india arie, wherever you are. there she -- no. where you are? backstage. she's backstage. i was like, where, i don't see her. somebody else i'm very honored to have. i want everybody to acknowledge -- there she is. there's my girl, india arie. .

>> i am even happier to be with my good friend and great senator, barbara boxer. it was one of the privileges of being a senator that i had a chance to work alongside barbara. you know, california has been -- you know, california has been a leader in promoting hybrids and cleaner burning fuels and appropriately you have in barbara boxer a compact senator with a seemingly inexhaustible supply of energy.

now, a lot of you are aware of how deeply barbara cares about the environment, about her work to pursue a clean energy future, and that work's important, but i also want you to know that this is a woman who has a deep passion for fighting for you. fighting for all her constituents here in california. she's passionate about fighting for jobs, jobs with good pages, jobs with good benefits. she's passionate about fighting for california's families. she is -- we are going to do that. hey, hold on a second. hold on a second. we are going to do that. so, let's -- >> yes, we can. yes, we can. yes, we can.

yes, we can. >> all right. guys, guys. all right. i agree. i agree. i agree. now -- no, listen. what the young man was talking about was we need to repeal don't-ask, don't-tell. which i agree with. and which we have begun to do. but let me say this, when you've got an ally like barbara boxer and you've got an ally like me, who are standing for the same thing, then you don't know exactly why you got to holler because we already hear you. all right. [cheers and applause]

>> it would make more sense to holler that at the people who oppose it. when you've got barbara boxer who is passionate about fighting to give people all across this state a fair shake, to put the american dream within reach for all americans, then what we should be wore roying about is how to make sure barbara boxer gets elected. that's mostly what i want to talk about tonight. i am proud of the work we have done to bring the world together around a host of problems from terrorism to the nuclear threat, from climate change to depravation of poverty around the globe. i was gratified to sign a new start treaty with russia and

host so many world leaders in washington last week. working in concert to reduce the perilous risk that nuclear materials could fall into the wrong hands, but reviving our own economy remains the central challenge we are facing today. i don't have to tell you that. this state has been hit as hard as any statement in the union with economic troubles these past few years. jobs have been lost at a heartbreaking level all across this state and they have devastated families and devastated communities. the housing crisis hit this state with a particular vengeance. driving your friends, your neighbors out of their homes, injecting a sense of fear and financial insecurity into too many people's lives. i'm sorry, do you want to come up here?

because, can i just say, once again, barbara and i are supportive of repealing don't-ask, don't-tell so i don't know why you are hollering. the problems that we have here put a further strain on folks in this state. forcing painful choices about where to spend and where to save. and the challenges folks have been facing here -- >> yes, we can. yes, we can. yes, we can. yes, we can. yes, we can. yes, we can. yes, we can. yes, we can. yes, we can. >> everybody. i just wanted to confirm, i just want to confirm, i just checked with barbara, so if anybody else is thinking about starting a

chant, barbara didn't even vote for don't-ask, don't-tell in the first place, so you know she's going to be in favor of repealing don't-ask, don't-tell. now, that is a key issue. but i think putting californians back to work is also a key issue. because there are folks gay and straight, who are out of work right now. and the challenges that are being faced right here in california are facing americans all across the country. now, these aren't challenges that suddenly appeared when i got sworn into office. they didn't come out of nowhere. when i walked into the white house on that very first day, america was embroiled in a series of crises the likes of which we hadn't seen in some time. abroad we were confronting a war

in iraq that needed to come to a responsible end. a war in afghanistan that demanded greater focus. a new world of threats and new dangers. at home we were facing a financial crisis that just about every credible economist said had the potential to plunge us into another great depression. and economic crisis that was producing stagnant wages, falling incomes, and shaken middle class. and a deficit crisis that was saddling our children with a mountain of debt. that's what we inherited when we the chair: in. while we still got a -- when we came in. while we still got a long road ahead of us, while too many neighbors are still struggling, especially here in california, these are challenges barbara and i are working to solve together. we are beginning to signs of progress all across america, adding jobs instead of losing them. spending -- people spending again. orders rising again. an economy that's growing instead of shrinking.

and california, this progress we are seeing didn't happen by accident. it happened because we had taken a number of necessary but not always popular steps to break the back of this recession and get our economy moving again. but you didn't send us to washington just to manage the crisis and rescue the economy, you sent us there to rebuild it so that it was stronger than before. to make it more prosperous than it was before. more competitive than it was before. you sent us there to make the 21 ste century another american century and lay a newfoundation for growth that would reach all our people. that's what health insurance reform was about. that's why we embarked on historic education reform. that's why we are embarking on clean energy reform. that's what our future's about.

that's why we have restored science to its rightful place. that's why we renewed our commitment to research and development for medical labs to nanotechnology. we are focusing on the next generation, california, not just the next election. that's the mission that i have been trying to faithfully carry out on your behalf. and that's the mission that members of congress like boosh a have been carrying out. it would have been nice if we had more help from the other side of the aisle sometimes. so any how -- just a smidgen of help. i have been disappointed sometimes that little smidgened yen hasn't been more forthcoming. you would have expected that

republican leaders would have been willing to help out cleaning up after this mess since they had more than a little to do with creating it. and we all have a stake in cleaning it up. we are all, after all, americans. not democrats, not republicans. we are americans first. so we should have have a -- we should all have a stake in seeing this situation cleaned up. after driving our economy into a ditch, they decided to stand on the side of the road and watch us while we pulled it out of the ditch. they asked why haven't you pulled it out fast enough. i notice there's like a little scratch there in the fender, why didn't you do something about that. look, you know, that's their prerogative, california.

that's also what elections are for. and the american people will have a clear choice when they enter the polls in november. they'll have to doll -- all they'll have to do is look what we have been for and what the other side's been against. for example, tax cuts, we just had tax day and there were a bunch of folks out there complaining about their taxes. i understand that. nobody likes paying taxes, except i just want to make sure the anger is properly directed because we were for putting $200 billion in tax cuts into the pockets of the american people. tax cuts for making college more affordable. tax cuts for buying a first home. all together we gave 25 different tax cuts for families and for businesses, several of them directed at small businesses that are the backbone of our economy. here in california 98% of working families are getting a tax cut.

so that's what we were for. and that's what the other side was against. you're welcome. barbara and i and the other members of congress, we thought it was wasteful and wrong to give billions of dollars to bnks to act as unnecessary middlemen in administering student loans. so we said, let's use that money to help more students go to college and get the skills they need to outcompete workers around the world. we said let's make the repayment of student loans more manageable so that kids don't start out with a crushing debt. that's what we were for. that's what they were against.

we thought it was unfair to deny health insurance to americans with pre-existing conditions. we thought it was wrong to let hardworking families and small businesses continue to get crushed by skyrocketing health care costs and families go bankrupt because somebody gets sick in their family. so we did what americans have been trying to do for a century, republican presidents and democratic presidents and republican congresses and democratic congresses and we finally enshrined the principle that all of us ought to have a sense of security when it comes to our health care. that's what we were for. that's what they were against. the republican leader in the house said the other day that repealing health insurance reform would be his number one priority if he becomes the speaker of the house in

november. so he would say to you, and 800,000 californians with pre-existing conditions, you know what, we think it was a mistake to make sure that you can get coverage. and he would tell all those seniors, give back that $250 you'll get this year to help pay for prescription drugs. and then he'll say to millions of small business men and women who today qualify for new tax credits to help them cover their workers, you know what, your workers don't need health insurance and you don't need help, either. now, that -- if he wants to run on that appealing agenda, go ahead. but barbara boxer's not going to let this happen and i'm not going to let it happen. and you're not going to let it happen. and the american people are not going to let it happen because we believe that americans should have affordable, quality health care.

you're welcome. even as we speak we are in the midst of another important battle in washington. i want everybody paying attention these next several weeks. because one of the main reasons our economy faltered was because some on wall street made irresponsible bets with no accountability. the rules weren't adequate. sometimes the government simply looked the other way. and as a result we had a financial crisis that led to the loss of 8.5 million jobs. a crisis that's caused millions of californians to lose their homes and cost families and businesses and businesses trillions of dollars in savings and assets. i said this many times before, i believe in the free financial market. i believe that's -- that it's essential that we have a strong financial market because that

helps to boost dynamic economic growth. but a free market doesn't mean you should be free to do whatever you want. however you can get it. without regard to consequences. there would have to be rules in the road. there's got to be some accountability. there's got to be some transparency or else we are going to see more abuses and disastrous meltdowns like the one we just experienced. so, barbara and members of congress who are here, and i, believe that we've got to make the rules to bring greater accountability and transparency to wall street and greater protection to consumers and taxpayers and the broader economy and not surprisingly wall street has fought some of these reforms. shocking. they have sent down an army of lobbyists. they are just waiting to water them down. the truth is, that's a big reason we got into this mess in

the first place because of the disproportionate power of these lobbyists. so this time we got to get it right. this time we have a responsibility to meet, a responsibility to the american people and to america's future. now, the senate republican leader, he paid a visit to wall street a week or two ago, he took along the chairman of their campaign committee. he met with some of the movers and shakers up there. i don't know exactly what was discussed, all i can tell you is when he came back, he promptly announced he would oppose the financial regulatory reform. he would oppose it. shocking. and once again he's threatening to tie up the senate with a filibuster to try to block progress. and he made the cynical argument , it was just plain false, that this plan that is essential to

avoiding fuhr taxpayer bailouts was somehow going to create taxpayer bailouts. now, understand, i'm not saying democrats and republicans ought to agree on everything. there are some things we just philosophically disagree on. that's a good thing. that's part of our democratcy. but a wise man once said he has the right to criticize who has the heart to help. and all we are looking right now for is some help. some commonsense -- common sense and help. that's what we hope the over side is -- other side is going to do. not just criticize but help. exercise some common sense. don't just stand in the way but lend a hand and help because the fact is we need everybody's help. the problems we face are too great for any one party to solve and all of us, democrats and republicans, have to come together to solve them. all of us together have to

tackle exploding deficits. that's why i directed my team to go through the budget line by line to cut what we don't need so we can pay for what we do. that's why i took a republican idea, an idea they have been fighting for and set up a bipartisan fiscal commission to rein in our deficits. and barbara and i set a clear goal, to cut our deficits in half over the next three years. all of us need to come together on behalf of clean energy. it's the right thing to do for the environment. it's the right thing to preserve our natural heritage. it's the right thing to do for our economy. and that's why following california's lead, that's why following california's lead i worked to bring everybody up to a tough new standard for cars and trucks, ushering in the first national standard for fuel economy and greenhouse gas reductions. that's why barbara and i worked together to provide incentives for companies building wind turbines and solar panels and green jobs that can't be

outsourced. that's why we need to build on barbara's new work and pass comprehensive energy and climate legislation. because the country that leads the energy economy will lead the global economy. barbara and i want that country to be the united states of america. all of us, all of us need to come together to expand the reach of the american dream. that's why the first bill i signed as president helps ensure equal pay for equal work for men and women alike. and, yes, that's why i'm committed to ending don't-ask, don't-tell and upholding nondiscrimination in the workplace. that's why last week i signed an order to help end the cruel practice of denying loved ones

hospital visitation rights because of who they are. we need to keep a promise of america. we've got to keep a fundamental promise that it doesn't matter who you are, what you look like, where you come from, the blessings of this country are opened to every single american. so let me close by saying this. these have been difficult years for california. and they have been difficult years for america. and i can't pretend we are over all the tough times. there are going to be some more hard days ahead. but here's what i want you to know. i have never been more optimistic about america's future. and i am optimistic because i know there are people like you out there and i know there are people like barbara boxer in the senate who is fighting to change this country for the better and because you are out there fighting and because barbara's there fighting, i draw

inspiration. and there are people all across this country who are dreaming of a better tomorrow. and then they are willing to fight for those dreams to come true. and you know what, that's the story of california. that's a state that always drew dreamers, men and women with the courage to pursue their dreams. it's a state that inspired pioneers to head out across an unforgiving wilderness. state that spurned glory seekers to rush westward for gold, state that draws innovators and entertainers from hollywood hills to mountain view. there's always been something about california that inspires us to dream. that's called on us to build a better life and has helped us imagine the world as it is and then recognize that the world as it might be is out there. i'm absolutely confidence that if folks in washington can recapture that same spirit, that same boundless, resilient american spirit, we are not only

going to rescue our economy, rebuild it stronger than before, but we are going to do what generationbefore and make the american dream more secure for our children and grandchildren. that's what barbara boxer's about. that's what you're about. and that's why i expect you to be out there making phone calls and knocking on doors and rallying the troops just like you did in 2008 to make sure that you return barbara boxer to the united states senate. thank you very much, california. god bless you.

♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> that will be followed by the indiana us senate republican primary. five candidates running for the seat being vacated by evan buy -- by. legislative work this afternoon includes a resolution honoring

civil rights leader benjamin hooks to died last week. we'll have live coverage for you here on c-span at 2:00 p.m. we'll take you to the pentagon for an update on air force operations in afghanistan. the briefing from this morning, just over a half-hour. >> no front row takers today? a couple. a few. good morning. it's a privilege to have the opportunity to hear from brigadier general steven coif, commander of the 4055th air expeditionary wing located in afghanistan. he's been the wing commander since april of 2009. and can provide an overview of area operations in afghanistan.

he is prepared to speak to the relationship between the pilots in the air and the troops on the ground. with the goal of ultimately providing security and stability to the afghan people. he is in bag a today -- bagra today. i would like to welcome him. general, i'll turn it over to you for a few opening comments and then we'll take some questions here. from the pentagon, welcome again. >> thank you very much for that kind introduction. and forgive the three-second delay as we communicate one to another, but i am very grateful that you are taking the time to be interested in and talk about afghanistan because it is such an incredibly important strategic place in the world right now for a whole series of reasons. i am grateful to get to talk a little bit today about that and to answer your questions.

without further ado let's get right to business. >> very good. barbara's been waving her hand back in the third row. we'll let her take the first one today. >> general, barbara star from cnn, i noticed that aeromedical evac is under your command. so can you explain to us in as much detail as possible why now the air force is medevacing wounded, ill, or injured patients out of afghanistan to balad in iraq before taking them on to the united states? what is the thinking there? and can you give us any numbers that you can about the numbers of troops going from one war zone to the other before they come home now? >> yes, i appreciate that question. barbara star, i have to say hello to you from general scott

body and the entire team here. you're one of their biggest heroes out there and we really appreciate what you do in communicating the story out here to the american people and to the world. with regard to your question, that is actually an event that was driven by the volcano and the ash that is settling over europe and england, ireland, and some of the northern tier european countries. normally we take them to lan constitutional -- landstuhl, and it is designed around the medical reality that survival and taking the best care of our soldiers possible needs to have an intermediate stop where they are properly stabilized and given care that may not be able to efficiently be given out here. so because we could not fly them into land stew because of the

safety concerns of the volume -- land stew -- landstuhl because of the safety concerns of the volcano, we used balad before they go home. we took the capability and capacity there to do the same thing we do at landstuhl at balad. but it's all driven by the requirement medically that that intermediate stop saves lives and it needs to be done. i hope that answers your question but i'm happy to go into more detail if you like. >> i would appreciate it if we could go into more detail. this may not be directly up your alley but can you possibly explain why bag ram -- bagram, do they not have the sufficient medical care at the hospital there to stabilize these patients? and you say that it is driven by the need -- medical reality to ensure survival.

it raises the question, it was our understanding troops were being taken directly back to the united states. at some point did -- was there some belief in afghanistan in the command structure that wounded troops were at risk and they had to take a stop that they couldn't bring them back directly to the united states? can you tell us how many wounded troops so far have been medevacked to iraq? >> right. i appreciate that further question and i'm happy to talk to that. you're right it's not directly in my lane, but i will tell you that the it is not about the amount of care it's about the capacity and it's about making sure that we triage, if you will, that we make sure that we have capacity for the unexpected events of a battle space like this. we have to be prepared at a moment's notice for something like a devastating attack by the

enemy to have that capacity ready at our hands means we have to move those wounded soldiers and we have to move them in a way that allows us that capacity to be prepared for the unexpected. the reality is that there is no degradation in care because we are going to balad instead of landstuhl. the reality is this very deli cat balance of medical care -- delicate balance of medical care and capacity so that we are prepared for the unexpected in the battle space where the enemy gets a vote drives us to this construct that was very wisely crafted a. very creative way of giving maximum care while maintaining maximum capacity. and what ill he -- i'll do is to describe that very nuanced and medically founded construct will give a medical professional to give you those detailed answers. it's predicated on medical fact

and capacity so that at the bat thele space right here where the rubber meets the road we are prepared for the unexpected and no matter what happens to us, no matter what the enemy might do, we are ready to save lives and we are not so full with people that we cannot handle a major attack. >> general, i'm rick from rotor and wing magazine. i just wonder, do you have any information about how the survivors were evacuated or taken to medical care on april 9 when the cb-22 osprey crashed? for that matter do you have any information you can give us about what caused that crash or anything about it? >> i appreciate that question because i appreciate what's behind the question and that is a very deep concern for those

that were wounded and killed and for the safety issues surrounding that. i will tell you the one thing you can rest assured at is that the defendant -- department of defense is world class any event that takes place that they preserve evidence and they research root cause so that we protect people in the future. and that investigation and that entire process of protecting evidence and driving to root cause and then bringing forward recommendations in every aspect to make sure something like this never happens again, that is ongoing and will be brought to conclusion so that all the decisionmakers in our country are able to ensure safe and effective war fighting capability. back to your first question with regard to how are the people taken care of after that devastating accident took place, the answer is just like any casualty in this battle space

that they were brought forward to the forward medical facilities. it was based on what happened to them. every situation is different and every situation is judged by a medical professional who is qualified to make the decision on exactly how this patient should be treated to make sure they survive and they have long-term care that they need. that same construct that applies to any soldier on the battlefield, any airmen, any marine, any civilian took place with this terrible accident as well. does that answer your question sufficiently, sir? >> i would like to ask for two clarifications, actually. on the investigation i think i could read into your answer that you are denying reports that the aircraft wreckage was destroyed. is that correct? yes or no? >> that is a total misrepresentation of my

intention there. i am neither making a statement in one way or the other with regard to the facts in the case. i am talking about the fact that the process is very good at determining root cause and that that will come out eventually. but it is also important to not comment on things just like any investigation because it can sometimes threaten an outcome that is all driven towards safety and protecting future soldiers and fighters that are out here. so my comment is based on the process and that the process is vigorous. it is aggressive at meet getting at root cause. and as quickly as possible making sure that future lives are protected because we know what happened to the best of our ability. so that process is ongoing and it would be inappropriate for me to comment on anything more specific than that. so you cannot read into my comment one way or the other and for very, very important reason, the safety of future soldiers.

>> what i meant to say is that you said all the evidence has been preserved and there has been a report that the wreckage was destroyed. those are not necessarily contradictory statements, but i wanted to see if you could tell us whether it's true the wreckage was destroyed. >> they are not contradictory statements because what we do is we take a look at what took place. we go forward and we gather those things we need. and then depending on the battle space and the threat and the risk, there is a judgment call made. once we have what we need to determine root cause, we will say, well, do we -- how many lives are we going to risk to bring this metal back home? is it better to just destroy it there so it cannot be used against us or better to bring it home? those decisions are made very carefully and it's made by the people who are doing the investigation. but rest assured that

investigative team, they went out there and they got what they needed in order to do this investigation properly. and then whatever was not needed was destroyed because the decision must have been made and i'm not intimately familiar with any of the details in the case, but my assumption would be that -- decision was made that the risk of bringing back things that were not useful to the investigation outweighed the situation so that it was destroyed in place after they had gathered all of the important pieces of information. >> that's very helpful. >> general, military times, quick follow-up on barbara's question. we were told last week that these flights were coming straight from theater to -- patients were being transferred to walter reed or bethesda. . when was the change made to stop them at balad?

or were we misinformed back week? >> forgive me, the question was a bit distorted just because of the technology and the delay. could you repeat the question again, please, sir, forgive me for not being able to hear the beginning of it. >> last week we were told that air medical flights were coming straight from theater because of volcanic ash plume to andrews air force base in washington. now we are being told there is an intermediate stop being made at balad. were we misinformed before? or was this change made subsequent to the initial plan? >> that's a very good question and i heard you very clearly that time. thank you very much. the two are not mutually exclusive. again this is based on medical care and capacity. those are the two drivers here. and there are some patients that are stable enough and medical

situation is such that they can go straight back home. the reality is balad does not have the same capacity as landstuhl. again there is a triage decisionmaking process with the professionals that know exactly what they are doing making the call. and the capacity that we preserve at balad can be increased by taking some patients straight back home. again not being in my lane there, but watching the process, that would be my assumption. that they are preserving capacity at balad by taking those patients that can go straight home, straight home. but that it is not done on anything other than medical facts in the case to maximize care and protection and survivibility of every single fine american that is suffering in this regard. >> kevin baird from "stars and stripes "quongs the same topic.

how many bodies have gone to iraq whether wounded casualties or any other kind of medical evacs, and what happens to the route through spain? is that a third option still going on? is this a change instead of? >> i appreciate that question. what i'll do is i'll get you those numbers so you have them and i'll make sure that those are given to you by headquarters. we'll get you the numbers you are looking for so we get those facts straight and accurate. with regard to other options, all the options out there are always being considered. every time a decision is made we look at all the compeasit from here home to make -- capacity from here home to make sure that each case is being decided on based on the facts in the case, the medical realities, and that it's a person with a medical credential to make that call and then we execute that decisionmaking process based on

medical evaluations. >> general, justin official with "just news." a broader question. new d.o.d. report on iran says that iran is known to provide weapons in country to various insurgent groups. i'm wondering if you have seen any evidence of that, and if any of these weapons pose a specific threat to what you do there in afghanistan? >> i thank you for that question. forgive me this is not a classified v.t.c. so my answer cannot be too nuanced or detailed but i will tell you that any country that supports the insurgents is a threat. it doesn't matter what they might be providing. it is a threat. the question is, how catastrophic is that threat and how potentially devastating is

it? so i think even in all the open sources that we have read we have seen reflexes that iran -- reflections that iran has been at least accused of doing this. even though i have no direct knowledge specifically, i can tell you that if that were the case, that would not be good and this is one of those situations where any state that is supplying our enemy is not a friend to the coalition. and that needs to be addressed. >> general, this is joe. to follow up on justin's question about if iran is supporting the insurgency in afghanistan, have you found any proof that there are some iranian weapons in afghanistan delivering sophisticated weapons

to the -- to the militant within taliban? >> well, the answer to that is that i cannot speak to any of the classified information that may be out there. i will tell you that as we fight this enemy, the enemy has weapons. you see it. you read about it. they shoot at us with bullets. they shoot at us with r.p.g.'s. they shoot at us with all types of weapons. and whether those weapons have come from a certain nation state or whether they have come from funding from certain states, it's impossible to tell on the battlefield without forensics. if you go do those that's in a classified realm and i can speak to this on this v.t.c. forgive me for that. >> general, we heard a lot of

general mcchrystal's emphasis on avoiding collateral damage civilian casualties and a lot of that is restricted the air strikes. hue are your men, your crews -- how are your men, your crews handling that? are you still sending missions up ready if needed? are you waiting on alert? it seems your guys are not having anything to do if you are not able to do direct ground support for the troops. >> no, i thank you for that question. because this is one of those misconceptions in the american media that i'd like to address. that is that the more this fight is a counter insurgency, the more powerful airpower is. the more useful it is. we fly more now than we ever have because we need to be there for the ground force commander.

the troops on the ground. and we are there to support them directly. even though general mcchrystal has a tactical directive that helps us do the right thing where the people of this country are the center of gravity and we are here not to kill the enemy but to protect the afghan people. we fly those missions to protect the coalition, to protect the afghan people, and to protect this country they live in from their homes to their irrigation systems to their orchards. we are here to protect them. and airpower can be applied in so many ways. we can be there to shut down the enemy's communication so they can't fight. we can be there to be the eye in the sky so we can see the enemy. we can hear the enemy. we can understand what they are doing. and we can wait and have tactical patience to wait until the enemy is in a place where there are no civilians. just the opposite is true. your assumption we are doing less because of the tactical directive, we are actually doing

more. and not only are we doing more, but what we are doing is more profoundly bringing us to victory here because it is more focused on protecting the people . now, it's true we still go after the enemy. and if there are enemy combatants out there, insurgents trying to kill afghan people, trying to kill coalition forces, we will be there to protect those coalition forces. that has not changed. but we have had an opening now to do even more in the counter insurgency to help the people of afghanistan. >> the loudoun times. nevertheless, despite what you said are you significantly reducing the number of bombing missions that you have ordered since the tactical directive from general mcchrystal?

there's one more question but i'll ask in a minute. >> yes. again it was a little garbled but i think your question was have we reduced the number of bombing missions we have flown since the tactical directive? the answer is we have dropped fewer bombs since the tactical directive because the ground force commanders are becoming more and more focused on protecting the people instead of chasing the enemy. now, you have to still chase the enemy. both of these are important. but the emphasis has been placed on helping bring the governance and development and security of the afghan people. and so that focus has had the effect of fewer bombs dropped. but that is a good news story because it means we are getting it right. >> can i ask, you have opened

your -- you started your opening remarks by saying that afghanistan was now strategicically, very strategicically important place at the moment. can i be bold to ask you do you envisage the use of any of your air assets in afghanistan for any possible future operation against iran? >> i appreciate that question. the reality is that the coalition that is here is focused on the counterinsurgency in afghanistan and any adjustments to that set of constructs that we are working towards lies in the realm of presidents and policymakers that really are the ones that are responsible for making those strategic decisions. so i can't speak to anything

with regard to how forces might be shifted or postured. we are here to focus on saving the afghan people. bringing security and peace to them. bringing them what they desperately want and that is to be able to raise their children, love their families. just like we are able to do with a sense of security to do so freely. and we stay focused on that. >> general, you talked about how you're getting the wounded to care and eventually back to the united states. what is the -- with the volcano continuing, what is the route now, the air route for the return to dover air force base of those killed in action? how are you bringing them home? and what is the delay in returning those remains to dover right now? >> i thank you for that question.

it goes back to something i said at one of the earlier questions and that is we keep open-minded with the entire spectrum of options out there in europe. there are many places in europe we can use as a staging place to move forward and have the same effect that we have going to landstuhl. so the reality is there's no delay. it's just a different route. and it's predicated on how far south that volcanic ash is drifting. we watch the jetstream every day. we watch the weather patterns to see how that ash is man festing itself in the sky. and -- manifesting it self in the sky. and we watch the volcano to see how it's going. every day is a different decision. every medical case is a different decision. one thing that is not compromised is the safety and health of these fine young warriors who are giving and sacrificing for all of us to have a world free of extremists

that are trying to do harm to our globe. can you rest assured that every day is looked -- you can rest assured that every day is looked at closely and every case is sent back home with dignity, with care, and with prudence to make sure that there is no degradation in the highest quality of care that's given to these wonderful soldiers, sailors, airmen, marine, and civilians doing so much for our country. >> it probably got garbled and you didn't hear the full question. i was actually asking about the return of remains to dover air force base of those killed in action. how is that now taking place since they can't be taken back through the usual routes in europe? and what delays are being experienced in the return of remains to dover air force base? >> thank you for that. my apology. i didn't mishear that question. the answer to your question, though, is that it has not changed.

