use of

the tax payer money out there. thank you very much. i would be glad to answer any other questions. >> thank you. i thank the witnesses for their testimony today and i start with you, is sheehan, representing chase. you just heard mr. marks testimony. what you have any response or reply to some of his comments? >> we have been working with mr. marks organization for quite awhile. we think the great job in their outreach events and bringing home owners to talk we have the process we have established in terms of how we do our intake for our defense. it is a different, slightly different process perhaps than bank of america and ensure each of us have different process these we've worked very hard to make sure we get the documents in, we have a dedicated portal, the image documents, put them together and then they

there have been bumps along the road, particulates g building up -- particularly to building up capacity. we will continue to work very hard and follow up with him after this hearing and talk further about how we can do better. >> do other witnesses have a comment on the question? anybody else? all right. when it comes to foreclosures, i continue to be troubled by stories of mortgage fraud and individuals that tried to make a quick buck by scanning innocent people. -- scamming innocent people. what steps are you taking to make sure your customers are not being taken advantage of? is there more education that needs to be done so innocent people are not taken advantage of? . . their litigation to be taken

to make sure others are of scant? >> there's a lot of work that is to be done in the scam process. we've made a lot of process. we work with the ftc making sure we are getting information to them when we learn about scams going on. we have, you know, put together a booklet with the ftc we include in all of our conversations with our customers. we continually remind them they don't need to pay for a modification. >> thank you. other witnesses on to answer the question? mr. marks? >> yes, the answer is if you consider those out there doing the fraudulent activity you have to consider them as religious and the only way you can't kill off all of the roaches by stomping them out you've got to stomping them out you've got to cut of and the food source is the lack of ability some homeowner goes to the servers are to get a solution right then and there. so the focus should be on requiring the server service to get the job done because if you

do that then you're going to prevent all of the fraud. clearly it should be outlawed no one should charge anybody to save their home because they should be working with the server servers and nonprofits who don't charge to do that. we have got to focus on hundred% getting the job done. everybody comes to the save the dream has tried to work with the servicer and failed. so we have got to put these players out of business and profits out of business because our job should become irrelevant if the surface are required to do these restructure's and forbearances. thank you. >> any other witnesses? >> i just want to add to what he was saying. i disagree with part of what he's saying because against opposing a bar where does not like what they are hearing from the surface or they may want to get legal representation to push the envelope. you have to be careful about regulating people out of these

industries. it sounds good but there might be people that want additional representation. >> and we certainly agree with that because of these events we do a forensic audit of cologne's so on the picket people that you find 80% of all of the pain in the country there's something that was done illegally so when we do the forensic audit we find the violation and then gives the bar were a better opportunity to get the long-term solution absolutely. >> thank you to the witnesses. my time is about to expire. i'm going to recognize ms. capito. >> there are two things troubling me. first of all is i guess the conflicting information. but the information that -- when i learned the last hearing in order to go to a trial modification you don't have to have your documentation before you. you can go to the charnel

modification for three months without documentation. but according to what ms. sheehan is saying after you are requesting these documents they are not forthcoming with a large percentage of the folks that are trying to modify their loans what is the principle reason people are not forthcoming as the gentleman said they don't like what they are seeing or they are postponing the inevitable. what is the reason for this? >> certainly the situation is that, a lot of the situations that we see or where they have submitted some of the documents but not all of the documents. and -- >> income tax -- protivin planet. >> it may be documents they don't have easy access to it like supporting death certificates or divorce decree.

this is -- mr. marks made the point is a true origination process. it's truly underwriting alone so we are looking at as you said all of the different financial aspects of the situation and so it is a challenge for the borrowers trying to help them overcome the challenge. >> do you have the same situation at bank of america? >> it is true. when they were first setting up hamp there was a lot of discussion whether or not we should require full documentation, parcel documentation or no documentation to start the period. over that time there was a general consensus that we supported that we have a lot of pent-up demand right now. we need to get the customer started as soon as possible so people here on the ec side of the program. they get no documentation or commitment to what you make, start the trial period, use that to get the documentation. hopefully you what actually solve the documentation problem at the same time in parallel with the three month trial payments. clearly we now look at the height of folly ratio to change

