call here from newcastle, though a cure -- delaware, republican line. caller, are you with us? caller: i ask about immigration because -- immigration reform because i hear -- i am here almost 10 years of my life and i'm an american citizen. i have a wife and i have been working at my job almost five years, but still, [unintelligible] host: what is your question? caller: i asked him if any new law has been in, that is it.

host: any new law on immigration? caller: yes. guest: president obama has vowed to pick up this torso president bush had carried in conference of immigration reform. the elements of that package would be taking illegal immigrants currently in the united states and offering them the opportunity to stay. a lot of people are saying it is an employe of a space program, but that has not been fleshed out yet. -- said there is an employment base program, but that has not been flushed out yet. many have suggested that they come out, apply, pay taxes, go through a criminal background check and you would be able to stay in some sort of legal capacity and possibly earn legal citizenship. host: thank you for your time. the house will be in session around 12:30 p.m. eastern.

the senate is in this morning as well. but now, we want to bring you today three of toyota hearings on capitol hill, this time before the senate commerce committee. it is live coverage here on c- span. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] . .

>> it's about their safety and security, and nothing is more important than that. we are all here today because we know something has gone terribly wrong. the system meant to safeguard against faulty vehicles has failed and it needs to be fixed, and it needs to be fixed right away. this is an important hearing.

once we have dedicated entire day, which have not done that before, to one subject so that we can examine the problems and get after the solution it is -- theft how we can get to the solution. it is about toyota and the safety oversight system and how to fix it. it is not just for a future problem, but right now. in order to get to the bottom of the dangers of sudden acceleration, which are not addressed in the recalls. hardly the way we respond will and must have a left intact on the car maker and its employees, the federal agency charged with overseeing safety and on the confidence of the public for years to come. this hearing will focus on the

government's rolfes and this afternoon we will focus on the company's loth. -- company roll. it is no secret that toyota is very important to our national economy. the carmaker operates 10 plants across the country. i've worked very hard to bring a toyota engine and transmission plant to buffalo, west virginia because i knew toyota was built on the philosophy of quality first. if they designed and built the most oft safecard possible, jobs will follow. somewhere along the way, public safety took a backseat and corporate profits drove company decisions fifth if toyota wants to remain successful and gain

consumer trust, it needs to find this balance once again. toyota's consumers and incredible of employees who have won all sorts of awards and deserve nothing less than this. they drive a toyota is to. -- they drive a toyota schiedam, too. they need greater resources and authority in the future. their actions and lack of action in the years leading up to today are deeply to cut a -- deeply troubling. they count on the american people to protect them, and provide them with clear and reliable information. today, that picture is not clear. once more, the american people not yet clearly understand how this happened and how it will be solved, which defects have been

addressed and which dangers remain and what the recalls are fixing and not fixing. we need to look back and focus forward. we will hear from executives about how these problems occurred and why the company did not respond more quickly. i also want to know about plans to fix the ongoing problems with sudden acceleration and set itself on a new course to identify needed recalls in the future and prevent new defects. a big company, serious problems, very important to be fixed for the future and right away. we will hear from nhtsa and the department of transportation officials as to why they did not adequately connect the dots and move aggressively to investigate. i also want to know the plan of nhtsa to get to the bottom of sudden acceleration, industry-

wide, and to make sure that it has the resources and the authority to fulfill that mission. last, but not least, we will hear in a panel following this one, who the center which the center for auto safety -- the center for auto safety. i do intend to work on comprehensive legislation to get at all of these issues in a real way. i will discuss that at the end of the day. we need to look at current law and asked if it is strong enough to prevent if something -- to prevent something like this from happening again. i know my colleagues have contributed and i welcome that. the american people deserve a top to bottom review, not just the past errors, but the road

ahead. they deserve more than reassurances. they deserve full disclosures, accountability and solutions. thank you for all of our witnesses for participating and working with our committee. i look forward to hearing from all of you. >> thank you. thank you, very much sir. the past few weeks have been extraordinary. whenever you turn on the television set or listen to the radio, watch the printed pages, just about every article is on toyota -- the front-page articles. the toyota problem.

we have had interviews of attorneys who are bringing class since. we have talk shows determining how long it will take this company to restore its credibility and i suppose that it would be justified for americans to get the impression that this is a toyota problem. mr. chairman, i decided to do a little research and i would like to share some of these numbers with you. these numbers were prepared by the nhtsa, prepared yesterday, march the first, 2010. it is very current. it runs from the calendar year 2000 to and including yesterday.

in the year 2000, a total of 7,827,164 vehicles were recalled. of that number, ford motor co., 7,485,466, toyota 8379, on day 338,003 and 19. in the year 2001, a total of 11,466,361 vehicles were recalled. general motors -- 2 million. chrysler, two million 609,045. ford, 5,000,600.

mitsubishi, 379919. toyota, -- 2002, 15,186,000 cars were recalled. during that year, general motors 4 million. ford 2 million. chrysler 6 million. although the 496,000. i would like to put the rest of the numbers in the record. a decided to read these numbers and they are very interesting. it is not a toyota problem, it is an industry problem. looking at these numbers, one

with the impression that maybe it is ford motors, or chrysler, or general motors, and i think we should be honest with ourselves. if it is an industry problem, we should hear from the industry, not just toyota. i would like to commend nhtsa for compiling the statistics. they are very helpful. it gives a clear picture. if i may respectfully suggest the investigation and inquiry should be based upon the industry instead of just toyota. thank you, very much, sir. >> thank you. following both this morning from the statements and this afternoon's statements, people go by seniority.

>> sent -- mr. chairman, thank you very much. this is an interesting issue. we traveled only as fast as a horse could carry us from the roman legion to lewis and clark. now, almost everyone has it higher. that are made bigger and faster and safer. except, this issue of safer, not all cars have been made to the same standards. we have had a lot of free calls. at first, early on, the manufacturers were not enthralled with recalls. you will recall the pinto and the fires and the industry was forced to understand the need for recall and to own up to defects. the specific other day is going to -- is dedicated to toyota.

it is the world's largest there is a question of sudden acceleration in certain models. people died, their relatives complained, more people died, and more people complained. the question for this hearing is what about the government agencies that are engaged in a worried about safety issues? did they take these things seriously? today's seriously investigate? were they fierce advocates for the public good, or did they become paper tigers? i think this here in will give us a lot of information. this afternoon, it is if -- it is with respect to the automobile company, in this case toyota, what did they know and what did they do with what they knew? what kind of information to describe to the federal agencies?

all of these things are very importantç. it is about a matter of trust, the american people being able to trust the company they believe will sell them an automobile that a safewmo and, people having trust and confidence in a federal agency that is designed toçqól3 addres safety issues. i amr>ç not anç exqurt, but e read as much as i could recently on the hearing set out and held end of the crown that has been provided toç us, i think they'e very serious questions of a well-rounded -- all the way around people experienced tragic consequences because of the acceleration and the company pushed that up, saying that that is a floor mat issue or something like that. there is also some evidence that the federal agency did not take it as seriously as i wish a federal agency would. we will have the chance to test

some difficult and tough questions. whatever the consequences and what is happening going for to make sure this is not happening again? >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. last august, a california patrol officer, his daughter, and brother-in-law were killed in a tragic accident. a heart wrenching 911 call placed seconds before the call described a terrific scene in which their rented lexus reached speeds of 120 miles per hour with no way of stopping in the end, of a family could do was pray. this tragedy should never have happened and we are here to insure that it never happens again. the recalls and tragic deaths associated with toyota models

has reigned -- has raised serious questions. nhtsa has conducted eight investigations, but mr. secretary, my friend, i want to ask you if youç thinkçç theyk investigations. in addition, i want to as your opinion because you have it -- because i have so much respect for you, i am deeply concerned about reports that former nhtsa employees who were later employed by toyota may have played a role in influencing the results. i want to submit a record from a cbs report. the job at nhtsa was conduct studies.

in 2002, he gave his two-week notice, and joined toyota's team and worked under the man who had been his toyota contact. the two helped negotiate with former nhtsa colleagues to limit probes into toyota. they convinced nhtsa to focus only on the brief bursts of accelerations, really not even said have allegedly left -- ruling out acceleration that has left -- led to the deaths. no understand the concern in the car, especially when carryingçy children and grandchildren. i believe that every toyota model should be analyzed by an çobjective party. çevery fix, by an objective party. every car owner should have the ability to have the car fixed at

the earliest possible time. çi trust that under your leadership, this committee's work will move us toward those steps. [ç>> thank you. ççqççmrs. snowe. ç1'>> thank you. we have anç obligation to determine where these massive breakdowns occurredokq both in e company and the federalq agency that led to the perpetuation of defects resultedç in a loss of life -- and a loss ofç lifeç. nhtsaç hadç 26%çç increase % increase in complaints. the failed to investigate this issue. it points to nhtsa's enforcement program. it is outdated. it lets software expertisexdçd

experts necessary. also, we have a company that exploited nhtsa's weaknesses in avoiding compulsory reporting of information. many of us hereç are reminded f the time and in which weç have the firestone tire recall, a session just about 10 years ago. çat that time, transportation secretary rodney slater appeared before this committee asking to grant nhtsa authorities that they can get the data that they required. çwithin months, we passed an at that created an early warning reportingçt( system, requiring manufacturers to report defects that resulted in injuries or economic damages. what is amazing is that in the

direct aftermath, there was a number of reports regarding toyota's accelerations. ççthe inspector general of the department of transportation issued two reports criticizing nhtsa for failing to act on its own reports and failing to set up base this -- set up a system adequate to do this investigation. those of us that were here will remember that it is a disturbing pattern that is all too familiar. state farm notified nhtsa of the firestone problem. in 2004, state farm the to fight nhtsa that there was a trend occurring with respect to toyota acceleration. they closed the investigation, saying that the agency's

çfurther examining this issue. inq 2004, state farm again notified nhtsa but did not expand it into aç independent investigation. we know toyota had a recall of in europe. it was only after the crash that senator boxer is referring to,ç that resulted in a significant recall. lastç week, you have the toyota usa president saying that he was not sure about ruling outçq the electronic system. the very next day, the president seems at some of the continent there were no flaws in the design system. the bottom line is that we have a huge problem. nhtsa can not independently verified or corroborate misinformation the contradictory assertions that are occurring either because they lack the

expertise, or they have not contacted it out, whatever they need to do in an independent investigation. they allowed a company to hide behind proprietary data and corporate records. nhtsa's primary mission is to save lives and prevent injuries. if this is an example of how the police a primary design flaw in a major auto maker, how can we have confidence that they can lead of -- live up to the important word in their name, that of course is "safe beeper tel -- "safety." . clocks profits should -- >> profits should never trump safety. i am highly skeptical, bordering on cynical, when it comes to the auto industry, and now we have

another example of them dragging feet when it comes to safety. i remember when i was a young congressman, we have been able to put in on a trial basis, air bags. ça grandmother and a granddaughter going down a two- lane highway had a head on collision and that grandmother and granddaughter walked away from that head on collision. yet, over and over the automobile industry prohibited us from having air bags until enough people died and now, of course, it is standard issue. here we come with a similar issue. what will it take for us to wake up? the sad thing is we are in the middle of a recession,ç and gus

who is being hurt? but toyota dealers. u.s. anyone whether or not they think a toyota is safe, and you would be shot at the percentage of people that would save no and there are voting with their feet because they are not walking into the toyota dealers. it is hurting them, their suppliers, and all of the small businesses that are in the middle of a recession. çthank you for getting to the bottom of this. a one to think the secretary. he has been straightforward, very clear. keep at it. >> thank you. center prior -- senator pryor. >> i want to thank you for having this hearing. mat this is not a witch hunt.