the route of flight for these -- forgive the fact that we don't have perfect conditions here so a fly in my eye. the answer to your question here is the construct for bringing home our fallen heroes has not changed at all. and the predicate is getting them home to their families as quickly as possible. that is not delayed at all based on the ash. they just take a route that's just slightly south of that volcanic ash. but they are moved forward with all due speed. and that struck ture has not changed. we again look at all the options we have in europe between here and home. and we make sure that those remains fly out on the first available aircraft to get back to their families with honor and with dignity. in fact, i was just at the sight of an aircraft this morning where we were sending home a young man that was killed in that suicide vest attack in kabul yesterday. and he is getting home and we

track that timeline to the second. literally. from the moment his remains arrive here to the moment he's back at dover. and there has been no degradation in the speed and the efficiency and dignity and respect with which those remains have come back home since the volcanic eruption. >> general, we have been talking about outbound flights but are you in the middle after fairly major buildup there in afghanistan in the constant resupply of people who are there. how is the volcano situation affecting your inbound transport? >> yes. it is affecting it. and we read in open source how this has been the most devastating transportation crisis we have seen in recent memory.

but the reality, though, is when you're working logistics structure like we have here, it's all about priorities. so the fact that it has delayed or trapped in some cases logistics flow in europe, that we expected here, we prioritized and we make sure those things, we absolutely positively have to have here, we get here. so we may not have the same volume or speed in the short run, but we get what we need. and we make a plan to ensure we make up for that loss over the long run. so what you'll see is if you could see it on a chart you would see a potential dip, but we would prioritize such that those things that are getting here and the many, many ways we have of getting things here that we are getting what we need. and it's prioritized. and that we will make up for it over the next few weeks and

months based on that pryorization -- prioritization scheme that's directed to the coalition priorities. >> general. abc news. two quick questions. you spoke about fewer bombs being dropped. does that place greater emphasis or greater importance on the show of force missions as part of the counterinsurgency commission? and also the mc-12 liberty aircraft, do you have any theater now and if so what kind of impact are they doing as your eyes and ears up in the sky? how many do you anticipate on having over the coming months? >> i thank you for the question. let me make sure i heard the first question properly. the second question was on the mc-12 the liberty ships and how

that's going. the first question was on the fact that in this counterinsurgency we have more shows of force is that a correct restatement of your question, sir? >> that's about right, sir. yeah. it's about whether you are having greater emphasis on shows of force because you are dropping fewer bombs. >> right. yes. i thank you for those questions. to take the first question first, and that's with regard to the shows of force. one thing to realize about afghanistan that is very different than iraq and really anywhere else we have been is that afghanistan has a culture where people are living in such remote areas that every single valley is a different place. every single situation is different. and so the use of airpower is different in every situation. so the ground force commander out there in one valley, a show of force might be a good thing.

we see it more often in certain places. but in other valley it might be something that is not helpful. the people may not appreciate it. as we put ourselves in the shoes of the afghan people, making sure we are doing things that help them, that bring them security, different ground force commanders use airpower differently. so the answer to your question on show of force, in someplaces it has gone up, in other places it has not but it's predicated on the fact that every village is different and every village needs a different solution. and that solution is something that is in the hands of the ground force commander, that army sorlede out there, that company commander, that knows the people that's been living with the people for the last year, that knows the elders and he knows exactly what kind of air effects he needs to bring to that valley to ensure that he's bringing security, he's bringing development, and he's bringing

governance to that village. so the shows of force, it's a mix bag but on a whole we see more of them with this tactical directive. with regard to your second question, that liberty ship, that mc-12 is a godsend. i cannot tell you how happy the ground force commanders are to have that capability here. it brings something we have not had before -- >> watch this program online at the c-spaniedo library or later in our schedule. we are leaving this now and taking live to the u.s. house. they return with legislative work that includes a resolution honoring civil rights leader benjamin hooks to died last week. live house coverage now on c-span. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father coughlin. chaplain coughlin: lord, our god, continue the work of your creation, you shape our history

and establish your realm of equality and justice. the beauty of spring puts to rest our fears that winter would last forever. the movement of the moon and the stars removes the season of dark memories. nature commands us to adapt to an ever-changing world of light and hope. not called to master other peoples our the currents of time, not called to master nature but only uncover its secrets, not called to master other nations we will find peace. created in your image and likeness, lord, we struggle to be unique persons of distinct integrity, finding ourselves in the land of freedom, we are ever learning how to live in community.

simply called by your wisdom and grace we are to master none but ourselves both now and forever. amen. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the juren of the last day's proceedings and announces to the chamber her approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be delivered by the gentleman from missouri, congressman cleaver. m cleaver: please join me in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker: without objection.

mr. cohen: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, today america mourns the loss of dr. dorothy height, a civil rights pioneer and women's rights activist. for many years this freedom fighter served as president of the national council of negro women, the young women's christian association, and delta sigma theta sorority incorporated. dr. height was the backbone of the civil rights movement, worked alongside dr. martin luther king jr., whitney young, and our own john lewis. during the march on washington, she was the own african-american woman on the speaker's platform during dr. king's historic "i have a dream" speech. in 1994 clin president clinton aword dr. height the presidential medal of freedom. in 1995 in my hometown of memphis, tennessee, she received the national civil rights museum's freedom award. in 2004, president bush presented her with the congressional gold medal. during dr. height's lifetime, the freedom gates were half

ajar yet she fought to open them full and wide for everybody. our nation mourns the loss of a great woman, a great african-american leader, a great civil rights leader. hers was a life well lived. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, this week is victim's rights week. today i honor the life of houston police officer timothy abernathy. for officer abernathy, fighting crime was more than an occupation it was his personal calling. he bravely dedicated his life to keeping the peace on the streets of houston, texas. until he was murder on december 7, 2008, by a cowardly killer. the murder was cruel and it was calculating. after shooting officer abernathy once in the neck, the assassin calmly walked up and put the gun close to the back of the officer's head and fired again. recently a jury in houston

convicted the suspects of capital murder. this week the texas jury sentenced the outlaw to death. officer tim mi abernathy served the people of houston for 11 years. he like so many before him put his life between the people and the lawless. we as a nation need to remember peace officers sometimes become victims of crime while taking care of the rest of us. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> mr. speaker, to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. costa: mr. speaker, i rise today to honor the live and career of roy isam, a broadcasting legend in the san joaquin valley from california. known as the voice of agriculture, for over 40 years roy was a force in broadcasting industry relentless in reporting on issues that mattered the most to our

communities. he began his career at channel 30 in radio before moving to kmj radio where he spent the last 28 years. he was known as a workhorse and his colleagues remembered how he would begin his days at 1:00 a.m. getting ready for the farm report. his hard work translated into the stories and reports critical of making sense what was going on in the valley and our nation. whether it was reporting the first lunar landing or breaking down the agriculture news of the region, his style and ethics serves as a role moddle to our younger generation of reporters and broadcasters because he was. today roy is remembered by his family and friends and colleagues. everyone who knew roy including myself had a tremendous respect for him. i join with all the people of our valley in celebrating roy's life and contributions to broadcasting. i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. smith: mr. speaker, a "new york times" cbs news poll of the tea party movement revealed that 97% of tea partiers view illegal immigration as a serious problem. the result is not surprising considering that jobs and the economy are top priorities of tea party backers. more than 15 million americans are unemployed. and more than eight million illegal immigrants are in the u.s. labor force. it makes no sense whatsoever to force citizens and legal immigrants to compete with illegal immigrants for scarce jobs. furthermore, the national research council found that an illegal immigrant without a high school diploma, about 2/3 of all illegal immigrants, imposes a net cost on taxpayers of $89,000 during their lifetime. multiply that by millions of

illegal immigrants and that's a multibillion dollar burden on american taxpayers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, bernard baruch was born near columbia, an historic camden, south carolina. the world acclaimed finance year and benefactor was an adviser to presidents since the days of woodrow wilson who also was raised in columbia. last week, april 16 marked the day in 1947 that bernard made history when he coined the term, cold war, to describe the relations between the united states and the soviet union. as the politico newspaper highlighted, he first used the phrase in a speech to the house of representatives as a portrait was dedicated in his honor. in his speech he said let us not be deceived. we are today in the midst of a

cold war. our enemies are to be found abroad and home. let us never forget this. our unrest is the heart of their success. the peace of the world is the hope and goal of our political system. it is the despair and defeat of those who stand against us. we can depend only on ourselves. today we railroad the south carolina statesman who so aptly described the chilly relations between america and the soviet union which led ultimately to the victory of democracy over communism. in conclusion, got bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. congratulations jim furyk, on your heritage golf classic vicktry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives. madam, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on april 20, 2010, at

10:12 a.m. that the senate passed without amendment h.r. 4360. that the senate agreed to without amendment house concurrent resolution 243. with best wishes i am, signed, sincere-l i. lorraine c. miller, clerk of the housement -- clerk of the house. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 , the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered. or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. recorded votes on postponed questions will be taken after 6:30 p.m. today. for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition mr. cleaver: i move the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 4178 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 4178, a bill to amend the federal deposit

insurance act to provide for deposit restricted qualified tuition programs, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from missouri, mr. cleaver, and the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker, today we are taking up h.r. 4178, the deposit restricted qualified tuition programs act of 2009. this bill establishes an avenue for those wanting to save for the college education of a child, grandchild, or other related individual to do so in a federal deposit insurance corporation, fdic, insurance

deposit. at the present time saves can only access the 529 college saves program through a security-based plan and my bill would not change this avenue. however, following the recent crash of the stock market, many savers saw their accounts drop in value by 50% or more and as such are reluctant to place anymore money in a security-based plan. furthermore, many small savers can find investing in securities based on products both complex and intimidating. an fdic insured deposit option would provide guaranteed principle return and guaranteed return on the deposit. all from a commercial bank with which the safer likely has a relationship. this proposed legislation will help families across the united states save in a safe, sound, and simple manner for their children and grandchildren's college education. this bill does not make any changes to the current 529 college savings program, nor

the current delivery system of the program through a securities based plan. nor the tax treatment of the 529 plans. it simply adds another 529 college savings program delivery option through an fdic insured deposit. this is a bipartisan bill. it has both the chairman and ranking republican member of the house financial services committee as co-sponsors among other republicans and democrats. at a time when the nation is concerned about congressional karling based on political -- quarling based on political party affiliation, it is refreshing that both parties can support this bill. currently, section 529 programs are established and maintained by the states who in turn generally contract out with securities firms and others to administer the programs. investors may go through a state agency to invest in a 529 or in many cases through a securities dealer. many states typically offer a number of investment options or

portfolios, including ones that minimize the potential loss of invested principle. the bill is intended to encourage states to offer among the options they provide investors, deposit restricted qualified tuition programs. the bill will not be independent of nor compete with the current state programs. in order to qualify as a 529 program, the program must be established and maintained by a state. therefore this program would be a state program and the laws of the various states would have to be adapted to establish such a program. in my home state of missouri, the law which has already been adopted teashes a deposit only program as separate from the securities-based program. the state would still generally hire a third party to administer the program. the third party could be the

same one that manages the securities program or it could be a different third party. and i do have a letter of support from our state treasurer asking that this bill be approved. h.r. 4178 does not create a state program. the bill is intended to provide states another option to offer investors the deposit restricted qualified tuition program. total 529 savings plans assist -- assets were $117 billion at the end of the fourth quarter of 2009. reflecting a 67% increase from third quarter 2009 assets of 110.5 billion. my office asked the fdic for statistical information on 529 deposit insurance programs. the fdic provided the following information and i quote, currently seven states offer 529 plans that include an option to invest in an insured deposit either as part of a broader investment strategy or

as a sole investment all of these plans are open to nonresidents although the ohio plan requires nonresidents to go through a broker to access the plan. . three of the states recently added the insured deposit option to their plans. states offering an investment option are arizona, colorado, montana, ohio, utah, virginia and wisconsin. information gathered from the five of these states indicates that at the end of 2009 there were approximately 670 million invested in fdic insured deposit options of their plans. for these states approximately $207 million was offered to the fdic insured option in 2009. three of the responding states were able to identify whether the funds invested in their fdic-insured option represented new money or a transfer of

funds from another option in an already established 529 plan. for these states approximately 47% of the funds placed in the fdic insured option in 2009 were transferred from other 529 options representing approximately $82 million of the approximately $173 million added to the fdic insured option in these states, unquote. additionally, the fdic has already said they will insure 529 at the regular insurance rate of $250,000, which we raised. the congressional budget office and the joint committee on tax have completed the review of the budgetary impact of h.r. 4178, the deposit restricted qualified tuition programs act of 2009. they determined that by enacting this legislation it would affect revenues but estimate that the reduction in revenues would not be significant over the 2010-2020

period. similarly, implementing the bill could direct spending but it would be nemmingable over the next 10 years. i want to congratulate the missouri bankers association, the missouri bankers association's president, max cooks, for bringing this needed bill to my attention. they moved the bill in the missouri legislature several years ago to allow the fdic insured 529 deposit accounts because they thought it would be helpful to missouri college students and parents who were saving them. for the record i'd like to submit letters of support from the missouri bankers association, the missouri independent bankers association, the office of the missouri state treasury, the independent bankers association, although the support letters are written in support of h.r. 3599. h.r. 4178 is identical to h.r.