the process slightly. we would advocate to make some documentation at least two documents, the hard ship affidavit which is a fundamental program, it also has language making sure everything when you are saying is truthful and the true 46 ot, that is pulling a tax return for some point in the future so if there are customers that potentially are going to try to gain the system that might rule -- rutka stores up front and eliminate the conversion problems we have today. so, our view may be a good time to challenge what documentation we are requiring up front to get in the program. still allowing the time to finish the process to send them to the trial because that process still is a good idea because there are a lot of documents to get in trying to get them out front with what may be unnecessary delay to start the process. >> if i could add one thing to what they're saying it is not a difficult process. it is a simple process. if we can do it in the same day,

seemed a solutions, all you need is three documents. you need the hardship affidavit, 4506t authorization and verification of income. so we do not believe he should do the no documentation. we believe in the trial of but you should underwrite on the one and get it done after three months of mckelvie on time payment it gets done. the other problem is that homeowners have lost confidence in the servicers. and that, you know, so the process doesn't work, people don't trust the servicers out there and somehow we have got to reestablish the trust between homeowners and servicers but just get it done at the beginning, get the verification. i think the fact of the matter is the required more documentation at the beginning of the process. the administration made a simple process -- >> i would certainly say to have up front door irritation, like i said i was astounded to hear there was no documentation in the beginning. we had the problem when we

started. i'm talking we back. the other thing i think ms. goodman brought up is the negative equity situation when challenged whether it was on a plane and driving a lot of this now, no, not really. it is negative equity or people underwater i don't see how you solve that problem. luckily i from a state where you don't really have that problem, the states like california, florida, nevada, they are under water in amounts more than the median home price where i live and people have got to feel just desperate that there is no way they can get out from under. so, you know, with -- i think that is a huge hurdle to overcome and it is one you cannot do overnight. it's not like you've lost your job, you've got a new job. it's like you have time here and i think my time is up but any way that is just a comment. >> is it possible to respond to

that? do you mind if i can do that quickly? >> we do have other people that want to ask questions. you can respond in writing in fact the chair encourages anyone who would like to provide additional testimony to give written testimony. it will be provided to the members appear. thank you. the chair next recognizes ms. waters for five minutes from california. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i apologize for not being able to get here earlier today. let me just say i have spent a lot of time trying to understand why we can't get loans modified faster, quicker. i don't buy the white house latest attempt to prod servicers and duke load modifications. i don't think the trying to embarrass the services into

doing this works. i think we need stronger legislation. i understand a lot about the lone service and mr. marks, you're absolutely correct. i see no reason why you cannot do a loan modification in the same day that you are contacted with limited documentation. i'm not saying no documentation but, you know, this business of the trial for three months, and then the request for six months worth of pay and statements and on and on, in my office we are helping people 75 and 80-years-old try to put together requests from servicers the professionals' work every day can't put together easily. and the other thing is many services, what do you lose so much? i mean, most of the time i'm getting calls about people having to submit a second and third time. further, i get the feeling that

some of our companies have just brought in servicers and gave them a two and a half hour training and put them out there to try and do loan servicing and then tell my constituents they can't take into account certain kinds of incomes, that's not valid. i don't care where the money comes from. child support, on employment, social security, all of that should be taken but i'm talking to services and get on the phone with, and i get on the phone with my constituents, i get a waiver. my constituents talk directly to the surface is to assist them. i am just amazed what appears to be incompetence. i am amazed at the request for all of this documentation, the bank statements, tax filings on and on and on. it is not necessary and they are not getting done. we know that they are not getting done. the white house is embarrassed about this and people are losing

their homes who could remain in their homes and the recovery bill that's going to be on the floor tomorrow we are going to try to get something for the unemployed. because we have reverse mortgages where people get reverse mortgages, get money up front and then when the house is sold or what have you the money is paid back. we can do that with unemployment when the house is sold we can lend money upfront and they can pay it back with a house is sold but i tell you there is not a real effort by the mortgage companies or the banks or the servicers or whoever. banks' own most of the servicing operations to do loan modifications. that's the bottom line. you don't want. and so not wanting to do them, you don't care about hamp or anything else. you just don't want to do them. so i am looking for stronger legislation to force these

modifications. i'm looking for ways to expedite as mr. marks is explaining, and i didn't hear some of the other testimony. it isn't a lot that can be told to me about the can be done that people are not getting their paperwork in that somehow people signed on the dotted line and now they don't want to take the responsibility. i have been looking at if i may negative looking at some of these mortgages where they readjust in perpetuity. the readjust every here for the rest of the loan up to 20 34, 2035 on and on. those should be modified on the spot. it has nothing to do with anything excerpted is a predatory loan. and for those servicers and those companies who have those bad products that are out on the market, and they have people in trouble and they are saying they

can't modify those loans i am coming after them with some real legislation to do so. some of the loans are predatory some of them people have been defrauded and i wanted those loans modified even if they work every day and they can afford to pay the loan. those loans have to be modified along with people who don't have the money because they've lost their jobs cetera. i yield back the balance of my time. there is not a lot to be said of this mess, mr. chairman. >> thank the gentlelady for questions >> you have an opportunity to submit witness statements as well. >> i appreciate that.