we want to look at what is going on in the field and what toyota has been doing and how this has been handled. we are doing our oversight here today. i want to thank you for that. t(i have seen some documents tht i would like to pass out to the committee when the time is appropriate to look at documents that nhtsa provided to the committee and we may have some questions for our nhtsa with this. thank you all for being here. this is a very important matter. qthere are 12 owners all over te country better concerned. -- there are toyota owners all over the country that are concerned. we need to do everything we can to keep our roads safe. >> thank you, if you are the

head of ourç safety and consumr subcommittee. your words count. center eisa -- center darrell issa. >> to let my former colleague ray lahood. the spoke to toyota dealers in georgia and called him to see how my constituents were being cheated. the report i got -- were being treated. the report i got gave me some very impressive numbers, which i appreciate, but it caused me to think if we have been just as quick to respond to the first death that took place in on the çhighway, we may have saved lives. the most important thing for us to hear is what is the

threshold? we need to err on the side of caution. we ought to be conservative of the first hint. i thank you for the time, mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank you for holding today's hearing and to look -- and think ourç witnesses. the also want to thank the witnessesw3ç that will join us throughout the day. the necessity of today's hearing is unfortunate and it is a manifestation of an oversight process the test of the consumer. clearly, the recent recalls have not been handled well by either the government agencies or by

toyota. after the several tragic accidents and the recalls, the investigations have intensified and throughout that process we have heard a changing story on the root cause of the problem. i am hoping today will shed some light on that subject. we have had unintended acceleration problems that have been linked to 39 deaths. many were preventable. i think the questions the need to be answered are when was the problem first identified pets with toyota to slow to react? does either toyota or the national highway transportation safety ministration know the true cause? thousands of families fleeing cars into dealerships hoping their cars will be fixed. a look forward to working with

the department of transportation and myç colleagues on this committee as we dig deeper in search of those answers. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman, secretary lahood, and administration and strickland. i believe a full investigation of toyota's response to these complaints must be conducted, but i'm mostly interested in how our government responded. this is a basic matter of public safety and public trust. i know the two of you were not in charge been up to this tragic situation. regardless of what happened before, you are in charge of cleaning it up i think there may be a problem of culture here. çt(industry executives can roae halls of government on like

consumers. they are not on an equal playing field. some small businesses cannot have the same access. çitç was recently at exposed t çtoyotaç prepared an internal saved money by having a limited recall. çthey also claimed millions of dollars in savings by delaying safety regulations, avoiding defect investigations, and slowing down other industry requirements. this was entitled "wins for toyota." among those who lost wereç some )uuq'ts. ççheç was drivingñr home fro' and after two miles of high- speedw3 driving, he was able to

stop the car by putting it into çneutral. he says the format had nothing to do with it. çóçç inci, ymt>nxx.jçp'4b=-ñ[?1rçxdek"tae received a response and thek"tae agency denied his complaint. at that time, they were expecting toyota's explanation. it always makes his innocent wonder what is going on and what happened between the system and nhtsa. it was like a hockey puck going back and forth on the ice. toyota would promise to answer, the regulators would complain about not receiving information. in the end, almost nothing was done. the puck never got into the net. people died.

i have faith in both ofçç you, çw3 she willçi]d8 get to tlm uestion i am moste"aqçw3xdy3o the agency suffered because of leadership turnover, with the agency reluctant to use investigating powers? did nhtsa have all the tools it needed? was theç?0't;wn relationship ty between toyota and the restqxd f dustry? toyota and the restqxd f those are the questions that the american people deserve answers forç as they believed and havea right to believe that nhtsa is there to protect them. >> thank you, mr. chairman for, in this important hearingçów3w3. this is an issue that has grabbed the attention of all americans and many others worldwide. it certainly warrants a thorough

investigation one of the most important roles is insuring the safety of american motorists. the tragic accident that took the life of a highway patrolman brought national attention to a problem of unintended acceleration in certain vehicles. toyota has recalled millions of potentially effected vehicles. the coverage has expanded head the public is understandably concerned. since that time, toyota has undertaken extensive outreach and even taken the unusual steps zvof halting sales and productin of certain models. in place and dealerships have been working tirelessly to fix effected vehicles. they are beat -- they are to be commended. there are lingering questions that need to be addressed such as the timeliness of the

response, and whether a solution has been found. we will continue to ask the tough questions. i also want to express that it is important to also be fair and to keep the fact in perspective. we must not use a different set of standards for one company over the other. nhtsa and the department of transportation have become very active. secretary lahood, my friend and punt -- my friend and colleague has been dedicated to examine the problem and the potential for electronic defects in the throttle control. we have an obligation to review what nhtsa has been doing over the last several years as these accidents were being reported, and why they seem to limit the scope of their review. iróñr believe there aret( still several outstandingçt(fáçóççe ]omçovçvc5çççççççç u. the most important is has the

problem of unintended acceleration then correctly identified? next, i believe consumer education is an important component to ensure safety. toyota has undertaken a massive campaign to get intermission to customers. i employed -- i applaud toyota for this effort. do consumers now how to get their -- know how to get their cars repaired? finally, we need to review the processes that they're in place, and see if changes need to be made to help ensure that owners and those on the road are safe. there is a lot of -- there is a lot at stake, and we need to get it right. all americans need to feel confident they are traveling in safe vehicles. it is in the best interest of toyota to continue operating and working hard on these problems

they have been a good partner in states across the country. let the record show that with the debt is investing $1.3 billion to build a new plant in northern mississippi. although the economic downturn has delayed the opening, the company has continued to honor its commitments to our state. at this point, i would like to point out and ask that we entered into the record one op- ed written by a democrat from mississippi, the executive director of three rivers planning district and another hotbed from "the washington post."

he says among other things, i worry that there has been a rush to judgment. the way that congress and the obama administration respond will have real economic consequences. he hopes that those involved will "give the toyota company the same opportunity to deal with issues that they afford other automobile manufacturers that experience recalls." s that is the place into the record. >> they both will be included. >> to ensure the partnership continues to flourish, we must work to prevent these issues in the future, worked diligently to ensure the vehicles tested, and the public is protected. at the same time, we need to be mindful that there are thousands of american jobs at stake. i believe this hearing is only

the first step in a process that must require careful analysis. thank you to our witnesses. >> thank you. >> once again, chairman of rockefeller, you are focusing on consumer protection and i thank you for that. this. is about insuring the safety of american drivers and uncovering why hundreds of instances of sudden acceleration or occurred for so long and killed, injured, or inconvenienced so many without adequate was fronts from toyota or safety officials. for years, toyota has enjoy a stellar reputation in america and around the world. i own a toyota prius and add to that for yearsç with pleasure d no safety problems.

"the buzz" the reality is that too many if -- the reality is that too many vehicles have not been safe. dozens ofç people have died. hundreds of people have been hurt. hard-working employees at toyota dealerships in my home state of new mexico and across the country now face a uncertain future in an already uncertain economy. while all of this was happening, toyota continue to put company profits above the safety of the american people. these are the american people who bought their vehicles, depended on the product, and expected toyota to inform them immediately if something had gone wrong. pleaded did not just fell, they did it knowingly and without remorse. they were bragging about over two and a $55 million in safety

in -- in safety through recalls avoided. toyota is not alone . nhtsa is also to blame. çsince 2003, they have conductd more than two dozen investigations that resulted in a less-than-adequate recall in 2007. only after the release of the terrifying 911 call the senator boxer mentioned, and that crash with the high weight control -- highway patrol officer, did it seem that that's a step up. that recall resulted in the complete recall. although the toyota safety issues have been in headlines for months, and hearings were

held last week, many questions remain. by, for one, would like to know why the safety issues went unchecked for so long, what steps toyota is taking to ensure the safety of those that rely on their vehicles, and finally, what steps nhtsa is quick to take to ensure this never happens again. it is wonderful to see you here, secretary lahood and administrator of strickland. >> thank you. >> mr. chairman, thank you. everything that time i wanted to say this probably then said. çi will be brief and avoid beig repetitious. i want to reflect on something, if i could. it was not that long ago but mr. secretary, i was in your

position as a member of the cabinet. during those years, one of my responsibilities as secretary of agriculture was food safety jimmy area of meat, -- food safety in the area of need, and other issues. food safety issues arose from time to time. i always considered those to be the greatest risk and greatest challenge that we faced and the greatest responsibility. each time that i dealt with the nation, i have to tell you that what i wondered about was what else is out there? you cannot know what you do not know. as we conduct this hearing, i suspected to be easy for us to dig into the documents, looking

back, i have a history of what has happened here. it will be relatively easy to connect the dots are in hindsight. what that does not point to tell us is what else is out there -- what other companies may have done, have bragged about how they somehow evaded being involved in a recall. as you testify, i hope he will spend some time talking to us about what you are doing to assure us that there is not anything else of there, that our vehicles are safe, and that when it is brought to the attention of this department, if there is a good follow-up. i also want to mention something. :gi3i will be very blunt about . this really irritated me while i

was a secretary of our culture. ç;3 -- the secretary of agriculture. çóqt(i firmly believe there is e çfor the japanese government hereç to step up and to make se that what they are sending to our borders is safe. they have a responsibility. i worked with the japanese for years on issues related to livestock. we found one animal, there has never been a case of bse in the united states, yet to this day, there border is largely closed to our product. i wonder what the response would be in japan if i suggested that because people have died because of the way they have conducted

themselves, but until the japanese government can assure us that all of the defects are out of these vehicles, we are not when to expect any vehicles from japan. that is what they did with one of our industries. i start this hearing very, very frustrated with everything that this happened. ymbut nothing for consumers have been treated right, not onlyok y what has happened here in the united states government, but what has happened in a government that has been an ally through the years but has not treated as fairly in trade issues. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> thank you. let me first say, secretary lahood and administrators strickland, -- it is on?