3599 except for some small technical changes and more co-sponsors. i'm pleased this congress will address h.r. 4178 and move the legislation forward. this is a bill all members can support. i strongly urge all members to support for h.r. 4178. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: dud the gentleman reserve? -- does the gentleman from reserve? mr. cleaver: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: i'd like to rise to express my strong support for h.r. 4178 and commend the sponsor of this legislation, mr. cleaver, for his thoughtful efforts encouraging americans to plan for their children's college education. given recent market volatility, some families are understandably hesitant to save in these -- to save in the

security-based plans. therefore, for the first time, h.r. 4178 provides an option for states to expand their 529 programs. the bill allows community banks, which are fdic-insured institutions, to directly offer consumers a college savings plan. at the same time, savers in these new deposit-based plans will be able to benefit from all of the traditional tax incentives of existing security based 529's. as an added benefit, this legislation will fund the insurance fund up to $250,000 per account. for the families seeking lower risk alternatives, the fdic insured college savings plan would provide a guaranteed return. by expanding the options available to those savings for an education, the simple step will help more families prepare tore their children's future

and -- prepare for their children's future. again, i thank mr. cleaver and his staff for their hard work on this bipartisan measure, and i urge my colleagues to support it. with that i don't think there are any more speakers, i'd reserve -- yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker, if there are no other speakers on the other side, i have no further requests for time and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 4178 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition? clover cleaver mr. speaker, i move that the -- mr. cleaver: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3553. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: h.r. 3553, a bill to exclude from consideration as income under the native american housing assistance and self-determination act of 1996 amounts received by a family from the department of veterans affairs for service-related disabilities of a member of the family. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from missouri, mr. cleaver, and the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker,

according to the most recent u.s. census data from 2003, there are 561 federally recognized tribes which include native american, indian tribes and alaskan native villages. more than 3/4 of a million americans live on indian reservations and another 1.68 million live outside tribal areas. furthermore, a total of 34% of the native population resides in rural areas where many reservations are located. it has become clear that much of the housing in tribal areas lack adequate housing compared to the general u.s. population. according to the 2000 census bureau report 14.7% of homes in tribal areas are overcrowded compared to 5.7% of homes of the general population. on native american lands, 11.7% of residents lack complete plumbing facilities compared to

1.2% of the general population. furthermore, according to a 2005 government accounting office report, 11% of residents lack kitchen facilities compared to a merely 1% of the general u.s. population. this situation is even more dire for those in need of housing on tribal lands. in total, approximately 90,000 native american families are homeless or underhoused, and an estimated 200,000 housing units are needed immediately in indian country, according to a 2003 report from the u.s. commission on civil rights in 2003. however, native americans have the highest rate of serving in the military, making them more likely to serve of any ethnic group. according to the u.s. department of veterans' affairs, 22%, 22% of native americans are currently serving in the military. it is appalling that although native americans are the most

likely to serve of any ethnic group, little has been provided to ensure adequate and sufficient housing for the brave veterans who have served our nation. furthermore, with the total number of disabled veterans in the united states currently at 24 million and 3.1 million veterans receiving service-connected disability benefits, it is also evident that many native american veterans are also struggling with disabilities. the native american housing and self-determination act of 1996 or nhasda, was established to the department of housing and urban development to provide housing for native americans based on needs based formula. unfortunately, under the current calculation, native american veterans and their families and survivors are often disqualified from this program. by calculating disability payments and survivor benefits and to the family's income, the family will often exceed the

80% area medium income threshold required under this program's regulations. thereby disqualifying the family from the program. ms. kilpatrick path rick's bill, h.r. 3553, will correct this problem by amending the definition of income in nahsda. by doing so, disabled native american veterans, their families and their survivors will be able to qualify for this program. this bill will do much to help ensure that all citizens are adequately served in government housing programs, especially those who have served our nation bravely. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i

rise to express my support of h.r. 3553, the independentian veterans housing opportunity act of -- the indian veterans housing opportunity act of 2009. this would amend the native american housing self-determination, also called nahsda, so that disability income is not counted against native american veterans when determining eligibility for nahsda housing benefits. currently native american households with income below 80% of an area's medium income are eligible for housing assistance under this program. unlike similar programs for non-native american households, nahsda counts veterans' affairs disabilities or survivor payments as income when determining eligibility for housing assistance. as a result, many native american families of disabled veterans can lose their eligibility for housing and if their disability benefits place

them beyond the 80% threshold. interestingly, the internal revenue service does not consider this disability payment as income, yet, without changes included in this bill before us, native american veterans who have been left disabled as a result of their service to our country will remain limited in their access to affordable housing on the reservation. h.r. 3553 simply amends the definition of income under the law to exclude payments for disability compensation. the bill would not effect any tribe's current funding under nahsda, and the congressional budget office has said that there is no cost to this bill. mr. speaker, we must meet our commitments to our troops, both in the field and when they return home. this legislation will help extend existing housing resources to native american veterans, allow them to return to the reservation and will provide their families with access to stable housing.

i urge my colleagues to support this bill, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from illinois reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker, how much time do we have on this side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 16 minutes. the gentlewoman from illinois has 18 minutes. mr. cleaver: thank you. mr. speaker, i yield at this time six minutes to the gentlelady from arizona, the sponsor of this legislation, ms. kilpatrick patrick. -- ms. kilpatrick. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from arizona is recognized for six minutes. ms. kilroy: i thank the gentleman from missouri for allowing me to -- ms. kilpatrick: i want to thank the gentleman from missouri for allowing me to speak on this bill. i especially want to thank chairwoman maxine waters and her staff, jeff riley, and keochia, who traveled the long

distance to arizona who had a field hearing on april 10 of this bill. mr. speaker, growing up in indian country, i learned at an early age of the long history of native americans sacrificing in service to our country. this history includes indian scouts assisting united states units throughout the american west. it includes the best-known example, the brave and honorable service of the navajo code talkers who saved the lives of countless americans in world war ii and the korean war by using denai to transmit sensitive military communications. and it continues to this very day as native americans serve proudly and honorably in iraq, afghanistan and around the world. . today the department of housing affairs that 20% are native americans are veterans or currently serving. that's the most of any ethnic group. despite this service, far too many native american veterans return home to tribal land to

face extraordinary challenges in finding safe, quality, affordable housing. service disabled veterans returning to indian country face the added challenge of having to make every dollar of their disability compensation count as they deal with circumstances unique to tribal land. including very long distances to v.a. medical centers and underimproved surfaces, we call them washboard roads, that accelerate wear on prosthetics and wheelchairs. i am a member of the house committee on veterans affairs where we have taken a number of steps to keep our promises to all veterans. we remedied budget shortfalls in veterans health care and benefits to address an aging vets population and returning iraq and afghanistan veterans. we helped finally pass a law

that veterans service organization vs. been pushing for years -- organizations have been pushing for years, a law to require the health care budget one year in advance to ensure timely sufficient funding of these necessary programs. however we can and must do more to ensure that native american veterans are not allowed to slip through the cracks even as we make broad advances to better serve these veterans and native americans in general. the native american housing assistance and self-determination act of 1996 was a monumental step forward in helping tribes provide safe, quality, affordable housing for thousands of low-income native american families across the country. this assistance can come in the form of down payment assistance, property acquisition, new construction, and housing rehabilitation. and is limited to families making less than 80% of the median -- median income in

their area. the act treats compensation either paid to veterans with service related disabilities or for the families of those children's service as income. as a result, these benefits can push veterans and survivor families above the limit making them ineligible and costing them assistance that they badly need. in fact, when we had the field hearing i met with many families who told me because of this flaw they had to move into their children because they couldn't qualify for their own home. this flaw has caused disability veterans, their families, and survivors to be denied help because that extra income has pushed them over the allowable limit. my bill would fix this flaw by changing the definition of income to explicitly exclude veterans disability and survivor compensation. ending this unfair practice and lifting the burden from native

american veterans. native american veterans have sacrificed so much for this country and neither they nor their surviving families should be punished for receiving the compensation they have earned. it is long past time to right this wrong and ensure this nation keeps its sacred promise to its native veterans. thank you again for the opportunity to address h.r. 35 53. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from missouri reserves. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: with that we have no further speakers. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker, i have no further requests for time. and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3553. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to

reconsider is laid upon the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, house resolution 1257. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1257, resolution supporting the goals and ideals of national financial literacy month, 2010, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. hinojosa, and the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. hinojosa: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation. and to insert extraneous

material thereon. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hinojosa: mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may need. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hinojosa: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of house resolution 1257, supporting the goals and ideals of national financial literacy month 2010, and for other purposes. i ask unanimous consent to enter into today's record president barack obama's national financial literacy month proclamation which i old my hands. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hinojosa: thank you, mr. speaker. it gives me great pride to bring this important resolution to the floor of the u.s. house of representatives. it contains some very important data on financial literacy and economic education. unfortunately, i am sad to have to report again this year that

the surveys and studies we reviewed while drafting this resolution indicate that the majority of americans remain financially illiterate and are in desperate need of financial education. i represent the 15th congressional district of texas which includes one of the poorest counties in the whole country. it is 89% hispanic and contains over 900 colonias. many residents do not speak english fluently and several speak english as a second language. they tend to purchase refrigerators, washing machines, automobiles, televisions, and electronic equipment in cash. one of the reasons for this aberration is a question of trust. another is that lower income americans are not aware of the

benefits conveyed when they open a bank account at a mainstream financial institution. a more pervasive problem is that mainstream financial institutions tend not to open branches in the neighborhoods in which these constituents live. consequently these residents are left to rely on nonmainstream financial servicers such as payday lenders, such as check cashers, and other predatory entities. for these reasons i was not surprised by the findings of the fdic december, 2009 national survey of unbanked and underbanked households. it revealed that approximately 60 million people in our united states are either unbanked or

underbanked. it is situations such as this that congresswoman judy biggert and i began collaborating on financial literacy and economic education starting in 2003. two years later in 2005, we co-founded and currently co-chair the financial economic literacy caucus. i am very pleased and grateful that she and i and the members of this caucus have worked together on a bipartisan basis on financial literacy and economic education over the years. this year, 2010, the caucus has coordinated with several different associations on financial literacy events, including the national consumer protection week fair, america saves week, and the relief of the national foundation for credit counseling, better known

as the nfcc, the fourth annual consumer financial literacy survey. on april 27 of this year, the congresswoman and i are coordinating on the annual financial literacy day fair with senator daniel akaka from hawaii, with the jump-start coalition for personal financial literacy, with a junior achievement and the council for economic education. this fair on february 27 will be held in the senate hart building from noon to 3:00 p.m. i encourage you and all my colleagues to attend this special event. if you are unable to attend due to conflicts in your schedule, you might consider sending one of your staff in the senate hart office building. america saves week, the national consumer protection week fair, and the financial

literacy day fair, as well as the resolutions congresswoman and biggert and i introduce every year to support their goals and ideals are substantive and important statement of congress' commitment to improving the financial literacy and economic education of all americans. the financial literacy fair is very comprehensive and concrete. agency staff are on hand at these events to provide our staff with the materials they need to hold events in our districts, to help arm our constituents with the information and guidance they need to become more confident, savvy, and safe in the marketplace. the nfcc, which is the national federation or credit counseling fourth annual consumer literacy survey indicates a larger percentage of americans, more than two in five adults, now keep close track of their spending.

however, more than half still do not have a budget. and more than 11 million adults fail to monitor their overall spending. nearly 64 million adults admit to not paying all of their bills on time. though 67% of adults say they pay for most purchases with cash, or with a debit card, approximately 41% report that their household carries credit card dealt -- debt and more than 11 million say they carry $10,000 or more in credit card debt. from month to month. approximately 100 million people currently have a home mortgage and of those one in three say that the terms of their mortgage somehow turned out to be different than they and their family expected. 80% of adults feel there are situations where it is

acceptable to default on a mortgage and two of the top three most justifiable circumstances place the blame on the lender. despite all this negative data, the proportion of adults who have no retirement savings has increased from 60% in 2007 to 67% this year. so, mr. speaker, as you can tell we have far to go to improve the financial literacy rate of all americans across the united states during all stages of life. one of the caucus -- one of the ways that our caucus has moved the financial literacy cause forward is coordinating with several federal agencies on the national consumer protection week i mentioned earlier. on a positive note, several members of congress have introduced comprehensive and beneficial legislation that will help americans become

financially literate and provide them with the necessary consumer protections. one such legislation is that credit card reform act authored by my good friend and colleague from new york, congresswoman carolyn maloney, it was signed into law by president barack obama in 2009. congresswoman maloney could not be with us on the floor this -- for this debate, but her presence is felt here and throughout the united states and especially in the wallets of most americans. her legislation takes financial literacy and economic education 10 steps forward. it requires issuers to extend credit to young consumers under the age of 21 to obtain an application that contains the following. the signature of a parent, guardian, or other individual 21 years or older who will take responsibility for the debt. or that person who signs is

proof that the applicant has independent means of repaying any credit extended. it limits prescreened offers of credit to young consumers and prohibits increases in the credit limit on accounts where a parent, legal guardian, spouse, or other individual is jointly libel unless the individual who is jointly libel approves the increase. . this law increases protection against aggressive card marketing and increasing the transpeashesy of affinity arrangements -- transparency of afin iment arrangements. i commend her for managing to pass that legislation. i co-authored the student aid and fiscal responsibility act that passed both houses and was signed into law recently by president barack obama. that law invests $750 million