i just make mention here, miss sheehan in her testimony said that jpmorgan chase had successfully prevented 730,000 foreclosures. bank of america assisted 615,000 customers in the first six months of 2009, refinancing to more affordable mortgages at a lower interest rate. the administration and some of the members of congress would like to change the bankruptcy code so that bankruptcy judges could write down principal. this does not just have to do with the interstate but also reducing principal on a loan. they wait and don't renegotiate because we might do these huge write-downs of principle.

why would the borrower continue to work at the table to try to stay -- try to work out an abridgment for lower interest rate. that would be one of the questions that i would ask. mr. schakett, do you have a thought on that? what would happen "after words" to our efforts to restructure, to continue to restructure your loans should that kind of legislation passed. >> circulate there is risk. went to work with a mortgage company in existing programs like camp to modify or judicial process you get a utter deal judicially. you're right there some risk that undermine the program. our view is that the congress and the administration determines we should do more for certain we better work i've been. i think there could be some more segments very high ltb, delinquencies, because there's a large problem.

i think there should be some portents participatory program. it would be best served idly by putting out through a process that works for everybody and actually kind of sponsored by the administration itself versus the judicial process. >> one of the concerns i have here is having caught in the past against some of the policies that encouraged fannie mae and freddie mac to do some of the types of lending they did with zero down payment loans, subprime loans, half of their portfolio been subprime. my concern is that we now go to a situation where if this crammed down concept goes through, it's going to have an effect in the future on mortgage rates. and i want to ask for faster sanders about this. what's going to be the effect going forward on the secondary market? are lenders going to have to

reprice their consumer mortgage project or their consumer mortgage product in order to adjust for the risk to investors presented by something like bankruptcy creamed down? is that the likely consequence of legislation like this? i remember the justice department court justice john paul stevens comment that there's a reason why the bankruptcy code does not treat residential mortgages like it treats credit cards or auto loans and basically what he said was we want to enjoy investment in certainty and encourage the flow of capital into this market. if congress keeps making mistakes, errors in judgment that blends the market like what was done with fannie mae and freddie mac and then comes back with crammed down our legislation like that, do we drive the private capital out of the market. i mean at the end of the day i don't think congress did any favors or disadvantaged people i pushing fannie mae and freddie

mac in mandating that half of their goals mandated that has to that be subprime. that was a huge mistake for congress to make. zero down payment alone by fannie and freddie was a huge mistake. for now living with the fact that people took advantage of that, obviously. as everybody would. if you can get capital at those rates and with no money down, if you could flip homes 30% of the homes in 2005 were flipped in this country. so we knew what was going on. let me ask you, professor your observation. >> well first of all i think you responded at the beginning that the write-down of principle law is desired by anyone that's in that position has serious moral implications about weeding and actually going to default. if you know you're going to get a principal write-down. but secondly on the secondary market fits. andy davidson knife votes a paper for the anti-macarthur and what we said was if we want to

get the whole securitization market which is really, but important for the mortgage market and the housing market to recover we have to establish trust. so investors around the world, the united states pension funds have to trust that the securities market is going to work etc. and the problem is if we go to cram-down. they will send kind of a shockwave through the international markets that's all my gosh were going to haven't entered judicial intervention and probably not going to be consistent. they will vary by jurisdiction. they are a terrible signal that were sent into the capital markets around the world if we pursue that. as they nobly intended as it is. >> thank you professor. >> pitcher will next recognize mr. clay from missouri for five minutes. >> thank you so much mr. chairman. i guess along the same lines as mrs. waters, some of the

strategy that we see now deployed by mortgage holders and banks does not make good economic sense. why haven't we seen an effort to keep people in their homes instead of removing them? and then leaving the home vacant and reducing the value do you of the surrounding property in the neighborhood. if it is about the bottom line and profit motive, would it not be a better business strategy to keep people in homes? doesn't the mortgage holder or the bank have to maintain utilities and to keep the water on in those facilities? let me ask someone on the panel