is that better? maybe there is a defect. i know you are always very direct. my big issue, not to echo what everyone said here is going to be what systematic changes are necessary to ensure the safety of prince you move forward on our their and that you have the -- injured the safety efforts you move forward on our there and you have the resources. what is ford and how we change the system and then prove it? that is what i'm looking for, systematic changes. it is a little unique. when folks in the rural alaska

barrault -- by a vehicle, the barge it up. i own a toyota and i drove from alaska to washington, d.c., and it is great. it is a very good card -- it's a very good car. when they ship it in a barge, how to they get it fixed? there willç be states whereç e dealer may be miles and miles çaway. how do they make that connection? inç our state, they will have o figure out how to get it taken kqvarí#ó1dde testimonyñrdhnççç today, buk w3fop3çg7.açnbçççççóy: tt we need toçw3ççó doççfá ande

there was a problem in delivery of information to the public and to make sure they are upholding the best vehicle quality possible. thank you for being here. >> thank you. secretary lahood, administrator strickland, thank you for your patience. you've got all of the statements this morning. that means that by definition in the afternoon, there will be fewer statements. they set the tone for what we want to ask and i look forward to hearing you, sir, and you are accompanied byç david stricklad to is the administrator of nhtsa. please proceed. >> mr.ç chairman, thank you for

your leadership on safety and your courtesy in arranging this meeting that is convenient for both your committee and those of us at the department of transportation. ever since i was warned in 13 months ago, i have said that safety is the department's #1 priority. i believe we have demonstrated that commitment time and time again. when the terrible crash of washington's metro system claimed nine lives, we quickly introduce legislation to give federal oversight of the nation puts the transit system. the flight crashed in buffalo, we learned right away with many of the problems were. we began working with the aviation industry immediately to enhance airline safety and

pilot trick -- pilot training. this spring, the faa will contest -- will issue a new rule to combat pilot fatigue. one of the hallmarks of my time has been our work on destructive driving for all of you with self phones and blackberries, and other electronic devices, i am on a rampage. it is a menace to society. we have exercised our authority to ban truckdrivers from texting while driving. now, toyota. the issue is serious, and we are treating it seriously. the three recalls are among the largest in automobile history, affecting more than 6 million people in this country. i would like to speak to consumers. if you notice your gas pedal or

break is not responding as it normally would, contact your toyota dealer right away. the recent recall involves entrapment by floor mats. it is important to take your formats out of your vehicle until the problem has been taken care of. secondly, accelerator pedals sticking. if the panel is harder to predict if the gas pedal is harder to press, contact your toyota dealer immediately. if your guest panel become stuck for any reason, steadily apply the brake, put the car in neutral, bring it to a stop, and call your desler. finally, the toyota previous for model year 2010, -- toyota

prius, for model year 2010, contact your vehicle. nhtsa has the most active investigations in the world. its job is to investigate complaints and look for defects. it receives more than 30,000 complaints from consumers every year and reuse of every one of those complaints quickly. we do not ignore any of them. we examine them all, looking at all of them very carefully. investigation have resulted 524 recalls involving 23.5 million vehicles. 20% of those involve foreign we vehicles were up 80% were domestic. there are currently 44 opened defect investigations, five of

which involve toyota. every step oft( the way, nhtsa officials have pushed toyota to take corrective action so that consumers would be safe. unhappy, with the response, our returns, they flew to japan in december of 2009 to clarify to toyota management that legal obligations have them identifying defects. our deputy administrator told the president of toyota north america, in no uncertain terms, we expect prompt action. toyota publicly announced the recall two days later. çi personally talked to akio toyoda and emphasize that this is very serious.

nhtsa has pressed hard to expedite these fixes. if nhtsa had resisted a recall, this would have consumed an enormous amount of time and in effect, extended the. in which owners were directly effected. the agency avoided a lengthy investigation that would have delayed fix's for one year or more. last year, i announced it we were investigating whether a political of the protections. we have best toyota to turn over a wide range of documents. this will be one of the most comprehensive reviews of documents that will show us when and how they learned of the safety problems. nhtsa will continue to make sure toyota is doing all that it has promised. we'll continue to investigate all possible causes of unintended acceleration.

the recalls are important steps, but they did not answer a bre-- they did not answer every question. although we're not aware of issues proven to be cut by such incidences, nhtsa is doing a thorough review. we have heard from enough members of congress that they think it is a problem. we will look into and review the electronics. if nhtsa finds a problem, we will make sure it is resolved. recently, i met with the president of toyota and told them that safety is the top issue for us and that it must be for toyota as well. he assured me that they take concern say -- seriously and that they're working hard. there is a reason why we investigate safety. i listened to the 911 tape of

that family's heroin last moments. i met with the family last week when they were in washington. i offered sympathy and our commitment to them that this would not happen to another family. it was a terrible tragedy, and i hope that no other family has to end with this. again, mr. chairman, i thank you for the opportunity to -- for the opportunity to appear. >> thank you. when the american consumers and regulators for not a serious issue like the sudden acceleration issue, toyota executives in america did not seem to have any authority to take action on their own. it all has to go back to japan. that might be a matter of corporate or japanese culture, but it is the fact. it was pretty obvious what the

president of toyota north america, mr. jim lentz, said he did not have the power to order recalls in the united states, only japan did. he told the committee that inside toyota, "information only goes one way." this seems to have been a problem in nhtsa's investigations, too. toyota has not been responsive to their inquiries and does not seemç to take consumer protectn as a mission for nhtsa seriously. that is our impression been talking to your people. secretary lahood, last week, you yourself testified that toyota cannot respond to concerns until you personally called akio toyoda. i assume that is correct >> that

is correct. >> it is also true that we had to fly to japan to try to get toyota to take these issues seriously. to get them to take it seriously. in my opinion, stan needs to be i]çsomeone in the united states that can be held responsible when american consumers are injured or killed due to safety problems in toyota pickles. -- toyota vehicles. . .

i think this type of decision making structure would help foreign companies be more responsive to safety issues in the united states. what do you think? >> i agree with you. mr. secretary, more than 2000 consumers have told nhtsa they are experiencing a sudden, unintended acceleration in their toyota and lexus vehicles. they have reported at least 34 deaths caused by sudden acceleration. that is correct, isn't it? >> yes, sir. >> if we areñi being honest, we still do not totally understand why this is happening.

over the last few years, toyota has offered several explanations. first they said it was the floor vents, and more recently they have blamed it on sticky accelerator pedals. until recently, nhtsa accepted these explanations. but here is a problem. there are still many cases were toyota -- where toyota discovered drivers had accelerated rapidly and the recalled mats are not involved. so there is still a problem, and we do not know what is causing the problem, but there does seem to be an easy way to get drivers to regain control of the vehicles, and that is called a break override system. it means that the brake always beats the accelerator. it could be going forward, but

the brake stops a cold. this override feature would help toyota owners control their vehicles during a sudden acceleration episode, would it not? >> yes, it would. >> and if toyota decides to add this feature to its new vehicles, it is true that other manufacturers adopted it years ago, correct? >> yes. >> it is also my understanding but there are a lot of older toyota -- that there are a lot of older models that are not given this brake override system, correct? >> the testimony said they were going to try to install the system in as many cars as they can. i do not know if it reflects the cars your mentioning, mr. chairman. >> it would have to reflect the

early ones. >> it sounded like it would be in as many cars as it possibly could do. >> the question is, does it need to be all of them, and i think that it does. and my understanding is that the brake override feature is not a costly mechanical fix. it is instructions that program into a car parts computer, correct? >> yes. >> so why doesn't the government make toyota install this feature into vehicles? why didn't they do it years ago? couldn't it have prevented some of the injuries reported over the past few years? why don't we require every manufacturers selling cars in the united states to install this feature? in that it does not only affect toyota vehicles. >> we are looking at the possibility of recommending the system in all manufactured automobiles. >> mr. secretary, my time has

run out, and i call now on drinking member of the committee -- ranking member of the committee. oh, he is gone. ok, then order of questions will be in order of arrival. senator udall. >> thank you, chairman rockefeller. i am wondering about the chart published in the "new york times." in 2004, you had this huge spike in what are being reported as crashes and complaints. 126 toyota drivers experienced a crash and later filed eight complaints -- a complaint.

all other manufacturers were on the chart, either flat or going down in terms of complaints. it took us five years to actually do something significant in this case. and you had another spike in 2007, and here you can see this very, very dramatic spike in 2009. so my question to both secretary lahood and administrator strickland is when you look at this problem, and secretary lahood, you have some independence from this because you are new to it, when you looked in your testimony and mention all of these complaints that come in, it seems to me you should have something in your database that when you get a spike like this, i mean, this just stands out, it alerts people that there is something

wrong here, something going on, and immediately and activity started that would have gotten to the bottom of this a lot longer. mr. strickland, let me ask you, you know, there is one big watchdog out there, and that is nhtsa, and you are administrator. the other watchdog is this committee, the commerce committee, and you have served many years in the commerce committee. so all of your experience going back, what do you see? what is the thing that happened here that we need to get to the bottom of to make sure that this does not ever happen again? please. >> senator, first of all, let me just say, we have contacted the "new york times." that article is inaccurate. it did not mention that nhtsa found no safety defect in early

camry models. they claim now that they will post on their website the accurate information, which they left all -- out of the story, which is unfortunate. people read these things and believe what they read. but we did take it seriously and to interview the owners and we looked at these model vehicles -- we interviewed a owners and looked at these model vehicles -- >> you say it reveals toyota had more complaints involving crashes than any other car maker. >> i will let our administrator comment, but i want you to know that the story was not accurate when it reflected we did not have investigations. we opened two investigations, as a matter of fact. and the website will have the

report. i do not know what that means, in fact. >> this chart is revealing in terms of the spikes and what it took to get action. >> that article actually reflects the experience that nhtsa had at the time. since 2000, there have been can open investigations dealing with sudden acceleration its -- tan open investigations dealing with sudden acceleration -- 10 open investigations dealing with sudden acceleration. if you look at the entire market size of toyota, they were the largest fleet during that period, as well. while they had more sudden acceleration incidents, the comparison to the rest of the fleet was on a remarkable -- unremarkable.

they just had more issues because they have more cars. in terms o of nhtsa's reaction, that was absolutely appropriate. we opened investigations. >> my time is almost up. chairman rockefeller, i just want to say to you, you have taken this committee in at the -- in the consumer protection agency a number of times as chairman. i applaud you doing this, and i hope you continue, because i think the american public knows when they see these articles that there are big consumer protection issues out there, and i look forward to staying in fault with you in the oversight of those issues. -- involve with you in the oversight of those issues. thank you very much. >> thank you very much.

this afternoon, we are sorry to hear from toyota, but this is about the agency. -- we are going to hear from toyota, but this is about the agency. others will take the seats at some point in the future. i want to ask about the agency. not who is sitting in the seat at the moment, the agency and the credibility of the agency. because my understanding is that nhtsa has a budget of about $145 million compared to $875 million for security for the embassy in iraq. the security for one embassy in one country exceeds by multiples the amount of money we spend in nhtsa evaluating safety and related issues. now i have a seat here, and i want to refer to something that senator boxer said, because i want to ask whether you have investigated this.

you just responded to senator udall by saying that investigations had been made and no evidence was found, and i made that list in july of 2003, an investigation in 2004, with no did in 2005, 2006 -- no data to support in 2004, 2005, 2006. senator boxer said that it's something that made me wonder. mr. santucci, whose job was to conduct investigations, he went to work with toyota. that was immediately thereafter. the two have negotiated with former nhtsa colleagues to

limit probes in toyota surging out of control. internal documents obtained by cbs used the term negotiated. here's the question. if somebody left nhtsa to go to work for the company, that limited the investigations that results in no data to support further investigations, had you gone back and investigated inside the agency what has happened here? is this a case where for several years, the investigation happened, knowing that fatalities were occurring, and they did investigate, and there was no data to support? have you done an internal investigation to find out what this agency has done, what it should have done on behalf of the american people?