in college access challenge grant program. this helps organizations provide services such as financial literacy and debt management skills that increase the number of low-income students who are prepared to enter and succeed in college and manage their student loans. this congress is also considering legislation that will establish an office of financial literacy that i requested in the financial services committee. other financial literacy proposals are being reviewed, including establishing a financial literacy center across the united states. mr. speaker, financial literacy and economic education are both a life skill and a key component of financial and economic stability and development. it is imperative that we pay more attention to the financial literacy rates of our citizens

from prekindergarten all the way to retirement. the sooner that a person begins to learn good saving habits the better off he or she will be in the future. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution and join the financial economic literacy caucus. with that i yield back -- no -- with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i rise today as a co-sponsor of house resolution 1257, which recognizes april as financial literacy month, and i would strongly urge my colleagues to support it. i'd like to begin by thanking my good friend and fellow chair of the house financial and economic literacy caucus, mr. hinojosa, for sponsoring this resolution and for his continuing efforts to improve

financial literacy rates in america. since 2005 when mr. hinojosa and i formed the caucus, financial literacy has grown from an interesting offshoot of economic education to a key element in numerous efforts on and off the hill to protect consumers improve financial security, help manage debt, assist in retirement planning and prepare our children to prosper into the sophisticated marketplace. we've also seen financial literacy programs become successful centerpieces of campaigns to bring independents and families security to improffered population. women, minority and victims of hurricanes or domestic violence. for example, with help from the national network to end domestic violence, thousands of victims nationwide have benefited from the economic empowerment for domestic violence survivors program. it empowers victims with

financial strategy to escape abuse -- abusive households and help provide them with resources and training to achieve independence. mr. speaker, financial literacy month is a chance to recognize and support the work of countless organizations like these around america and the leadership of groups like the jump-start coalition, junior achievement and the council for economic education. for all they do to educate american consumers and most importantly our children. it's also an opportunity to recognize how much more work remains to be done. according to the f.t.c., as was mentioned, approximately 50 million people are unbanked or underbanked. some preteens don't know the difference between cash, credit cards and checks and only 26% of students are actively learning financial planning from their parents. and according to the national foundation for credit counciling, latest consumer

survey, 1/3 of adults are more than -- or more than 75 million people are not putting any part of their income to retirement, up from 28% in 2008. these are a troubling number and in today's economic climate, the financial challenges and choices facing consumers have only grown. that's why as congress reviews our national educational guidelines and takes up far-reaching changes to our country's financial regulations, we must keep in mind one of the most important benefits of financial literacy as expressed in this resolution today before us. financial education is the first line of defense against financial fraud. when it comes to preparing against economic uncertainty, recognizing deceptive practices, building credit or making dozens of other day-to-day financial decisions, nothing protects consumers and their financial security more effectively than arming them even as young students with a

sound foundation and financial literacy. consumers benefit most from more financial options, not fewer. and with the right information and education, individual americans are best equipped to avoid financial pitfalls, analyze risk and make financial decisions that hold the greatest benefit for their future and that of their families. with that i'd just like to once again thank my good friend and colleague, ruben hinojosa, for bringing this resolution to the floor, and i'd also like to recognize the hard work of his dedicated staff, especially greg davis, for all their efforts. and finally, mr. speaker, i'd like to encourage all my colleagues and their staffs to attend this year's financial literacy day fair on capitol hill. as mr. hinojosa mentioned. but i think it bears repeating. it's going to be held next tuesday, april 27, where members will be able to find a broad array of financial educational materials and ideas for reaching out to constituents on this important issue.

this year it's been hosted on the senate side in room 902. and invitations will soon be in the mail. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to support house resolution 1257, and i would reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hinojosa: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on h.r. 3553 and to insert extraneous material thereon. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hinojosa: mr. speaker, i have no further requests for time and i yield to. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman reserve? the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield as much time as she may consume to

my friend and colleague in the financial services committee, ms. jenkins of kansas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from kansas is recognized. ms. jenkins: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to support this resolution, supporting the goals and ideals of financial literacy month, and i commend the gentleman from texas and the gentlelady from illinois for introducing this resolution and for their commitment to financial literacy. during my service as kansas state treasurer, i was proud to partner with financial institutions across our great state to increase financial literacy for kansans of all ages. as a certified public accountant, i'm committed to this cause and believe it is critical to equip our students with good financial habits at a very young age. the lesson that must be learned as our nation emerges from this financial crisis is that additional regulation is meaningless if personal responsibility is not our primary objective. i urge all my colleagues to

support this resolution and to support increased financial literacy, not just this month but always. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: i would urge all of our colleagues to support this resolution. i i yield to. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1257. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair -- mr. hinojosa: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended and the resolution is agreed to -- the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20

and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will proceedings on this motion will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. i move to suspend the rules and pass house resolution 1271. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1271, resolution honoring the life and achievements of reverend benjamin lawson hooks.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen, and the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cohen: and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. with the news today of dorothy height's passing, we have lost two significant civil rights leaders in less than two weeks. today in memphis, others throughout the country will pay their respects to reverend benjamin lawson hooks at greater middle baptist church where he pastored for 52 years. yesterday in detroit, michigan, remped hooks was honored at greater new mount mariah baptist church where he also pastored for some 40 years in the detroit area. a native memphian, he was one

of the few silver tong giants of oratory. dr. hooks was born in 1925 and was the fifth of seven children born to robert b. and bessey hooks. his grandmother was the second african-american female college graduate in the nation after graduating in kentucky in 1874. following in her footsteps, dr. hooks attended college at memphis, tennessee, where he studied prelaw. he continued to study at howard university here in washington, and later at depaul university in chicago where he received a law degree. it was unfortunate when he decided to go to law school there was not a law school in tennessee that accepted african-americans, and for that reason dr. hooks traveled to chicago. after graduation from college, before law school, he entered the army during world war ii, and he job as guarding italian prisoners. the prisoners were able to eat in restaurants that were off-limits to him because he was african-american.

this experience, humiliating as it was, deepened his determination to do something about bigotry, not just in the south but in our country as our armed forces were segregated and our african-american soldiers fighting for our freedoms were not allowed freedoms of war were allowed to enjoy. he began practicing law in memphis in 1949, one of the few african-americans practicing law in memphis. in 1954 he appeared on a roundtable with late justice thurgood marshall, then attorney thurgood marshall, and other southern african-american attorneys to formulate a possible litigation strategy before the supreme court in brown v. board of education of topeka, the landmark case that ended separate but equal and ended segregation in our nation. he was public defender in shelby county from 1961 to 1965 and was then appointed by the

governor to be criminal court judge in shelby county, and he became the first african-american criminal court judge in the state of tennessee. in 1956 while serving in the baptist ministry at greater middle baptist in memphis, he joined the southern christian leadership conference with dr. martin luther king at the time he was starting the boycotts of the downtown stores in montgomery and working with rosa parks and boycotting the buses leading the great civil rights uprising movement in the south and made our nation a more perfect union. president nixon apointed dr. hooks to the federal communications commission in 1972 and served from 1972 to 1977 and was the first african-american appointed commissioner. there he wanted to make sure that african-americans had the opportunity to have ownership interest in radio and television and other opportunities that they didn't previously had. in 1977 when he left the federal communications commission he did so to become the executive director and the chief executive officer of the

naacp, the national association for the advancement of colored people. in 1977 at that same time, dr. hooks' nephew, michael hooks, and i were serving in the tennessee state constitutional convention and we had dr. hooks address the limited convention of 1977, the first african-american ever asked to address the joint legislative body in the state of tennessee. while dr. hooks served in the naacp, he fought for efforts to end apartheid in south africa and dealt with the rodney king trial in los angeles. he served as chairman and on the board of directors in the civil rights museum in memphis my hometown and his as well. he taught at the university, where he benjamin hooks society

for change was established in 1976. he commented to me one time it was appropriate and right and proper that when african-americans have been able to secure moneys and savings, that they make contributions to their society. he was able to do that. a first generation of wealth that was able to contribute to civic causes and he was proud to be a leader in that cause as well. i was present in 2007 and honored to be in the white house when president bush awarded dr. hooks the presidential medal of freedom. most recently he gave one of his last lectures on civil rights and social justice as part of the premier civil rights elect -- lecture series. it was october 6, 2009, several members of congress were present and other interested parties in d.c. and on the hill and he was accompanied on that occasion, as he was on so many

occasions, by his beautiful and jovial bride, frances. frances dancy was a teacher. she met ben hooks as a shelby county fair. ben hooks was a lucky man because he found the perfect bride. frances was by his side and gave up her career as a teacher she gave up that career, to be the first lady of the chug, whether it was mount mariah, or greater middle baptist in memphis. they were married in 1952, they renewed their vows for the third time after nearly 50 years of marriage on march 24, 2001. she encouraged him in all his endeavors and she will see that his memory is maintained and preserved in an appropriate fashion. dr. hooks was one of the greatest civil rights icons in american history and a community lead for the memphis and a friend to many in this congress. he's survived by his beautiful

and devoted wife frances, his daughter, patricia grey, grandchildren, and a nephew in particular, michael hooks, who served in public office and a grand-nephew, michael hooks, who also served in public office. his funeral will be tomorrow in memphis, tennessee, at bountiful blessings, the head of the church, the flagship church of the church of god in christ where superintendent hawkins presides and was previously presided over by -- his was a life well-lived. i thank you and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. poe: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: i want to comment chairman conyers and ranking member smith for moving so quickly to bring this to the floor. this resolution honors the life and achievements of dr.

benjamin lawson hooks for his commitment to justice and his work with the naacp to eliminate barriers to civil rights and his leadership in promoting equal opportunity for everybody. he was born in memphis in 19 256789 his family inspired him to study diligently and go to college, from which he graduated in 1944. after service in the united states army he went to law school at depaul university. he graduated in 1948 and went back home to memphis, tennessee. from 1949 to 1965, he was one of a handful of african-americans practicing law in memphis. in his law practice, dr. hooks was determined to combat segregation. days before the united states supreme court decision in brown vs. board of education in 1954, dr. hooks joined thurgood marshall and other attorneys at a round table to consider litigation strategies to challenge jim crow laws. dr. hooks was a pioneer in

sit-ins and other boycotts sponsored by the naacp. throughout the 1960's, he worked with the naacp on several civil rights protests and marches throughout the united states. throughout this time period, however, dr. hooks fulfilled a long desire and he entered the christian ministry. in 1956, he was an ordained baptist minister and preached regularly and contributed in many ways to churches in which he served. it was his ministry and law degree working together that gave him the deep conviction to fight for civil rights this deeper yearning is sure to influence the power and scope of all his civil rights work he ran unsuccessfully for the state legislature in 1954 and for juvenile court as a juvenile court justice in 1959 and 1963. he became well known in tennessee politics and the governor tapped him to fill a vacancy in shelby county criminal court and in 1965, he

became the first african-american in criminal court, as a criminal court judge in the state of tennessee. when president nixon appointed him to the federal communications commission in 1972 through 1977, he was also the first african-american appointed to the f.c.c. from 1972 to 1992, 20 year, he served as executive director and c.e.o. of the national association for the advancebility of colored people. -- for the advancement of colored people. then in recognition of his life's work and the idea that all people are created equal he received the presidential medal of freedom from president george w. bush. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is

recognized. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to comment, i appreciate representative poe's comments, he was a former criminal court judge and like dr. hooks was a criminal court judge, they share that experience. i keep under the glass on my desk a picture take oven benjamin hooks as a lawyer with several people appearing in city court in memphis, defending individuals in memphis charged with violations of the law that were jim crow laws. it's a historic picture that people in memphis know well. they stood up in a courtroom with a predominance of policemen in there and white visitors to the courtroom. but they stood for justice and they stood up. leaders in memphis like maxine smith and mr. sugarman are getting older but they continue to fight. just as mr. hooks did.

he tried to make it to the inaugural to the see the inauguration of the first african-american president, barack obama. he was here, but the weather was such he couldn't make it to the inauguration. he was bipartisan he came of an era when many african-americans in the south, if not most, were members of the republican party, the party of lincoln. he maintained that allegiance through his appointment by president reagan and others. president bush recognized his talents, as have president obama and president clinton. he supported hillary clinton for president because he was close to the clinton family but he was happy to see america come to the time when an african-american could be elected president. we saw part of that resolution in 2008 when ben -- and ben

hooks was pleased to see it. he'll be buried tomorrow at bo bountiful blessings and i know that many people from around the world will honor him. i would like to thank my friend john conyers, the chairman of the judiciary committee for working with me on this issue, who was unfortunately absent. he was close to reverend hooks in detroit and other places in fighting for civil rights over the years. i would also like to commend the ranking member of the judiciary committee, lamar smith, for joining me in co-sponsoring this resolution. if i could i'd like to yield some time to chairman towns of new york. as much time as he needs. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. towns: thank you very much, mr. speaker. let me thank the gentleman from memphis for yielding to me because i had an opportunity to work very closely with dr. hooks. i recall we moved naacp to brooklyn and he was the

president of the naacp at the time we moved him to brooklyn. i was always impressed with his dedication and commitment to people. dr. hooks was really committed to change and -- in a positive way. of course, having the opportunity to work very closely with him, i had to -- i had the opportunity to observe him as he moved with people. he had just a way of bringing about coalitions. when people that disagreed with each other but dr. hooks could pull them together and some way or another get them to begin to talk and to work together. he's going to be truly missed. he was a person that has truly made a difference in this world. as a result of his attitude and what he's done on behalf of the people. so may i say to his family, you have my deepest, deepest sympathy, but here again, we

can be thankful that we had an opportunity to live during dr. hooks' lifetime and there's no question about it. he made this world a better place for all of us to live. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. mr. cohen: i thank the gentleman for joining and relating those parts of dr. hooks' life. he was one who took the southern tradition of politics and the ministry and wove it into a manner of speech that was unrivaled and to his last days could deliver aer is month or speech that was unpara-- could deliver a sermon or speech that was unparalleled. he will be buried at bountiful blessings, where my father is buried and where i suspect i'll be burr rid. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1271. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. >> i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the resolution is agreed. to those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman -- >> i move to suspend the rules and pass house resolution 1104. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1104, resolution supporting the mission and goals of 2010 national crime victims' rights week to increase public awareness of the rights, needs, and concerns of victims an survivors of crime in the united states, no matter what their country of origin or

their creed and to commemorate the national vime victims' rights week theme of fairness, dignity, respect. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen and the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: i request that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and add extraneous material to the resolution under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cohen: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cohen: house resolution 1104 supports the mission and goals of 2010 national crime victims' rights week. this week's -- this year's theme is fairness, dignity, and respect. rallies, candlelight vigils and other commemorative events

honor crime victims in this week. crime vimes' rights week is used to honor victims of crime each year. though the numb of murder victims in 2008 fell by two million than in previous years, we must continue to recognize the victims. we must help vims rebuild their lives and acknowledge the impact on victims and their families. they suffer losses not just from the crime but from the feelings of being victimized. the losses were $2 billion for violent crime and $16 billion for property crime. this is also the time to make a commitment to providing resources to victims of crimes committed in the workplace, schools and college campuses. in addition, we should pay special attention to children and elderly victims of crime. this is an occasion to support crime victims.