and may be ms. sheehan or mr. schakett could take a stab at this. what is more cost effective for banks and mortgage holders, to evict and/or foreclose on a home is that more cost effective or would it be better to work out some arrangement even if it's the homeowner been reduced to paying rent in order to keep them in that house? what's would be more tears to the banks? >> i would say that obviously when we look at our distressed borrowers, the first thing we do is make a consideration about whether or not we can achieve an affordable and sustainable monthly payment for their housing under their -- under a modification program. that's lower trying to do

because generally speaking that is going to be more of from an investor or blender to them a foreclosure. so absolutely that is part of the process that we follow. >> well, but think about the difficulty when you remove a family from a home. then it's vacant. then you drop the overall value of the homes in that neighborhood. your profit is reduced when even if you're able to sell that home. i mean, it's just a strategy mr. schakett you may chime in. >> there's no question we make that calculation versus take the home away from the customer. it recognizes that to take it away you have to pay the bills while he is not there. there's an eviction cost. it takes a while to market the

property. that makes it even worse for us. so all of those calculations are a part of mass which weighs heavily in favor of the consumer. as long as we get a reasonable payment it is almost always better to keep the customer in the home. that is exactly right. >> but we are not seeing that trend now am on mortgage holders who are saying let's make every effort to keep people in their home. we're not saying that. >> sir, if i could respond? >> gas. >> there's two separate pieces. servicer does nothing ago stu foreclosure. they do nothing. the other is the investor that we always here for the service is to say we'd love to do it but the investor says no. the fact of the matter is they virtually never ever contact the investor. what they do as they go to the trustee who tends to be the same entity who the service areas and say what does the agreement by the contract between servicer in the investor? so while they say it's the investor's problem, it's not.

when you talk to the biggest investors out there that day we want to these modifications. we actually want to do the principal reduction that we are not being not. for the fact of the matter is the servicers lose very little if ago stu foreclosure. the investor loses and they very seldom ever talk to the investor and then the lawyers for the servicers as they take a conservative approach so they find a reason to say no as a reason to say just by reading and pulling the service agreement the psa and a very conservative manner which hurts everybody as you say, sir. >> will dump the servicers have a fiduciary recyclability to the investors? >> and that's right. from our opinion we think they're in violation of their fiduciary responsibility because they find a reason to say no when their protest on the opposite when they should be saying yes. >> let me just make one more point and that is that many

borrowers are so far underwater that they don't want -- but the current modification program doesn't work for them. you need to go to some sort of a principal reduction program. they still legally owed the money even if your mate in a lower payment. >> gentleman's time is expired. anyone else wants to make a comment is welcome to do so in writing for the record because that's helpful. the chair recognizes mr. baca for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. in my area we probably have the third of the fourth highest in the nation in foreclosures and it's really impacted the inland empire and almost in my neighborhood the homes that basically are vacant or i've just been rented. and it seems like many individuals who have lost their homes or are in the process of losing their homes are stating, why should i continue to pay the

high rates that are currently there right now when the property value has even gone down so much so they end up vacating their home and then renting which is a problem that we have been trying. but my question pertains to the hamp program and its inability to help families whose breadwinners have become unemployed because of the current economy. in many of these situations, it's actually better for the lender to foreclose on the property in a state is better for the lender to foreclose on the property. however there is evidence that permanent for unemployment for individuals and up hurting the taxpayers because of the government ownership of fannie and freddie. because of this there has been planned that actually call for limited modification for unemployment and actually call for housing vouchers or grants

to be used. could you comment on the feasibility of such approach addressing what's possible pros and cons that may be and i address this question to mr. martin. >> thank you. one is that for someone who is really unemployed, services have done this for many years. whether they do for bear and four to six months. and they should be doing that. so you don't need mha. he donate the subsidies to help the servicers to do that. so it's really an enforcement part. the other problem i think it's a very good point is that we are getting people locked down at a 2% interest rate for life. while that's a nice piece, but that shouldn't be the answer across the board. what should be the answer is let's put someone on affordable payment at a market rate and reduce the outstanding principal because that's better for the economy, better for the homeowner, better for the community. in other mha and understood when we see virtually no solution

when there's a principal reduction or forbearance. everything is interest-rate reduction. we don't think that's the right answer across the board. we agree with the investors out there who say that's not the right answer across the board. they'd rather have a significant principal reduction closer to the current value of the property and keep the edges straight at the market rate and we think mha and hamp should be reconfigured to re-encourage that. >> and you're saying that the current market today, not what it was before the foreclose, is that correct likes >> it's all about the affordable payment. so what to look at 31% of the gross income or you take the net cash flow and to determine an affordable payment, whichever be b