>> yes, we looked at that employee -- those employees, and they can work for a company, but they cannot report to the department about issues they were responsible for. and everything we can tell at this point is they did work for toyota, but not in an area where they are responsible did they report to dot. we looked at that, and some people believe that is not accurate. >> to you are saying it is just the appearance? >> i am saying that our review of it does not appear to show that they were engaged in activities that were prohibited by law from their engaging in. i said to another committee that i think this lot needs to be tightened up. i do. i work for an administration that sets the highest ethical

standards for its people. they need to be tightened up, but we found no violations for these employees. >> if you take a look at the question of when information was given to nhtsa, and then investigations begun, no data, no data, and then recalling 50,000 vehicles because the floor mats. then you come down further again and again and again, people are dying. it seems to just -- i am not sure anybody understands yet what is the problem. >> yes, sir. we know from our investigations that the format is a problem, and that is why these cars are up to ♪ -- for a recall. we know from what people have told us that perhaps electronics could be the problem, also, and

we are going to do a review of that. if we thought the problem was in the trunk because the manufacturers said you have to put the floor mats in the trunk, then we will look. but they are a problem. the sticky pedal is a problem. could there be another problem? some people believe there is, and it is our obligation to check it out. >> if the brakes override the a solider -- the accelerator, why is he recalled that requiring to have that fixed in -- why is the recall not requiring that be fixed? >> we believe that the electronics are involved, and we will have a complete review of that. >> this did not happen on your watch. but i think there are a real

credibility problems. i think they have raised questions of credibility with nhtsa going back, and i know that what you want to do is fix all of that and run an agency people can be proud of, in which people can have some trust. >> on my watch, when people think there is a problem, we are going to address it. we are not to take a back seat to anybody involving safety. everything has to do with safety. it is what we have to do. it is what people expect of us. when people say that there is an electronics problem, i am going to pay attention to that, and we are paying attention to that now. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

mr. secretary, i know you are looking at it now. but the point is, we set in place legislation that became law years ago as a result of the firestone tire recall issue. putting in place the investigative methods that are so essential in order for nhtsa to do its job. i do not know on what basis you can rule out electronics. we are urging it, but it is not about us urging it. you cannot rule it out, because you do not know. even toyota does not know, based on their public statements last week that were, as i said earlier, conflicting. one said he could not rule it out, and the other said they are confident. how do we know? i would be interested to know. you have to look at those investigations to find out exactly what went wrong, based

on that there was a trend in acceleration. six people died that year, in 2004. so did nhtsa look at it as a trend? what did they do? did they based it on information they got from toyota? do we subscribe to toyota's explanation of what went wrong in 2004 and 2007? >> and mr., our domestic dissent a letter asking for all of the possible information -- senator, we sent a letter asking for all of the possible information from toyota to make sure they gave us everything they were supposed to give us to begin with. that request has been made. i agree with you, we need to look back and make sure we had everything based on what we had at the time. we felt the remedies were the right remedies. but when we look back and find

that there was an additional informational component, we would have found a different conclusion. >> did they get the proprietary data to make a difference? the point is, we do not know. you cannot conclude one way or the other. >> i cannot conclude we received everything until we receive the request we just sent to toyota. >> these previous investigations in 2004 and 2007, were they relying on toyota's investigations? >> what we have to rely on, senator, our complaints we get from people, what information we get from the industry, what information we get from the manufacturers. >> the independent investigation did not occur, is that correct? >> our people do these investigations. we have people on our staff. >> we have been told you do not

have a software expert. looking at it in totality, what is independently verified? that is the issue, if you're -- hear -- that is the issue here. this is on the heels of firestone. we have to figure out what went wrong. we have got to know. >> we agree with you. >> we have to get resources, then come forward with contract and out. isn't there a way of solving this? we have to get independent reputation. i am not clear we got all of the information from toyota. >> i am not sure, either. that is why we made a huge, voluminous request for information. >> back in 2004, -- they

concluded after four months. who is information did they use to make that decision? -- whose information did they use to make that decision? >> we look at all of the information, we make a judgment call is to recall needs to be made, and if the manufacturer decides needs to do it, if they do not, we required them to do it. >> what if the information comes from insurance companies like state farm? >> we work closely with all insurance companies and regard their information as very valuable. >> it is amazing to me that there is no continuity. this is a matter of life and death. obviously, that memory was not ensconced in this at the time. it was a title recall issue.

then you have these debts. if you look at the death curve, at least submitted to nhtsa, 2004, six deaths, 2007, more deaths attributed to unintended acceleration. i do not see that independent analysis was done. that is what is concerning me. yes, we're looking at it now, but where were they then? we have to look at exactly what happened then to make sure it does not repeat itself. these are all reasons to do a very aggressive investigation. >> senator, on my watch, i guarantee you that it will be done to early, as independently as possible with every piece of information we can get. we will not rest until these cars are safe. >> is it unusual for nhtsa

officials to go to japan? >> yes, absolutely. i believe that toyota, the toyota business model is broken. i told mr. toyoda at that. when they have good, expert, professional people in north america making recommendations and they do not listen to them, their business model is broken. i think mr. toyota got that message, not only from me, but from others. i think you will see some changes in the way that they do business. >> thank you. >> i am also told that mr. medford and his team were treated dismissively. actually, they used stronger language than that. so these are not common experiences. senator wicker, i call on you.

>> thank you very much. senator boxer is under a time schedule, so i promise to be brief. let me ask you, mr. secretary, about these two studies, the exponent study commission in 2009 by toyota, and the study done by professor gilbert of southern illinois university. as i understand it, exponent is an organization is that is widely known in this field, concerning analyses of defects. nhtsa has used them in the past. they conducted an analysis of the electronic throttle system. toyota received a report

confirming their contention that the defense cannot be caused by the etc system because there are fail-safes that prevent it. i want to ask your opinion about that study as compared to the gilbert study. this study was commissioned by persons who are interested in bringing a lawsuit with regard to these incidents. and professor gilbert determined that toyota -- that the system did not properly detect electronic malfunctions. he was able to induce unintended accelerations vehicles that did not trigger the failsafe mode. toyota, on the other hand, contended that in his tests, he

manipulated the system that cannot ever occur under driving conditions. so i would just like to ask, at this time, realizing that their analyses are ongoing, if you have some advice to the committee or can't comment on these contrasting studies. >> we are going to look at the studies that were done by the professor at southern illinois university in carbondale, but the organization hired by toyota -- by the organization hired by toyota. there is a committee member whose toyota experienced unexplained acceleration. we have purchased that vehicle, and we are going to examine it. what we are going to do is a thorough review of studies that have been done by the professor at siu and other groups.

we are going to do our own study. we are going to do a review, we are going to look at the automobiles with unexplained acceleration and figure out if electronics were a part of this. >> so at this time, you do not feel comfortable doing a preliminary criticism or opinion as to either one of these. >> no, sir, not at all. >> and a study done by your department would be a completely separate and exhaustive -- >> absolutely. looking at the cars that have acceleration which is not explained, trying to figure out if the electronics are the problem. >> can you tell us at this point what you know about this firm, exponent? >> all i know is what i heard at the hearing. we are going to get a copy of their reports and look at them. >> i would appreciate it if you could get back to the committee

on the record and tell us whether in fact the department and nhtsa have used exponent. >> yes, on different occasions throughout the years, exponent had a different name, but nhtsa had used them before. in terms of this report, we are reviewing that report, and it will be involved in our work. but there also will be a significant piece of the work that is independent, where we are going to pull experts from around the country, which various -- from academic and engineering, a science panel. but dr. gilbert's work, we are examining it now. >> if you could stay on the record the number of times your agency has actually used and relied on exponent. and just to be brief, you stated last week that it would be beneficial in terms of foreign country's information -- foreign

countries' information, it would be useful to receive information from there. what types of information do you not currently received that would be beneficial? >> we certainly receive information on complaints, but why don't i tell you specifically what we received and the areas where i think we are deficient? >> ok, i appreciate that. i know that in past instances, previous leadership in nhtsa have said, do not intimidate us with data. it has to be distilled, or else it will be counterproductive and bog down the system. thank you, mr. chairman.