if we don't make a commitment to treating victims with the fairness, dignity and respect they deserve, it's even more difficult for them to hear. -- to heal. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. poe: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: i'm pleased to join my colleague and friend, mr. costa from california, as original co-sponsors of this resolution to recognize and support the mission and goals of national crime victims' week. i want to thank mr. costa for his work on the victims' rights caucus. from california where he comes is the state which started the victims' rights movement. when he was in the california legislature he had the three strikes law. he and i are co-chairs of the victims' rights caucus. and it has 62 members from both sides of the aisle who are dedicated to protecting the

interest and needs. crime issues are not partisan issues. they're people issues. they don't -- they affect everybody in this country. national crime victims' rights week began in 1980 when president reagan called for a need to recognize the millions of victims of crime. it pays tributes to the thousands of victims' service providers and those who provide critical support. the theme of this year's national crimes victims' right week is fairness, dignity and respect. mr. speaker, crime touches all of us and all of our friend and all of our neighbors. it happens in every state, in every district. it has many forms. in 2008, 21 million crimes were committed in the united states. of these five million were violent crimes.

16 million were property crimes. and there are over 11,000 alcohol-impaired driving fatalities in 2006. in 2008, the incidents of identity fraud rose for the first time to 10 million victims in the united states. crime victims are not just statistics. they are real people, real men, women and children, they are families, they are loved ones. and what are we doing to help them? first, we're raising awareness and highlighting issues important to victims. we're protecting critical programs that are already in existence. many of these programs were created by the landmark bill passed in 1984 called the victims of crime act, or voca. this law created the voca fund. it's a novel concept where criminals who are convicted and sent to our federal penitentiaries donate into a fund, that fund is then used for crime victims and crime victims' related organizations

throughout the united states. this fund requires criminals to pay for the crime that they have committed. this money then pays for the rent on the courthouse, so to speak. it pays for medical victims of the victim. medical expenses of the victim, rather. and sometimes it covers the victim's funeral costs. this is money that is funded solely by criminals. it's not taxpayer money and the money should be always used for victims of crime. voca is the only fund indicate ord to the victims of crime. 10,000 victim assistant programs and about four million victims received support and financial compensation from this fund whose covers are filled by criminals -- coffers are filled by criminals who are sent to our penitentiary. the office of management and budget estimates that the crime victims' fund in 2011 will have $4.3 billion. with an additional billion

dollars to be deposited in the year of 2011. this is solely for the victims of crime. we should make sure that this money stays with the victims and not taken by our federal bureaucrats and used for our pet projects. mr. speaker, crime victims are real people who have survived sometimes gruesome acts of violence. their voices must not be excluded from our criminal justice system. the criminal justice system should be justice not only for defendants of crime but victims of crime as well. as we take the opportunity to honor victims and their courage and their memories, we renew our commitment to protect the rights of crime victims and provide them with effective assistance programs. we commend the countless professionals and volunteers who dedicate their lives to crime victims. i urge support of this resolution. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield as much time as the gentleman from california, my colleague, and the national conference of state legislatures and my colleague in congress and the author of this legislation, mr. costa, requires and needs. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. costa, is recognized. mr. costa: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i want to thank the gentleman from tennessee and my colleague and good friend, representative cohen, for his hard work on not only on behalf of the people of tennessee but our nation in ensuring that good work is done. i do appreciate serving with you. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of house resolution 1104, to honor the national crime victims' rights week, which occurred this week from april 18 through april 24. as founders and co-chair of the congressional victims' rights congress, congressman ted poe, who just spoke, really stated it very clearly.

he who in a previous life served as a judge in texas, saw firsthand the challenges and tried to ensure that justice was served. not just to the criminals but to ensure that the victims of those crimes as he sat and listened in his court on a daily basis were understood and that in ways that justice needs to that they were reached out to. i want to congratulate my colleague, congressman ted poe, for his previous service and his service today on behalf of not just texans but all americans and those who care deeply about the impacts of crime and the victims that those crimes have created. this year the theme is fairness, dignity and respect, three things which all victims deserve. fairness, dignity and respect. last week the victims' rights

caucus hosted congressman poe and i and others the victims' rights caucus award ceremony to honor six individuals throughout the country for their outstanding accomplishments in the field of victims' services and victims'ed a vow cassy. the national crime victims' rights week helps us all to be more aware to acknowledge and to celebrate all the providers who are there for victims of crime. and to support the criminal justice professionals who provide critical assistance to victims across our nation. i know, having been involved in california, as all of my colleagues in their own respective states, that these professionals each day on a 24/7 basis throughout the week see the horrific impacts of these crimes.

crime knows no bounds and crime victims deserves our support and services to help them cope. they are our neighbors, they are our friends, they are our family members, those who are victims of crime. and as was noted earlier by my colleagues, the voca fund that was created by congress in 1984 and signed into law by president reagan has for decades now reached out and provided necessary funds for over 4,000 organizations throughout our country to provide support for those victims of crime. so i want to encourage my colleagues to support this resolution, to show that crime victims that we stand together in a bipartisan fashion for that fairness, for that dignity and for that respect, and we will to be to be supportive of commonsense approaches in assisting these individuals in their time of need. i thank you very much, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. poe: mr. speaker, i yield five minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. royce, who also being from california helped sponsor and did sponsor the stalking awareness law in the state of california and has brought that concept to congress as well, i yield him five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. royce, is recognized for five minutes. mr. royce: i thank the gentleman for yielding. when we talk about the five million violent crimes that occur in this country every year, we should be mindful of what that means in terms of the shaurd -- shattered lives of the victims, those who survive and those who don't survive, their families are shattered by this experience. i want to take a moment and recognize someone who did a lot

in california to help change many of the laws in our state and that is colleen thompson campbell, who lost not only her son to violent crime, but also in a separate case, lost her brother and sister-in-law to murder as well. i have had the opportunity to work with colleen over the years. she formed an organization called move, memories of victims everywhere, and one of -- one of the concepts that she had was to try in state law to overturn some of the worst decisions made by the then rose bird court which we did with proposition 115. i was the author of that legislation. we could not get that legislation to try to restore rights between the victims of crime and the accused, we

couldn't get it through the state legislature, but we pounded the payment and after gaining a million signatures on the third try, we were able to pass it overwhelmingly in the state of california. but that proppings, the crime victims speedy trial initiative, gave victims the right to a speedy trial. it gave those victims an opportunity to testify it increased sentences, it increased punishment, it required reciprocal discovery of evidence, tried to right that balance, allowed the family members of those victims to stay in the courtroom and follow these proceedings and not be dismissed and allow, also, to go to the sentencing. and i testified before the house constitution subcommittee here some years later when we had an opportunity to mold

legislation based on what we had done in california, the victims' rights bill that became law, codifying crime victims' rights here at the federal level. i would also just like to recognize colleen -- another individual who was affected by crime. kathleen beatty. never even knew that the man stalking her really had existed when she was in high school and went to ucla. she was running on campus. she was participating in sports. she did not know that this individual who she had never met had become obsessed with her and would take it upon himself over the next 10 years to follow her and stalk her relentlessly and threaten her and attempt to abduct her. and it is phenomenal that it took legislation to actually prevent this crime of stalking.

but that's where the concept came from, from this case and the case of four young women in my county of orange county who all died within a span of six weeks. everyone had gone to law enforcement and had been told there is nothing we can do despite you being stalked until you're attacked physically. so we passed the anti-stalker law with her testifying at the state level and later she came back here and helped us with the federal law as well. why was it federal law? because the first thing we tell victims is get away from your stalker. and when he gets out or slips, in the case of her stalker, he caught off his ankle brace let after he was finally -- bracelet after he was finally apprehended. he was apprehended after a 10-hour standoff but he had not drug her more than the required 1,000 feet so it was not kidnapping. it was not kidnapping. that is why we needed the anti-stalker act, why we passed it at the federal level, why we

have to be aware of the rights and the needs and the concerns of victims of crime because these are the types of laws that now we've been able to pass, as i say, in japan and overseas as well, in europe. but if we look at the effect on these lives, and i remember kathleen beatty coming back here to tell me about how she was never able to shake this individual. now we have the federal law so that if the victim crosses state lines the perpetrator cannot cross those state lines. mr. poe: i yield the gentleman another win. mr. royce: but i will mention the legislation i authored in california to put fines on those who are convicted of crimes and fund programs in the state for victims. and we've done this at the federal level as well. we need to do more to right the scales of justice. we need to do more to balance

the rights of crime victims. and lastly with this particular resolution today here does, we need to do more to make the public aware of just how out of balance these scales are to the five million victims of crime every year in the united states. i yield back and i thank the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves, the gentleman from tennessee is recognize plsmed cohen: i'd like to say i appreciate in mr. -- i appreciate mr. royce's comments. i worked in tennessee to pass an anti-stalking law. whether it's kathleen in california or victoria in texas, they need such laws. i want to yield such time as mr. towns may consume to address this subject. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. towns: i'd like to thank the gentleman for yielding to me and of course, mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.res. 1104.

commemorating national crime victims' rights week and it's theme, fairness, dignity, respect. i would also like to reflect upon a topic that is of deep concern to me, violence against women. domestic violence has a profound psychological impact on victims and survivors. there has been a 35% increase in domestic violence and shelter bed use since 2002. increase shelter utilization is evidence of the displacement and psychological havoc that the -- that domestic violence wrecks on families. we must put a stop to this. nationally, one half to 2/3 of

residents in -- to 2/3 of d to the two-thirds of residents in domestic violence shelter are children. 1,400,000 children were living in a domestic violence shelter or transitional housing facility. another 5,526 sought services at nonresidential programs. children who experience or witness domestic violence are more likely to become abusers or victims themselves. beyond the home, violence in the form of sexual assault, carries with it similar lasting psychological and sociological effects. according to data provided by the rape, abuse, and incest national network, 60% of cases

are never even reported to the police. we know that one in six women and one in 33 men will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime. with college age women four times more likely to be sexually assaulted. both domestic violence and sexual assault have lasting implications on the lives of victims. survivors and families. it is important, mr. speaker, while working toward crime prevention, that we continue to treat victims and survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence with fairness, dignity, and respect. we must work together as a nation to bring awareness to these important issues so that

we may prevent further abuse. thank you, mr. speaker, and on that note, i yield back the balance of my time and thank the gentleman from memphis, tennessee, for granting me the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee reserves. the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. mr. cohen: i reserve as well. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: mr. speaker, during this debate, which we agree on this legislation should be passed, we've talked a lot about victims. the victims we have talked about are more than statistics. they are real people. before i came to congress, i spent over 20 years on the criminal court bench in houston, texas. i saw about 25,000 people come

to the courthouse charged with the most serious crimes in our society. but along with those defendants came other people who didn't want to be at the courthouse either. but they were there because they were chosen by defendants to be prey in many cases. and those were victims of crime. they came to the courthouse, they were all races, all ages, both sexes and of all philosophies. but crime does not discriminate against who the victim may be. before i went to the -- became a judge, i was prosecutor in houston, texas. i spent my last years prosecuting capital cases. in my office across the street, i have a lot of photographs of my kids, my four kids, and my eight grandkids. but i also have two other photographs that have been in my office ever since i was at the courthouse in houston. first as a prosecutor, then as

a judge. this is a photograph of kevin, he was born the same year as my son kurt. but kevin didn't have the fortune of living very long this photograph was taken just a few days before he was murdered. kevin didn't have a lot going for him when he was born. he was born in biloxi, mississippi. his mother didn't want him she threw him in a dumpster. a homeless guy found him, turned him over to chath lick charities and he was taken care of in that orphanage. a couple in houston, texas, john and diane, married couple, couldn't have children they adopted kevin and made him their child. unbeknownst to them, there was a distant relative plotting to kill john and diane, and in texas, if parents die, the

child gets everything. on a summer night in houston, texas, two individuals posing as real estate agents came to the front door of john and diane's house, first shot john in the head, then shot diana in the head, then while kevin was asleep in his baby bed, curled up to his favorite little teddy bear he had blue terry cloth pajamas on, he was shot in the back of the head. he was assassinated on the altar of greed. four henchmen were involved in that murder. during the trial we proved there was another homicide that diana's mother was also killed by these henchmen two. killers restheaved death penalty two others went to prison for a long time. i always wondered what kevin would turn out to be. he was 14 months old in this photograph he didn't get to live very long. but he was a victim. and today we've talked about victims of crime but they were -- they were and they are, mr.