>> thank you. senator boxer. >> i am trying to connect the dots as to who knew what, what happened, why did it happen. i do not hold you responsible for what happened in 2004 or 2007. i am talking about going forward. when we look at an ethics rule or any law, there is the letter of the law, and the spirit. you might be totally right that this fellow, santucci, who left nhtsa and went to toyota, and according to the cbs news story, he convinced nhtsa -- he was part of a team that convince them to focus only on the burst of acceleration, ruling out the long-duration events that lead to accidents and deaths.

he himself admitted, he used the word negotiate. so he was involved. now maybe if you look at the letter of the law, maybe he never worked on sudden burst acceleration. maybe he worked on something else, safety belts, or airbags. the spirit was broken. i agree with the comments to cbs where it was pointed out that it is cozy, cozy. i really applaud the senators. they have written a letter to the inspector general, and i want to put that in the record, and one of the issues raised this issue. going forward, without waiting -- because it just seems to me on its face, remember, the

outcome of this was put by toyota in their own document, and i want to place it in the record, their own document talks about the fact they saved so much money on this. this is the car that killed my constituent. this is the car that spun out of control, and that highway patrolman died because, i believe, there was pressure put on nhtsa from people had too cozy a relationship. i think it is part of the problem. could i prove it? maybe, if i had a lot of time, i could. but it does not look good. it smells bad, it is not right, and they applauded their victories. . is.

look at this. this is their presentation. it says, a toyota safety group. fmvss110cir, labeling recall. no penalties, save money on buybacks. negotiate recall on camry es, saved $100 million with no defects found. this is an outrage. so would you work with us now on tightening up this law? >> absolutely. >> i think that is key. as i understand it, toyota is now installing brake override technology. imagine. you are driving your car, you step on the break, and nothing happens. the car goes faster, faster,

faster. so toyota is installing a brake overwrite technology as a fix. do you think we should use that in all new vehicles? should it be involved with more vehicles? >> we are looking at that, senator, and particularly given the fact that mr. lentz has said they will put that in all cars, we are looking at it. it is a good safety device, and we are trying to figure out if we should be recommending that. >> the 2006 camry model is not on the current recall list. why are there models such as the 2006 camry, which have been involved in deadly accidents, not included in the current recall? >> i will get back to you on the record, if i can, senator. >> ok, because i do not think

the recall was comprehensive enough, based on what i am reading. but i turn to you, because i trust your gut and on this. >> thank you, senator boxer. >> the way i look at it, investigations were opened six times, close without action, 34 people died. i think we can do better. in 1980, there were 119 people in enforcement. today, there are 57. in 30 years since 1980, we have doubled the number of cars on the road, from 146 million vehicles in 1980 to 246 million vehicles today. has this diminished staffing level made a difference? >> more positions for nhtsa are recommended in the 2011 budget. we applaud the president for recognizing that we need more

resources. >> do you think that would be helpful here? >> absolutely. >> secondly, regulatory or statutory reform, as i understand it, manufacturers can voluntarily initiate recalls without waiting for nhtsa to order a recall, were nhtsa can order a recall initiated, but to do that you have to go through public hearings and investigations, giving the manufacturer time, defending the recall in court. it goes on and on. what, if anything, can be done to speed up the process? >> well, we do have to do investigations before we can require a recall. but the manufacturers have been cooperative. a recall was just announced today on some automobiles, and i guess what i would say, senator, is that we will look at that. for now, what i am saying is for the most part, manufacturers are cooperative on this.

>> but we have an issue where they were showing off for saving $100 million, saying it was the floor mats. you can assess fines for this kind of behavior, but those penalties can be as high as $16 million for a related series of violations. it sounds like a lot of money, but when toyota is bragging about save $100 million by negotiating a resolution to a safety defect that is not a recall, is that enough money? should there be more vulnerability to assess fines? would this be a useful tool? >> i think so, and i would also say because of our insistence and going to japan, talking to mr. toyoda, we cut short their ability to stall this out by them recognize and have a safety problem -- in talking to mr. toyota, we cut short their ability to stall this out by

them recognizing they have a safety problem. >> regulators complaint, and you do not get an answer. i liken it to a hockey puck going back and forth on the ice. i know you just pursued this with senator boxer. do you have statistics or information on the number of former nhtsa staff who now works for car manufacturers? >> we can get back on the record. >> and he suggested there might be ways to tighten the rules to bring back that public trust. what are your ideas? >> i think we should have the highest standard possible, nhtsa which, nhtsa employees -- which would prohibit nhtsa employees from working with auto manufacturers for a limited amount of time. for this administration, it is two years for a cabinet

secretary. i think it probably should be longer. >> so you are saying that they can work with the agency on a specific issue, it just not with the regulators. that sounds like a good idea. i know when you get these complaints, you scan your databases to figure out if there is a match or you have seen a number. we do not want to get in the fight about what the "new york times" said or not, but nhtsa stands its own databases. who scans corp. databases? >> we work with that, and we try to go through all of the data we can. >> toyota has a statutory requirement to report to our early-warning system. so we receive their peaceful

reports, technical service bulletins. all of that -- we receive their full reports and technical service bulletins. >> the guy i mentioned, i talked to him directly, and he felt like he was being told he was not telling the truth. he has never driven a car, she is afraid to drive it. and we have another woman, a nurse, the same thing happened. she barely survive. she was able to put it in neutral finally and stop it from accelerating. the problem from a trust standpoint with government is that these people all came forward and went to the agency had filed complaints, and all of these other complaints were going on. these details were somehow in the computer system. i truly believe that employees are trying to do the right thing, to figure out what tools we can give you so there is no chance of this happening again.

when my constituents file complaints, at least there is some feeling that they were not going crazy when this happens to them, and they did the right thing reporting it, and they are part of the solution. >> thank you for your leadership, senator. we appreciate it. >> thank you, senator. ñi>> i have a packet to hand ou, if that is ok. administrator strickland, i hate to see the secretary have all the fun, so i'm going to ask a few questions, if you do not mind. first, i want to ask about the resource issue. we have had a few senators today suggest that you need more resources, and i know that is in the president's budget, but have you made decisions on how you were going to fill those spots?

it sounds like you might need more expertise in the software electronics area. do you know whatçó you are going to do? >> we have six positions provided for in the budget, if it is approved. in terms of expertise, we have several pipelines. we have five electrical engineers, 125 in two years total. we also have a vehicle research center in ohio were we have an electronics engineer, a software engineer, in addition to other engineers. we are in the process of hiring and other electrical engineer. but i am having my staff go through and have a full assessment of the department, and we will deploy resources to make sure we buttress a stronger nhtsa. >> the camera -- camry solara and es300, and uia stands for

unintended acceleration, basically, what you see is that in model year 2002, they added electronic throttle control. you can see the numbers, what they do. there may be other factors in that, but i am glad you are looking at it, and as you look at it, i would hope that you focus on the electronics product control and other parts of the system that makes sense -- electronic throttle control and other parts of the system that make sense. >> that is a priority. the secretary has also already laid out plans for nhtsa to do a comprehensive review in the automotive industry. we are not only going to look at toyota. we will be looking at every manufacturer, because this is a system that has gone through the entire united states fleet. >> on the second chart, these are state farm numbers.

unintended acceleration claims. you can see thatñi the numbers e different. every time they add electronic çótroubleñr control, with two models,]iñ camry and corolla, yu see a spike. does nhtsa have comprehensive in other words, some of these numbers are from state farm, some are from customer questionnaires. do you have the data that you need? >> about three weeks ago, nhtsa issued three query's -- queries to toyota. part of it is an overall query

for all sudden acceleration incidents. we have an incredibly large and rich amount of data to go through to figure this out. but in addition to that, we took at the data when we saw -- we took a look at the data in 2004. we got early warning data coming in, and nhtsa opened investigations. the standard we have to follow to get our case in courtxd is we have to find a vehicle defect that creates an unreasonable risk in safety. if we can not find that defect, we cannot go forward. we will lose the case in course. -- in court. those incidents are where a full investigation was done, top to bottom, and they were not able to find a defect. they took a look at the electronic throttle control system in 2004, did a larger

inquiry in 2007, and were not able to find a defect. >> the last question i have for you is that some of the senators have alluded to press reports, whether it be abc, cbs, whoever. i do not remember who reported on this. there is an allegation, or at least an inference, that there is a relationship between nhtsa and manufacturers that is too cozy. i do not know if that is true or not. but you are the new administrator there, and most of the stuff happened before you got there. do you have concerns that the relationship between nhtsa and the manufacturers is too cozy? i understand you need a close working relationship, that that is important to do your job and make the roads safer and keep vehicles safer. but do you have a concern that this relationship is too close?

>> my responsibility is to run the department with the highest level of ethics possible. i do not want anybody running balls at -- running of the halls at -- running the halls at nhtsa other than my employees. i will respond in more detail on the record, but the claims that toyota made about negotiations or influenced is false. that is like me claiming that i was responsible for the sun rising today. absolutely false. and nhtsa's people did independent work and investigations, and that document absolutely has no foundation. >> thank you, senator pryor. >> mr. administrator, let me ask you this. there are questions about the

vehicles that you investigated, and again, i think you have said that full investigation top to bottom happened. ok. so where were these vehicles manufactured? with a manufactured here in the united states, or in some -- were they manufactured here in the united states, or in some other location? these specific vehicles. at these specific toyota vehicles. >> i do not know where specifically. a significant number of camrys are manufactured in the united states, but i have to get back to you on the absolute country of assemblage. >> please do. is that important in your investigation? if you see all of the vehicles are coming from one location, would you go whoa, the

lightbulb just went off? >> i think you are alluding to fort-firestone, where there was one plant in particular that produced the tires that have to tread where separation issue. we take everything into account, the place of manufacture. if there is a trend, we will find it. for example, the sticky pedal recall was linked to indiana. they used two manufacturers. the other was in japan. my understanding was that we did not see the same issues and that japan pedal as the u.s. pedal. so we absolutely take into account all manufacturing inputs, whatever the problem is. >> ok. now tell me, this full investigation, top to bottom, tell me what that would entail. walk me through what you mean by that kind of investigation. do you look at the car itself?

>> in some situations, there are several steps in the process. from a preliminary investigation all the way to an engineering analysis. but in the typical investor toward process, we send an investigator to the complaint tends -- complaintant to review their car. if it is electronic, we will take a look at those particular assemblages. we will take a look at the map, we will take a look at whether there is a surge, and they go through to eliminate any and all possible causes. if we find a defect, that is where we take action at that point. if there is a risk, we go further with the recall request. >> ok. but when you send them to look at these things, do they fly out their computers and everything else? what are you seeing? >> it depends on but -- on

the type of car. in 2004 and 2007 -- 2004 was a smaller look, 2007 was a larger look at electronic throttle control. in either case, if the investigator goes through the list and finds a defect that had been made aware from a prior recall, that is what they will fly. at the end of the day, in terms of how the investigator goes through this process, it is confined to the defect. if we do not find it does affect -- a defect, that is when we go forward. >> there is an investigation, and then there is an investigation. when you say full investigation, top to bottom, the image to create for me is that there are computers hooked up to this car, they are testing this and that, the next thing, the car is taken

apart, i could go to the shop floor and there are parts everywhere. that is not happening, is it? >> i think the consumer would not be happy if my investigator took apart the car. but in situations where there is a need to take a look at on board diagnostics, investigators bring those tools with them. they also look at the assemblages and drive the car, seeking to replicate the problem. that is what i mean by top to bottom. if something warrants something broader, nhtsa will do that, as we did in 2004 and 2007. and what we will be doing in undertaking the full review for emi in days coming. >> let's confine ourselves to the instances were something tragic happened, where somebody died. i would like to know what the investigation was. i am not asking you to tear open all the files of your agency, but what i am trying to get to, because we could add 50 more people, if we could add 500 more

people, but if the investigation is not getting us there to what is going on here, it will not make any difference. the second thing, because i am out of time already, is this. i do want to know where this all comes from. i am as free trade as anybody here. but i will tell you, the american consumer is getting tired of this kind of thing. if the problem is that we're getting substandard products from some other part of the world. what i am also extremely tired of his the -- is the treatment we get versus how we handle these things. our borders get shot, their borders keep coming -- our bordersgé d shut, their borders stay open.

i will tell you, i have worked with this country before, and i think they have some responsibility here. >> sir, let me just say, the comments from your opening statement struck me. i am going to japan. i talked to the japanese ambassador to the united states on a couple of occasions about this, and i wish i would have the insight -- i think it is something that we need to raise. i am going to raise it with the japanese ambassador to the united states, and i am going to raise it when i go to japan. i think it is a point well made, and one that we should be making when it comes to automobiles. >> mr. chairman, we are out of time here, and i appreciate it, but i hope you do. what they have done to us in an area that i'm concerned about, in my personal opinion, is outrageous. andçóñi yet they want us to cone to buy their products.

again, i am a free trade sort of guy. fair trade. i hope he will bring it up. >> i will. >> thank you. >> absolutely. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you. mr. administrator, i have two questions for you. one is that i have talked to some of the dealers in southern nevada about these particular issues, and one thing they did is they offered a particular service to toyota dealers there, just voluntarily, a free car wash to anybody who has a toyota. as they were bringing them in, they were doing inspections. one thing they found, two, sometimes three cars had four formats stacked on top of each other. the one tragic accident we have heard a lot of today is that a card did not have its -- a car did not have its floormat, it

had a different car's. it would seem to me that the dealer has some culpability there. i'm not a legal expert, but they did not have the proper mats. the reason i bring this up is that having a toyota product, i have a light-colored carpet, i got tired of it getting dirty within a couple weeks. so i went to a local manufacturer and bought some rubber mats. the other day, the dealer said, you had better check that to make sure it is safe. does nhtsa look at things like that? when you go to buy something like that, it says on there, good for certain cars. well, if the issue is that it is too thick, if that is the

problem, if somebody is buying something that is not based on the manufacturer, because the reason you buy extra market like that is because it is cheaper thançó going down and spending several hundred dollars from toyota. that is the reason i did. i am sure there are plenty of other people who do that. does your agency look at things like that? >> yes, we do. not only do we have responsibility for motor vehicles, but equipment, as well, including things like aftermarket products such as floor mats. >> so in this case, you have aftermarket products without hooks on them. but it is still ok for toyota? >> the mat that was recalled was an aftermarket items. the issue we always have to look at at nhtsa is not only from a manufacturing standpoint, we also have to look at it from the

force the ability of use and abuse. the thought was that if we replaced those mats, it was a particular issue of entrapment. the accident, tragic as it was, illustrated to nhtsa that it is clearly foreseeable that not only would a consumer make a mistake like that, but the car dealer itself could make a mistake. i think the car did not have the right back. it was a map that belong to a lexus -- it did not have the right mat, itó[ belonged to a lexus truck. it is the fact that you need a vehicle-based solution to recognize the fact that the pedal could have a problem. >> from what i understand, almost all car manufacturers

have had accelerator problems reported to you. the point is, i think a lot of americans look at it and if there is one death or whatever, somebody reports that you should do a recall. but that is not how it is done. as you testified earlier, you have to make sure there really is a cause and effect here, that it is not just necessarily one vehicle, but that there is a problem with the manufacturer for other vehicles to have the same kind of problem, correct? >> there is a new merkel component to this. if there's a defect recreates -- there is a new merkel component to this. if there is a defect causing a safety risk, we will do a recall. çóin terms of execution, nhtsa's mission is saving lives and preventing accidents and injuries. not only on the issue of numbers of people involved with

accidents because of defects. nhtsa's mission is to all the deaths that have happened last year. . .

smoking so hard she had melted her hub caps. that's an example of a case we had in minnesota. thank you, senator, for allowing me to clarify it. >> can i ask you, let me just

sort of put something forward and you can talk it and i can answer it. you had your first complaint into nhtsa and it's in your dabe -- database about unexpected acceleration back in 2003. now, some people have said, can't be responsible for the past and that's true. we are looking at a history here, characterization, both past and forward. and it's very clear that the sudden unintended acceleration in toyota vehicles that nhtsa's database worked. it was clear. there were a lot of people that complained, and they're all in the database. what didn't work to this observer is what nhtsa failed to do because it failed to

determine the cause so that sudden unintended acceleration in toyota vehicles, so i think its investigations have failed. now, why do i say this? what reason could there be? our committee staff reviewed thousands and thousands of pages of nhtsa documentation, other documentation, and i think it fairly clearly shows that nhtsa employees are reluctant to do investigations of the vehicle electronics because it's much more difficult to detect. you had juan investigation which was limited to floor mats even though there were clear instance unrelated to floor mats. and so i just make this point and then i ask you react to it. i think that nhtsa investigators taking the whole period of time would rather focus on floor mats than micro chips because they understand floor mats.

they weren't comfortable with floor mats. they don't understand microchips. you're going to change that, but this is what the situation has been. so i -- i feel that very strongly and i feel that's been the major letdown on nhtsa's part. looking back and up to the present. so how do you react, what are you going to make sure that the microchips solution to unintended acceleration works? >> well, my response, mr. chairman, is that we are going to do a complete review. i'll be happy to share the copy of the letter that we have sent to toyota asking for every possible piece of information to make sure that we haven't missed anything or that they didn't disclose some things that we should have looked at.

>> but you won't disagree with me about my so-called stipulation? >> well, i don't know if nhtsa was turned a blind's eye on the -- because they didn't understand chips or the electronics. i know this, we're going to get to the bottom of the electronics. that's what i commit to you. >> and that's what i want to hear. i'm just telling you that you got your first complaints about this in 2003 and the record clearly shows that your folks stayed away. not your folks but the prior person's folks stayed awhich from microchips. >> and if the information from toyota that we get, information that we haven't received, you know, we're going to be pretty darn mad about that. it will help us in the future. >> mr. secretary, mr. administer, i totally thank you for being here.

we have -- administrator, i totally thank you for being here. we have one more witness for the next 12 minutes, but then that witness will be back again this afternoon. i thank you for taking the time. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> strong attitude. now, i'd ask clarence ditlow to please come forward, please. >> thank you for your courtesy. thank you for everything. i appreciate it. thanks, thanks. clarence ditlow. we have to hustle here because there's a vote coming up shortly.

if we could have silence in the hearing room, please. people could take their seats. mr. clarence ditlow executive director of the center for auto safety, has been observing auto safety for, what, 25, 30 years? >> longer than that. >> longer than that. all right. let me ask the first question, and before i do that, any folks, including senator hutchinson, who had a statement, and any other folks who didn't give a chance to give that statement, that will be included in the record. mr. ditlow, i am very troubled that nhtsa and the public must rely so heavily on manufacturers for data that ultimately will probably hurt if they share all of it the company's reputation and profits.

manufacturers have an incentive to only give the minimum amount of information to nhtsa. that would be my conclusion. in other context, companies are required, not asked to but remember to certify that the information they provide the government is accurate and complete or face criminal and civil penalties, am i right? [inaudible] >> would it require manufacturers to make a similar certification when they provide information to nhtsa? is your thing on? >> sorry. >> ok. now it's on. senator rockefeller, he has one of our first recommendations. every single response by an automobile manufacture ought to

be submitted with an aft that is sworn under penalty of perjury. that's the only thing that you are going to be sure that when they're submitting information that they don't err on the side of manufacture but they err on the side of disclosure. >> all right. i'm compelled to turn to senator mccaskill. >> senator rockefeller, can i give you a few points, talking points? >> i got to get her in. you are going to be here this afternoon on the toyota panel? >> yeah. >> the membership knows that. >> the -- all i want to do now is address a few of the points that was raised by secretary lahood and administer strickland. first of all, i have the utmost respect for the secretary and theed a -- and the

administrator. they are behind the eight ball. they came in after the recall and they have been doing everything they can to catch up. they have a lot of work to do. and in looking at some of the things, talked about the agency getting complaints on its own and from the manufacture. -- manufacturer. but in the days that didn't lead to sangle recall, there were complaints that were excluded on a long duration of events. were the -- the brakes did not override the full acceleration. so you narrowed it down. you didn't get the full picture. and we saw the submissions today on the number of complaints when electronic throttle controls were introduced. the center took a look at the toyota camry. there have been twice as many fatal crashes and deaths in the 2002 to 2006 camry which has not been recalled as in the 2007 to 2010 camry.

so that's a -- if you can't answer questions like that you haven't done your job. the -- the fundamental issue in the complaints i think comes out of the 1989 study that d.o.t. did that said if we can't find a mechanical failure, something that causes the throttle to open or the cruise control, then it must be driver error. they've excluded out complaints. those -- that study was done on 1983 to 1986 vehicles. a quarter of a century ago. technology today in today's cars are far beyond that. we didn't have electronic power controls. we didn't have 20 to 30 microprocessors in vehicles. you can't use the 1989 study to measure 2010 vehicles. so i'm just -- toss that out the door. and the other thing i want to point out in terms of the agency's examination is they did one modern test on a 2007

lexus es-350 that caused electronic acceleration. they said it was floor mats. we asked them to give us the study and they came back and said we have no data, we have no test procedure. so it wasn't a valid test. this is what we're up against in moving forward. an agency that really hasn't done a thorough examination. and then we have the issue of the former employees coming in. and i will add one more. aircrafta jones, former chief counsel, when they came in and negotiated the safety improvement campaign, she was there as part of the team toyota lobbying the former agency that she worked for. so they know the system, they know how to beat it and we need to get a lot more resources for

the agency. and i pose a question for secretary lahood, where are those 66 positions going, how many are going into enforcement where we really need it? thank you. >> i would just say in the panel this afternoon i think that toyota's going to get some very tough questioning from members here. but the purpose of that one is to solve the problem. that's by far the most important purpose. but also they need that to re-establish the level of trust they once had and then suddenly lost when some of these figures came out. that's what oversight is for. that's what our job is. and that's what nhtsa's job is. you know, so far the differences are not startling. i call on senator mccaskill because she didn't have a chance to ask a question. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. ditlow, did your organization make any attempt to track lawsuits that are filed against automakers and

make note of the results of those lawsuits? >> it's very difficult for us to track the lawsuits because there's no central filing mechanism. we have to rely on filings with the government. we certainly come across some individual lawsuits like the berto lawsuit in michigan where there was no floor mats in the vehicle and we call that to the agency's attention so that's part of the agency's files. >> part of the issue here, and i hope i have a chance to this afternoon question the toyota officials about it, is a culture about secrets. a culture aboutñiyó making sur that no one knows anything bad, and frankly in%kyrxdçó this ins maybe that culture is more to blame for this problem than anyone heretofore has acknowledged. i want to first say that i think there are fine cars this company has built.