speaker, real people. people that just wanted to live. to grow up. to play in the backyard with their dad. things that never happened to kevin. and a lot of other kids in our culture. and a lot of adult, too. we as a nation must understand that violence against people in this country has to end. and people who commit crimes against children and others, violent crimes, they must be held accountable under our law for the choices that they make. we as a society, we as a culture, we're not judged by the way we treat the rich, the famous, the powerful, the important, the politicians, we're judged by the way we treat the weak, the elderly, the children. that's how we are judged. that's why this resolution and other resolutions talking about vims are important. so i urge all of my -- talking about victims are important.

i urge my colleagues to support this legislation and remember that victims are people too. i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas yield back the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee is reck naysed. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the remarks of mr. poe, obviously heart felt. i think this is where the bipartisanship in the house, trying to make sure there are no more crime victim, sometimes you hear speeches on the floor that are written or maybe not personal in nature but what mr. poe said was personal, his experience as a prosecutor and criminal court judge came through, i'm privileged to listen to that, join in his thoughts that that's just the way it is. with that, i would like to yield ethe balance of my time and ask that all my colleagues join me in supporting this resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back, and the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1104.

those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the resolution is agreed to and without objection -- mr. cohen -- mr. poe: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yays and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on the motion will be postponed. pursuant to clause 12a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 6:30 p.m. tod

>> the name of your -- >> we were making a list of different challenges and strengths about our country and we thought that in times like this, there are so many challenges we're facing so why don't we look on the brighter side of things and make a documentary on the strengths of our country. we looked at the strengths and they all seemed to fall into the category of opportunity. we also heard the name, "the land of opportunity" before, so

we decided to use that as the title for the video. >> what type of opportunities do you think the united states has to offer? >> it has a lot of great opportunities. as we mentioned in our video, there's freedom and rights no cultural or religious restriction, safety a stable government, laws, education, jobs, and a lot more. through freedom, anybody and everybody is given an education and you can practice any religion and pursue your goals without being discriminated and you can feel really safe in this country as well. >> does your community reflect diversity? >> definitely. our small community definitely reflected diversity and we have a lot of ethnicities woveb together, there are african-americans, indians, mexicans, and more. it's great to see so many people of the world living together peacefully. >> you interviewed a former citizen of iraq. how did you get that interview and what did you learn from her? >> we realized we wanted to

find someone with a powerful story and see what they felt about living in america. we had a few people, including a custodian in school, one from iraq. her religion wouldn't allow her to be on camera, and we respected that. but then diya would agree to it, and we talked to her and felt her story at impact. >> what did you learn from her? >> it was unbelievable that someone my age went through those things. i cannot imagine myself in her situation. it was tragic to hear about the violence in iraq and how it affects everyone there. >> what did you learn from her? >> i've heard people say we should be grateful for what we have in our country and

sometimes we forget how fortunate we are. hearing her story showed me how fortunate we are. while we have the opportunity to live such a great life, we should take every chance we get and appreciate that we are so privileged to live in such a great country. >> you guys used a lot of creative elements in your documentary. how did you decide to use those? >> we always liked producing exciting, creative videos. even though we're supposed to proo deuce a documentary doesn't mean it can't be creative. we thought the idea of finding an old, dusty book would be fun and information at the same time. we thought it was a cool idea, like a storybook read-aloud session. >> what did you enjoy most about working on the documentary? >> i enjoyed everything. it's fun to work with neel and ronak and her teacher, mr.

hoffman, is really dedicated he came to school early in the morning so we could work on our video. we learn from him and he learns from us. i had a blast producing this video. it was a great experience to overcome challenges of our own and i home to participate in studentcam in the future. >> congratulations on your win. >> thank you. >> now let's play a portion of riya's documentary. >> equal opportunity for good and the common good. >> you can be a woman, be from a minority, have a physical disability, have any political view and you will not be discriminated. any individual has the freedom to reach for the stars and pursue their goals. about 64% of wall street is made up of women. imagine how much freedom our country has if david patterson who is african-american and blind, could become governor of new york. >> you can watch the entire documentary and all the other winning studentcam entries at

studentcam.org. >> next, the president's proposed fee on financial institutions that received money via the troubled assets relief program, or tarp. tarp's special inspector general, neil baroffski, testified before the senate finance committee on the administration's proposal. the treasury department said the proposed fee is expected to raise $90 billion over the next 10 years this hearing is an hour and a half. >> please come to order. the epistle of james says, quote, see how great a forest of -- a little fire kindles. end quote. the financial crisis of 2008 kindled a fire that spread throughout the entire economy that destroyed more than eight million jobs. that fire led to more than six million foreclosures.

that fire led to three million bankruptcies. the spark for that fire was lit in the financial industry. to generate huge profits and big bonus the financial sector was playing with fire. big banks were writing bad mortgages that they should have known folks were not going to be able to pay. they would have known it if they'd done their homework on the loan applications. next, big banks bundled good and bad mortgages together and sold them to investors. they called these collateralized debt obligations, or c.d.o.'s and called selling them securitization. then the big banks ensured the -- insured these against failures. they called these credit default swaps. credit default swaps aloud banks to protect their risk and -- and make big profits even if their mortgages they were writing went bad. they hedged their bets and

gained mund on the transactions. unfortunately, the financial system didn't have enough money to cover all the debts. now there are charges that big banks may have been assembling packages of mortgages on one side and betting against them at the same time. then the spark kindled the flame and suddenly our nation's economy was engulfed in the fire. the dow was above 6,500 in march, unemployment rose. then secretary paulsen knew he had to act he came to congress with a proposal to save the economy, a proposal that authorized the treasury to distribute almost $700 billion to the troubled asset recovery program, tarp. i knew when we were working on this legislation, we needed to hold the treasury and tarp resip yenlts accountable. accountable for how the money was spent. tarp was spending hard --

recipients accountable. accountable for how the money was spent. big banks had been paying out bonuses worth millions of dollars, they were sometimes rewarding extensive risk taking. i propose we build into the law a special unbiased investigator. this investigator would ensure the transparency and accountability of tarp funds that proposal resulted in the special inspector general for the troubled asset relief program that person is before us today, mr. neal barofsky. welcome. he's responsible for overseeing the tarp freshman. -- tarp program he keeps track of where the money go, how it is spent and whether it's paid back. that leads us to the purpose of today's hearing. the tarp legislation anticipated there might be losses. congress anticipated that the banks might pay back something less than all the tarp money. the most recent estimate

anticipated that the treasury will end up losing $89 billion. we need to think about how to get the money back on behalf of american taxpayers. in january, president obama proposed a bank fee to cover tarp losses. this is expected to raise $90 billion over 10 years. it will apply to the 50 largest financial institutions in the country. this committee is going to take some time over the course of several hearings to consider the president's proposal and other options to recover tarp losses. we want to understand the best approach to designing the fee to whom it should aplue and how it might affect the economy and the markets. we need to learn whether banks will pass it on to consumers and how it might affect lending to small businesses. we need to take into account what european countries might do as they consider similar levies. we begin today with mr. barofsky to ask who has benefited from the tarp program, how much they have

repaid and why some tarp beneficiaries may never be able to repay the american taxpayers. the financial crisis of 2008 kindled a great fire that spread throughout the entire economy. let's examine how widely that fire is spread, let's see who benefited from our efforts to put out the fire, and let us try to learn what we can to prevent such further economic fires in times to come. >> i welcome you here, mr. barofsky. we are both big believers in transparency, oversight and accountable. thank you for leading that effort even though it's in a very narrow area of government, it's an important one when $700 billion was put out by congress. today, we're discussing what the president calls financial crisis responsibility fee. the assistant secretary for tax policy told the dozens of people in attendance at a briefing for senate staff on the president's fiscal year

2011 budget earlier this year that the president's proposed fee is actually an excise tax. this is similar to the name game that the administration played with excise taxes in the health care bill, although they referred to the excise taxes as fees, the legislative text clearly states they are actually excise taxes. i will refer to it as a tarp tax, and not the bank tax, as some call it, because the proposal applies not only to banks but also to insurance companies, security brokers, thrifts among others. the statute that created tarp required the president to submit a plan by 2013 to recover any losses under tarp so that taxpayers are repaid for any tarp losses. however, three years before it was required, the president proposed an excise tax, the

tarp tax. one problem that surfaced recently is a congressional democrat -- is that congressional democrats are reportedly planning ways to spend the money raised by the proposed tarp tax. one proposal gaining steam among many on the other side lately is to add the tarp tax to the financial leg raher to reform bill. -- financial regulatory reform bill. they are so strappeded for money to pay for out-of-control spending that they're looking for -- looking to banks and other institutions looking for money. this reminds me of the story the reporter who asked bank robber sutton why he robbed banks, and sutton said, because there's where the money is. if congress decides to pass a tarp tax, money should only go to paying down the deficit. otherwise, the tarp tax wouldn't even pay for the

losses from tarp. it would just enable more taxing and spending by those who want to spend more. all economists think that corporate entities don't bear the burden of taxes. people do. i want to know which people would bear the burden of the proposed tarp tax. so i wrote a letter asking the nonpartisan experts at the congressional budget office, the joint committee on tax evasion a series of questions on that line. the c.b.o. responded to my letter by saying customers would probably pay higher borrowing rates and other charges, employees might bear some cost and investors could bear some of the cost. the c.b.o. also said that the tarp tax, quote, would also probably slightly decrease the availability of credit for small business, unquote. in addition, the c.b.o. said that, and here's another quote,

for the most part, the firms paying the fees would not be those that are directly responsible for the loss realized by the tarp, end quote. on one other item from the c.b.o. letter worth noting is that the tarp tax would not apply to firms in the automotive industry. that is really odd, since c.b.o.'s march, 2010, tarp report states that the automotive industry accounts for 34% of -- no $34 billion of the program's estimated total cost of $109 billion. chairman baucus and i invited g.m. to testify before our committee at one of the later hearings but g.m. representatives said they didn't want to testify and i think it's pretty obvious that the g.m. silence is deafening. on another tarp-related matter, i want to thank you, mr.

barofsky, for investigating the multibillion dollar severance payment -- multimillion dollar severance payment treasury is allowing tarp recipients to pay leaving executives. i have asked before about this troubling issue and run into a stone wall. i'm also pleased that you, mr. barofsky, are going to investigate the possible conflicts of interest on the part of key people at treasury who worked on the tarp executive compensation regulations. since those regulations helped executives walk away with huge severance payments, we need to find out if they were drafted by people who used to represent the very executives affected by the regulations. treasury claims that all of the proper refusals were made. but it has provided none of the

documentation necessary to verify their claims, so i trust that you will be able to get to the bottom of these important questions and report back to this committee in the near future. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. thank you, mr. barofsky, for your service to the country. i'm gratified we have named this position in the legislation. i remember thinking how important it was to find somebody to be kind of like an auditor, to have the authority and power to see how the money is being spent and we also designed a way to give you the power you needed, not just the power that the back room department of treasury. second, i'm very happy with your performance as -- we selected a very good person to do this job and thank you very

much for your service to the country. i think you've help red store some confidence to the american people in this -- that the program is conducted properly, as much confidence as any one person could. thank you for your services to the country. >> mr. chairman, i want to thank you for saying what you just said. i think it's so important in the checks and balances of government and particularly in the oversight that committees have to do and this committee does a good job of oversight, that they know you are behind what's being done here and what he's doing. i think it's so important and i thank you so much for saying that. >> chairman baucus, ranking member grassley, members of the committee, i'd like to thank the chairman and ranking member for your kindness and your unwavering support of our office. it's a privilege and honor for me to appear here today and to

speak to this committee our most recent quarterly report to congress. we do have good news to report. aspects of the financial system, there are clear signs it's on its way to recovery and many larger tarp banks have been able to repay their tarp funds far in advance of what anyone anticipated. as a result, the expectations for losses to tarp, while still substantial, have been trending downward work o.m.b.'s recent estimate back in february being approximately $1277 billion and the c.b.o. estimating $109 billion and both estimating that the concentration of losses in this program support to a.i.g., support to the automotive industry and support to struggling homeowners. on the other hand, while tarp is -- does appear to be succeeding, it's -- in its statutory goal of getting wall street back on its feet, it's not getting -- meeting its goal of getting main street back on its feet.

smaller community banks are failing at an alarming rate with 50 already this year and the statutory goal of providing homeownership is falling short. 2.48 million foreclosureses last year with estimates this year that will eclipse that. hamp treasury's mortgage program will help three million to four million homeowners to stay in their home at sustainable levels but it appears it will not come close to that goal with more than 230,000 permanent modifications in the program. we detailed some of the failings of the program and made recommendations, addressing areas such as transparency, problems with treasury's execution of the program and problems and concerns about the program's very designed which leaves it vulnerable to ultimate failure because of high levels of

redefault that circumstances when borrowers after they receive modifications are unable or unwilling to continue making their payments because of the high rates of the payments or because of being hopelessly under water. in an apparent response with the release of that report, treasury announced major modifications to the hamp program, addressing for the first time the issue of negative equity where underwater mortgages, one of the significant indicators of redefault. and while treasury's actions has addressed some of the recommendations and issued raced by safe tarp they, too, present their own concerns. in our quarterly report we identified those concerns and made further recommendations in areas about continuing problems with transparency, problems with the potential vulnerabilities of fraud and some of the revisions that may lead to them being ineffective or lead to arbitrary results for certain borrowers.