and are obviously hardworking people in america that are selling them and buying them. i look at some of the cases out there, and what i'm really concerned about now is that we have some homicide, vehicular homicide cases where people have gone to jail when they said i put on the brake, it didn't work, it just kept going. and i'm interested on a case where there was a driver of a runaway camry that signed a confidentiality agreement and received a settlement from toyota following accelerating out of control for 20 miles before killing another driver of car in san jose, california. she was charged with manslaughter but then charges were dropped. it seems to me that lawyers of the country are doing the work that the regulatory agencies refuse to do or won't do or bureaucracies somehow keep them from doing and that is they're pounding on the doors of justice and saying, let us in,

we got evidence. and it seems to me your organization now with internet technology, a lot of these lawsuits are very easy to find. it might be a way that consumer groups such as yours -- i know other consumer groups have utilized this, can begin to track some of the lawsuits and get a leg up in terms of bringing evidence to the regulators that could help prevent this in the future. >> senator mccaskill, you're absolutely right. these confidentiality agreements that are signed should be prohibited in areas of public health and safety because you would be covering up a defect that could lead to a recall that could prevent hundreds of deaths and injuries. i must add that the secrecy at the department of transportation is as bad as the secrecy in some of the lawsuits because all -- there are hundreds of early warning by nhtsa since 2003. yet none of those are made public. i mean, look -- when you look

at early warning, nhtsa spent $20 million. now, when it comes to toyota sudden acceleration, either early warning founded early on and nhtsa didn't act on it or early warning itself is a flaw because it should have detected it. i mean, we can't tell you as a public watchdog which way it is because the government won't give us access to the investigations done under early warning. but they're there. >> well, i think the transparency part is important and i know that economic considerations go in to the secrecy culture because they want to protect their product from their competitors until the appropriate moment because of the competitive market of automobiles in the world. but in this instance, i think we need to take a hard look at all the cases where there have been sealed and private agreements, particularly after litigation has begun. mr. chairman, thank you. >> thank you.

and before we all rush off to vote, i just want to make a point that comes out what you said. the -- during the hearing this afternoon with toyota, we have two people from japan that we brought over. one is in charge of safety. one is in charge of another factor. they're both on the board of directors, so they're top people. they can't do -- they could give their testimony in english but they can't answer questions necessarily. so they will have a translator. because we take these matters seriously in this committee, we will have a japanese -- person who can speak japanese, a translator, sitting right here to listen to how the translation is given in respect to how the questions are asked. and i think that's a little bit what you're talking about. having so said, this hearing is adjourned. mr. ditlow, we will see you again this afternoon.

>> well, thank you. i look forward to it. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> just a program reminder. the senate commerce committee will meet again this afternoon, the transportation committee

meeting again this afternoon to continue this hearing. we'll hear from a number of toyota executives. we'll have live coverage of that portion of the hearing this afternoon. you can follow that on c-span3. here on c-span, the u.s. house is about to gavel in to start the week. first up, morning hour speeches. about 10 minutes away at 12:30 eastern. then members will take a break before returning to legislative work at 2:00. 10 bills to be considered today including those marking national engineers week and honoring military dogs. live coverage of the u.s. house, again, at 12:30 for morning hour speeches. taking a look at $787 billion economic stimulus plan passed last year by congress, over $190 billion has been paid out so far of the $343 billion committed as of february 24. a reminder, too, we have a website devoted to following that money. c-span.org/stimulus is where you'll find news conferences,

hearings and congressional debates as well as links to government and watchdog groups. we're tracking that spending -- who are tracking that spending. c-span.org/stimulus. over 1,000 middle and high school students entered this year's c-span student cam documentary competition with a short video on one of our country's greatest strengths or a challenge the country is facing. we'll' nouns the 75 winners on march 10 and share their winning videos at studentcam.org. the u.s. house coming in in under 10 minutes for general speeches. until then, a look at items in the news and viewer phone calls from today's "washington journal." risburg, pennsylvania. steve on the democratic line. caller: in the senate, too much power is given to states with the smaller population, states like kentucky and senators jim bunning. i live in states like california and pennsylvania with a larger

population and i feel that i'm not given enough power and enough say. the we don't have a true democracy because of the senate. we don't have proportional representation in the senate. it gives an unfair advantage, the senate does, to these lightly populated states and the conservatives and the republican party. states like north dakota, south dakota, midwestern states and the southern states, but -- they are over represented. it is really unfair and it is killing our democracy. it is on proportional representation. and the system has to change now. host: how should it be changed? yarmulkes of the senate is not proportional representative -- caller: the senate is not proportional rep. you don't give two votes to

states like north dakota and kentucky. they should not be given the same representation of states like california. unfair to the people of california. host: we got your point. william on the republican line. caller: how are you doing this morning? i'm not too highly educated. i'm a disabled veteran, but if you want to know how the senate works, all you have to do is read the constitution. i have a copy of it in my hand. it tells you how it is supposed to work. in reality, how it is working compared to how the constitution says it is supposed to, that is open for debate. if you want to know how it is supposed to be, just read the constitution. thank you, and you all have a great day. host: wisconsin, ken on the democratic line. caller: good morning. this over representation,

congress puts enough people to cover portions of people. as for mr. bunning and the republican party, they should not be allowed to just stop people from doing their business, just one person. and the republican party is not saying a word about it. one other thing. when people used to call in and say one battle word about president bush, you used to -- one little word about president bush, you used to hang up on them. now the bacall and and called president obama every word under the sun -- now people call in and called president obama every word under the sun. you never ask them a question about bush. every week it is, how is mr.

obama doing? you never asked that about bush, ever. thank you. host: all right. the caller mentioned senator bunning. he was on the floor and had an exchange what senate majority leader harry reid. first, let us show you what senator bunning had to say about why he is holding up this legislation, and then we will come back and show you what senator harry reid had to say. >> i support extending unemployment benefits, cobra benefits, flood insurance, i will fix, small business loans, network television for satellite viewers. if we can't find $10 billion to pay for something that we all support, we will never pay for anything on the floor of this

u.s. senate. i have offered several ways to do this, including trying to negotiate with the majority leader's staff. none have been successful. we cannot keep adding to the debt. it is over $14 trillion and going up fast. host: senator jim bunning, republican from kentucky, talking about why he has stopped this extension of tax provisions, including unemployment insurance, " or insurance, and other tax provisions from going forward in the senate. this is "the baltimore sun" on how can one senator do this. this is a side story. in a q&a on the side of the story, this is not truly a filibuster out of mr. smith goes to washington. instead, democratic and

republican leaders saw to pass the extension bill quickly using a short cut requiring unanimous consent by all senators. only jim bunning accepted the -- objective. unless the relenza they were either have the bill passed on a senate floor vote, where it could take 60 votes, or likely the case, the senate will include extensions in the bill in an larger package that will be voted on later this week. either way, bunning's actions will result in a delay that is expected to last only a matter of days. south carolina, fell on the independent line printout you think about how the senate votes? caller: i wanted to echo what was mentioned a few minutes ago, it is working exactly the way it is supposed to at least never close to the constitution. the senate is a stop-gap of the larger states dominating over the smaller states.

that was the concern of the >> "washington journal" is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. we're leaving this recorded segment and go to the house. first up morning hour speeches. members will take a break before returning for legislative work at 2:00 eastern. 10 bills to be considered today including those marking national engineers week and another honoring national military dog week. recorded votes at 6:30. now live to the house floor here on c-span. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker: the house will be in order. pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2009, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair recognizes the gentleman from alabama, mr. rogers, for two minutes. mr. rogers: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to talk about what i think is the most important issue in america and that's jobs. specifically something that this administration can do quickly to help alleviate our jobs problem. many people in this country recognize that there has been a debate in congress for the last few years about how to replace our aging tanker fleet in the air force. we have tankers over 50 years old and need to be replacedp),

now. we have had competition for the contract to replace those tankers ongoing for a year. it has been nothing but bureaucratic. what i would like to urge the president to do is instruct his defense department to consider something that our late colleague, mr. murtha supported and that was dual procurement of these tankers. we can take the two major prime contractors, boeing and northup grumman and allow both to proceed with tanker production to do a couple things. one to immediately have an injection of jobs into the country. a bigger injection than we would have had by sole source procurement. also we would more rapidly then get the fleet of tankers replaced. the current contract construct it would take 40 years. i don't think anybody wants the war flighter to fly 80 and 0-year-old tankers. i understand the air force would need its procurement

budget plused up because they are expecting only to afford 15 per year. i think the president could take some of the stimulus funds which were ostensibly to be used for job creation, move that to the air force's budget so that we could instead of having 15 per year have 24 per year which would allow each company to produce 12 tankers per year. this would create an immediate influx of new jobs, not just in the tanker procurement but also the surrounding supply industry and the communities this would be an economic engine in the various states this production would take place. it would be good for the war fighter, good for our economy, good for american jobs. the president ought to do it. mr. president, it's about jobs. i urge you to focus on this issue. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from arizona, mrs. kirkpatrick, for five minutes. mrs. kirkpatrick: request permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. kirkpatrick: madam

speaker, every day this country is falling deeper in debt. today we owe more than $12.4 trillion and by 2016 our debt could be as much as $20 trillion. after more than a decade of mistakes and negligent by both parties -- neglect by both parties, washington can no longer afford to ignore this issue. it is time for congress to get serious about getting federal spending under control. we should start with our own salaries. today i'm introducing the taking responsibility for congressional pay act. which will cut pay for members of the house and the senate by 5%. this would be the first salary reduction for members since april 1, 1933. in the heart of the great depression. restoring fiscal discipline in washington will require some difficult decisions. and every agency has to do

their part. congress needs to lead by example to get the job done. by taking action and not just by making speeches. with this change we are fighting to change the culture in washington and beginning to make the tough choices it takes to cut waste and find savings. there will be an important step toward bringing back real fiscal responsibility. we are facing historic chal lention. it will take historic action to address them. i urge my colleagues to join me in acknowledging the problem and taking responsibility for fixing it. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington, mr. larsen, for five minutes. mr. larsen: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. larsen: madam speaker, trade creates jobs. in my own state of washington one in three jobs is dependent

on foreign trade. so as congress continues to focus on ways to create jobs, we must help american businesses export their products and services. this weekend i will travel in my own district to visit companies who have partnered with federal programs to increase exports and create western chemical, for instance a. small business in ferndale, is a leadershipce in fish healt products. it recently received $500,000 in financing from the export-import bank. by utilizing the eximbank they are able to maintain cash flow, and protect their jobs. export drives washington state's economy accounting for 30% of economic growth over the past decade in our state and contributing to almost half of #u jobs created over the past 30 years in our state. so the recent establishment of the national export initiative> to say doubles exports in the next fivev years is in the righ direction. u.s. trade reps' office, the

ex-im bankaw and department of energy, the administration has made it a priority to help farmers and small businesses to increase exports and create two million new jobs here at home. we in congress must provide the resources to help them do just that. first we should support the efforts to support advocates for u.s. companies and assist the 23,000 companies who are trading or begin to grow their export sales in 2011. we must not forget the engine that drives our economy is small business and over x the last twohnq(p(tj small and medium-sized businesses have accounted for almost 65% of new jobs created here in the u.s. last year i introduced legislation to direct the department of commerce to assist them in exporting products. from 2000 to 2007, washington state exports to china grew by 406%. this created jobs in sectors like transportation equipment,

crop production, and processed foods. i know the u.s. tradeyri rep's office hags launched a business to increase ention ports in the small businesses. our farmers will benefit asc% well. for over $1 billion in exports 9,000 jobs are creíq"@(" $1.4 billion in economic activity is generated. our farmers, small business$; owners, want to export their products and services, they want to create jobs here in the united states. i'm urging my colleagues to help them do this by supporting the export initiative which will create jobs an launch us on a path toward longer term economic growth. with that i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until 2:00 p.m. today.

10 bills today including one marking national engineers week and another honoring military dogs. we'll have live house coverage when they return at 2:00 p.m. eastern. ahead of that we are going to brive brink you a briefing to special ambassador to afghanistan and iraq richard holbrook. he'll be talking about that. live in just about 20 minutes. a year ago the house passed the economic stimulus package. over $343 billion has been committed. $190 billion just over -- just paid out. you can go to c-span.org/stimulus to look at the hearings about the stimulus. that's at c-span.org/stimulus. >> which four presidents lived

past 9 oyears old? they were john adams, herbert hoover, ronald reagan and gerald ford. find these and other presidential facts in c-span's newly updated book "who's buried in grant's tomb?" >> it's a guide book and also a mini history work of biography of each of these presidents. you can tell a lot about people at the end of their lives. >> a resource guide to every presidential grave site, the story of their final moments and insites about their lives. "who's buried in grant's tomb?" now available at your favorite bookseller or go to publicaffairsbooks.com. type in grant's tomb at check out. c-span is available on television, radio and online. and you can also connect with us on twitter, facebook and youtube. and sign up for our scheduled

alert emails at c-span.org. >> in about 20 minutes just a reminder we will be live at the state department. a news briefing from special ambassador richard holbrook on his recent trip to afghanistan and pakistan. until then a look at homeland security and in particular the budget of that department. this runs about 45 minutes. we'll show you as much as we can until ambassador holbrook begins his news week. host: mickey mccarter is the senior correspondent for mellman security today. the budget that still has to be approved for 2011 is about $56.3 billion for the overall department. when you break that down, $11

billion for the customs and port -- customs and border, and so on. when you look at that, what does that say about the priorities for the omen security department? guest: the big increase in the fiscal 2011 budget proposal is for the transportation security and administration, and this is not a big surprise given the attempt on christmas day in detroit abdulmutallab -- by our abdulmutallab. host: compare that was about 3% for the overall department in 2010. guest: indeed, the big increase will be at the tsa. we will see a lot of new technology going to try to capture explosives detection a

bit better, perhaps, than traditional screen technologies might be able to. host: foreign technology, most of the money going toward what type of technology? there are guest: as been a lot of money in these whole body imaging devices. -- guest: there has been a lot of money invested in these whole body imaging devices. the obama administration plans to put those 1000 whole body in the jurors around the united states and have coverage for about 75% of the largest u.s. airports by the time they are done deploying them. host: give us some examples of the largest u.s. airports. guest: j.f.k., o'hare, l.a.x., dulles -- some of these airports already have the technology and it has been installed sometimes in secondary screening locations. if for some reason there is a

suspicious passenger, that you'll have to go through this secondary screening to go -- to be sure that you do not have any contraband on you. host: does that mean that if you are traveling through the airport in the next couple of years you are likely to go through body scanner? guest: indeed, but there when to shift them through what is being called privacy -- primary screening right now, meaning everyone is going to go through them. host: have they resolved privacy issues? guest: there was some criticism initially that the anatomical detail in the x-ray might have been a little bit too high. people might not have been very comfortable with that. but now, with the software filters, the machine produces an image that looks more like a human character. it blurs our facial features and represents the human body

without as much detail while still highlighting threaten to -- threat areas on the person. but the tsa is going to opt out of that if they are still uncomfortable. they can go through the traditional metal detector and receive a pat down instead. host: how much of this money increase is going toward the body image scanners? guest: a lot of the increase is going to the image scanners, about $700 million in total. some of that will go to hire new scanners and some will go to hire operators for the scanners and some will go to reconfiguring airports. it goes one-third, one-third, one-third -- technology, people, construction. host: and where is the most emphasis beside tsa and what are the priorities for that agency? guest: it is interesting to see

where the decreases are to make way for the new emphasis. in the coast guard, for example, there has been a lot of debate here -- the coast guard, as you said, is getting about $10 billion in fiscal 2011. about 1.5 billion will go towards building new coast guard cutters, coast guard aircraft that they say they need because they're old equipment is literally falling apart. -- because they're old equipment is literally falling apart. -- their old equipment is literally falling apart. that budget would fund the national security cover, this is the big boat for the coast guard now. it will start designed for the workforce fleet, called the offshore control cotter, and that would be the medium range boat that they can use for multi-purpose. and it will also give them multi

response cutters, which will be in short coats. host: the previous type of boats that the coastguard was using, and how many jobs will there be for this new type of cover? guest: what is happening in fiscal 2011 is that they're going to cut about five votes, which means fewer jobs, actually. the coast guard will lose about 1000 people. 773, i think is the exact number that has been floated. because of the decommissioning of its old boats. host: and the companies that build these cutters, and where they are in certain districts'h in congress, what about them? kt security cover is being billed out of mississippi. the offshore patrol cover, which will actually be the largest acquisition in coast guard

history, that contract will be awarded probably next year. the coast guard has been relying on what has been called the integrated and deep water system, which it has been winding down. ((áájt(urjrjp couple of companies got together -- a combination of a couple of companies got together to build those assets. and it has generally beenó viewd as not to have gone the way the coast guard would have liked out of the program it set up a new acquisition director and is counseling that contract in january of next year -- canceling the contract in january of next year. a lot of these new contracts will go to new companies with new bids. host mccarter: is a senior -- mickey mccarter is a senior correspondent with norlands security. the new budget still has to be

approved by congress. will president obama get push back from members of congress? guest: he's getting a lot of push back on the coast guard because the budget would trim five water called maritime safety and security teams, one of which controls -- patrols new york harbor. again, the coast guard is cutting those because they want to be able to afford the new assets. a big loser in the fiscal 2011 budget in the eyes of congress so far has been border security. the customs and border protection agency is receiving about $11 billion and a lot of the money is being shifted away from the virtual fence, the secure border initiative network as it is formally called. and it is because the offense has not come on schedule. that has not produced useful technology yet. host: can i stop you there? how much have they spent so far

on this virtual offensive? guest-- a virtual fence? guest: several host: billion dollars and they are not going to -- guest: several billion dollars. host: and they are not going to continue? guest: there is very little money in the president's budget, enough to sustain the 53 mile segment that is going to be billed out. a lot of the technology is going to be mobile imaging technology that is easier to move around to different areas. host: are you talking about unmanned drones, those sort of things? guest: actually, not so much. i think there will be a future emphasis on unmanned drones. border patrol has five or six at their disposal right now. a lot of those are flying on the

northern border. what we are talking about in the mobile surveillance technology are really trucks outfitted with radar, other sensors, cameras, may be other hand-held devices that border patrol agents would be able to use in the field. host: one other area of this budget is first responders. jenna nepolitano was testifying last week on capitol -- janet nepolitano was testifying last week on capitol hill. guest: this is an area that congress is really sensitive to because it is something that members can bring home to their district and they can say, i got my own town x amount of money in firefighter grants or police grants or what have you. grant proposal so far has been pretty flat. there have been about a -- has been about $4 billion under fema

for local brands. the jobs bill before the senate right now would have about $500 million for firefighter grants. that is part of its justification. but overall, the grants would stay pretty flat, as far as they were in fiscal 2010. host: more on this budget, walter on the democratic line, what is your question? caller: i would like to ask mr. mccarter about a homeland security. my opinion is that we should be focusing more on our country. i think when you looked at a tense -- attempts to monitor flights from other countries, we are depending on foreign countries to do that and i think it is very inefficient. and that no flightless, the last

time i remember hearing about it was something like 2 million names. who can manage that? another thing on the body scan, i do not understand the necessity for this visual but you have. but you have a system that can accurately detect explosives and give you an alarm, what is the advantage to the bodies can? you have the information, you pull the subject to the side and you do a body search. guest: first to my want to talk about the overseas question. we cannot dictate, basically, what airports overseas do. and that is obviously a problem for tsa because you want to stop threatening individuals and treading goods from coming into the country from abroad. we can encourage them and say, if you're a visa waiver nation, for example, you have a pretty high bar for checking of people getting into the u.s. we can give them incentives.

we can give them a fast track of shared security program, information sharing, etc. to encourage them to adopt the standards we would like to see. to the whole body imaging, i would go back to the christmas day attempt. that would be terrorist had an explosive in his underwear. that is really hard to find. everyone will tell you that it is really hard to find. the whole body in the jurors -- the old body imaging manufacturers that i've talked to say they are fairly confident that their devices would have found it. they do not know for sure because how would was packaged on the suspect has not been revealed in detail. but it is a powdery substance that is very or to detect. in theory, this would have been one of the few technologies that would have been able to pick that up. host: pat on the republican

line. caller: yesterday there was a report sean about five times. how whites -- a report shown about five times. hawaii started checking i dug vacation. -- identification. some drug runners started coming through hawaii. a a reporter whewhen to macarthr park and in an hour he was able to have -- a reporter went to macarthur park and in an hour we was able to have an identification card made. he could get a visa card, master card, anything he needed. it took an hour. and he showed them to the camera. host: are you familiar with this? guest: i am not familiar with

this specific report, but i'm sure that it was a factual report. immigration and customs is the agency at the dhs that is responsible for patrolling illegal immigration and illegal activities like that inside u.s. borders. their budget is staying pretty flat. in fact, a lot of people is are arguing -- a lot of people are arguing that illegal immigration is less of a problem. it has dropped in the last year due to the bad economy, people going on, etc. as far as new initiatives in fiscal 2011 budget, the department will be focusing more on intelligence operations in big metropolitan areas in particular where there might be the threat of illegal trafficking or illegal goods, perhaps like the ones described. the department will be working with law -- local law

enforcement and other federal agencies to tackle those problems. host: ann on the republican line. caller: i have a question about this border fence between mexico and the u.s. that was a big waste of money. first of all, it cost over $400 million to build. it was my understanding it was going to be something like the berlin wall, but it is not. there are gaps in it and anyone can walk through. the secretary of homeland security stated that if you worilng. and this