it is important for treasury to address these issues that we raise here in this quarterly report and audit and similar concerns raised by the congressional oversight panel and g.a.o., otherwise it risks that the hamp program would be remembered not for being the catalyst for recovery in the housing market but for bold announcement, modest goals and meager results. in our quarterly report we also review what we are doing in our investigative division. and with the chairman and reab insisted on the creation of -- arcaing member insisted on the creation of safe tarp, they did so in recognize -- recognition it would -- and in safe tarp we've been building a sophisticated white collar investigate other program. we have had some success. charles antinucci was charged

in the southern district of new york for his fraud as the c.e.o. and executive of park avenue building for stealing from tarp. and fraud charges against bank of america and former c.e.o. and c.f.o. for their role in a fraud that affected tarp. and we supported the s.e.c. in its case that resulted in a $150 million set jlment -- settlement with bank of america. and out in california we assisted the attorney's office in southern california in obtaining criminal charges against glen and michael for their role in a fraud role that brought in more than $1 million in a scheme that was designed to take criminal advantage of struggling homeowners by falsely promising the mortgage modifications that never materialized. mr. chairman, mr. ranking member, members of the committee, it's a pleasure for

me to be here and i look forward to any questions that you have. >> thank you, mr. barofsky. i start off by asking, you know, at this point what do you think the losses are and how long will it take to realize what those losses will be? i'd argue over the next few years that the losses will be less but it would be helpful for the committee to see where the losses are today and how it will be reduced over the next several years? >> it's very hard to determine. our role is to report what others have done as far as the analysis of this result. what o.m.b. and c.b.o. has done. they see it as really as concentrated before in three areas. gaye, which they estimate as being between -- a.i.g., which they estimate as being between $30 billion and $50 billion. and in the automobile industry, $35 billion and $45 billion. and the housing program which is an entire loss. it's a subsidy. it's not intended or not

mechanism for it to be recovered. whether the losses will be realized will depend on a large part what will happen in the economy. particularly the automotive industry. are people going to buy more cars? is g.m. and chrysler and gmac going to be able to return to profitability? because of our interest in those companies, a.i.g. and other industries are an equity investment. their ability to repay will-g and depend on how successful -- will hinge and depend on how successful they are. it will take several years for us to get a real sense of what those losses may be. but as the economy improves, we certainly hope to see that these losses continue to decrease. >> fee bank tax and who has --

to what degree will that allow the tarp expenditures to be recouped, to be repaid? as we look as the tax is levied offer as proposed by the president, anyway, to what degree will that -- how efficiently will that return dollars back to taxpayers? >> let me tell you section 134, the statutory mechanism that provides for recoupment. there's certainly a lot of flexibility in there in how the recruitment is directed. there is some flexibility how it is ultimately designed and who it is targeted for. it is broad in its language to be the financial industry. i think it is born in a certain way because of the way tarp was originally intended. the direct purchases of troubled assets and mortgage-backed securities. i think in its original mission the government was going to buy up to $700 billion worth of these securities and then in five years make a determination

of how those investments are doing. and if they are short it would make sense the financial industry to come back and levy a fee or tax in order to recoup those investments. it becomes more difficult because the way tarp has morphed into 13 different programs, primarily into capital investments, because those who are most able to repay will have repaid and there wouldn't be a loss associated. those doing poorly and therefore not be able to necessarily repay a tax. a.i.g., the automotive industry is short, it would be more difficult to have a tax on them. i think that flexibility would be important in fashioning the appropriate result. >> you know, some people suggest that even though the -- first of all, the tarp money went to banks and that helped the banks but will also helped the economy generally. and i think the argument is a

fee is essentially on the banks and financial institution as well, that's appropriate because the benefits of tarp in the first place was not directed specifically but widespread. i understand the argument. why should the fee only be on certain institutions and not more widely spread even though institutions got the benefit from tarp? >> i think certainly there are multiple sides to this argument and this discussion. and really -- it really boils down to a policy determination from the congress and the administration to decide who is appropriate to fulfill section 134's requirement for recruitment. but there's certainly an argument on both sides. the financial industry and the larger banks certainly benefited beyond just the dollars that was invested. and not just from the tarp but

from them as a whole of the response of the government to the financial crisis. the input is guaranteed that they have a government support that's been widely reported that they're able to more easily and more cheaply raise money than their smaller counterpart giving them a competitive advantage, giving them ability for higher profits. it's a very complicated question, mr. chairman, for sure. >> do you have any thoughts on how the fee is structured? as i understand it, it's primarily -- specifically structured to discourage overleveraging. your thoughts on the structure as opposed to, say, a profit tax? >> to be honest, mr. chairman, until we see something in writing from the legislative proposal in the early discussion, we don't get involved. once it's more formed, it's

when we roll up our sleeves and dig into it. we really haven't had the opportunity to fully analyze the proposal as it's been described. >> my time has expired. senator grassley. >> thank you, mr. chairman. a year ago c.b.o. and o.m.b. projected the loss from tarp to be $250 billion. o.m.b. now estimates tarp will lose $127 billion. c.b.o. estimated it at $109 billion. it's been reported recently in "the new york times" article that i have here that some officials i think unnamed, as i recall, expect the bailout program to, "eventually turn from red to black." if treasury says that eventually there may not be losses, does this excise tax make sense -- before you answer

that -- would any amount of losses, in the year 2020, the president is supposed to propose a plan to recoup taxpayers' losses from tarp? >> certainly with more time there will be more certainty as to the extent of the losses. >> o.m.b. says that the auto industry is responsible for $34 billion of all tarp losses. c.b.o. says that they're responsible for $34 billion. does it make any sense to levy a tax to recover tarp losses and then carve out g.m. and croiceler, the companies responsible for 30% of the losses -- and chrysler, the companies responsible for 30% of the losses? >> i know it's based on the structure of the way section 134 was originally intended as the tarp was envisioned versus how it is now is that it's a difficult policy question. >> in march of 2009, and that's

obviously just 13 months ago, the president announced using $15 billion in tarp funds to fund what's called small loans. however, small business didn't receive that money and lending to them has not increased because the initiative was reduced to $21 million pilot program. so that's the difference between $15 billion intended and actually $21 million as a pilot program. in january the administration proposed taking $30 billion out of the tarp program and setting up a separate non-tarp program to support small business lending. we don't have actual legislative language yet, but i'm concerned about what that would mean for the ability of your office to conduct oversight.

could you explain why the previous small business lending program never materialized and why you think you should retain jurisdiction, oversee the newly proposed $30 billion program and also what are the risks to accountability and transparency if your oversight -- if oversight from your office would be blocked by change of legislative language? >> senator, if i may answer your second question first. we think that this would be tremendously dangerous and wasteful to the taxpayer if this $30 billion program is taken out of the tarp without our oversight continuing. there is virtually no difference between the newly proposed program and the existing capital program. it has the same five regulators on who gets money and who doesn't. it's the same capital structure. it's the same eligibility criteria. it's the same type of investment. it's actually the same money, tarp money. approximately -- we estimated that 90% of existing tarp

recipients because the way the program is going to be set up can just transfer their tarp -- their tarp investment into f f.b.l. investments. it won't change anything other than moving from tarp into this new program. meanwhile, safetarp, it was there when we created. on the audit side, the reporting side on the investigation side has been built around growing and learning the c.p.b. program is the mirror image of that. from an audit side, we've done audits into the decisionmaking process, how it works, the impact of outside influence. we've many a series of recommendations about transparency and program design and programs most importantly on the investigation side. we have literally dozens of criminal investigation into those who tried to criminally profit off of the capital purchase practice. we've developed a very specific

sophisticated forensic team. these types of crimes that the fblf will also be -- as i say it's virtually identical to c.p.t., capital raise issues, issues that we've spent a significant amount of time learning and training, getting up to speed to take this and to throw away the 14 months of expertise and training that we've had from an you hadity perspective, from a criminal perspective, and get a new body that may or may not have the resources to get up to speed will be a gear up process that will take at least a year to get to where we are, even if they have the resources and expertise i think would be a tremendous disservice to the american taxpayer and will leave a program which in many ways has a greater vulnerability to be taken advantage of because of the incentive program seleengsly without effective oversight would be a tremendous waste of

taxpayer dollars. i would strongly encourage this congress to include sip tarp oversight. i was very disappointed when the administration changed course on us after initially saying we were going to be included in the proposed legislation and then later telling us we are not. >> wouldn't it be more accurately to say if we don't do anything you will be included or is it your view as lawyer if they set this up he we got to transfer what you do now over to that? i thought you would automatically have jurisdiction unless law was changed to take it away from you. >> if they ripped this out of the tarp as they are suggesting to do so, we may have jurisdiction to a certain extent on some of the moneys but we wouldn't necessarily have complete jurisdiction over the program. >> well then i think you've answered my question that if you will have jurisdiction unless congress changes

existing law? >> yes, that's correct. >> i hope members of this committee will be aware of that so we don't let something like that slip through. i'll wait for a second round. >> thank you for your service. a big part of the ultimate losses of tarp is coming from a.i.g. and a big part of the losses in a.i.g. that won't be paid back is as a result of the credit default swaps being paid off, the insurance policies at 100 cents on the dollar. now, do you think that these derivative counterparties such as goldman sachs that receive the preferred treatment puts them at the front of the line

when the circumstances occurred as they did with a.i.g.? do you think they should be put at the front of the line? >> you know, i think when making these policy considerations everything should be on the table. and the fact is that goldman sachs and seven of the eight of the largest counterparties refused to negotiate with the federal reserve bank of new york to negotiate concessions which ultimately received them -- led them to receiving 100 cents on the dollar. we explored the reasons and justifications for this. but i think it's a irrelevant policy in designing the section 134 recoupment in the statute. >> well, what in the world made the federal reserve sit there and take that by these counterparties saying, oh, we're not going to negotiate with you on this?

it seems like the federal reserve should have been in the driver seat. >> well, senator, we agree. when we released our audit report, we went through the reasons that the federal reserve gave for what we described as a very ineffective negotiating strategy that was ultimately doomed to fail as well as what we call a simple lack of effort that they -- even within certain limitations they put on themselves in negotiations. things like requiring that they wouldn't do any deal unless all counterparties agreed or put pressure on them because as status as a regulator to move negotiations going forward. instead of basically saying, don't worry, it's just a voluntary negotiation. the fact that they didn't do what they had done a couple weeks earlier as resip gents -- recipients of tarp fubbeds. now secretary geithner didn't get on the phone and call a meeting of the c.e.o.'s of the big banks and the counterparties and call them

together and make a strong effort on negotiation, like they did with c.p.t., pointing out the incredible support and the taxpayer had given to a.i.g. and they all suffered horrific losses without that support and using that culprit to voluntarily get negotiated fees. even after one of the banks agreed and said in some circumstances they would agree to a concession and we have been critical of that because we think at the very least they should have tried a little bit harder. >> the $89 billion that the taxpayers will not get back from the bailout, is most of that attributable to a.i.g.? >> to be clear, all we're doing is we haven't done our own analysis. we are saying what c.b.o. and o.m.b. reported. but it does look like based on

their estimate anywhere from $36 billion to $50 billion of their estimated losses will be attributable to a.i.g. >> and, of course, all of those credit default swaps that were paid off with all those firms like $13 billion just for goldman sachs and going down the line, that would total up to about $50 billion, wouldn't it? >> you know, just on the main facilities alone, which is the portion that the federal reserve purchased from those counterparties at face value -- i'm sorry -- at market value, the c.b.o. -- the other half of that, the collateral had a was posted, most of that came from the taxpayers that the federal reserve then back paid and that alone was then tens of billions of dollars. >> this is an outrage. let me ask you about hamp. would you take more about your recommendations regarding

hamp's effectiveness and your recommendations on fraud and the voluntary nature of hamp's principle reduction program? >> well, with respect to fraud, in the new design of the program, it increases incentive in short sales which are circumstances where treasury is going to provide incentives to homeowners as well as to the servicers to encourage them to basically turn in the keys to their house and have it being sold to someone for less than what the mortgage is actually worth. so if a house is worth $100,000, the mortgage is $150,000 to effect that sale at $100,000. and shortly encouraging those, you know, we have no pro-with that. -- problem with that. short sales is less expensive. to investors it's not as

painful as foreclosure and these types of sales have been vulnerable to a short sale fraud called flopping instead of flipping. it's an artificial inflation of the home. the home is worth $100,000 but there is a benefit for the fraudsters if they could get the investors, the people who own the mortgage to believing it's only worth $100,000 so they provide false information. if they do that then they get the home below market value and could flip the home almost instantly and make a nice tidy profit. and the problem is that the valuation standard that treasury is anticipating using on this is basically not very robust. it's broker opinion or even that it's standardized. it's based on the review of the servicer. i see you running out of time. our recommendation simply with this program and all these

programs, they do what the f.h.a. does which is require a certified appraiser to make sure there is a good third party look to prevent this type of fraud. >> you ought to take a look in florida that some of this flopping is going on right now. >> oh, absolutely. it's a hotbed of that activity in the state of florida. >> thank you, mr. barofsky. thank you for your stewardship and the good work being done on this front. i want to make sure this is clear. when the last administration came to the congress and asked for us to fund the tarp program, my recollection is they asked about $700 billion, is that right? >> that's correct. >> and the proposed use of the money was to allow the purchase of liquid assets that were being held by a variety of entities, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> for the most part we didn't use the money for that but we ended up taking a different approach then and we injected a

fair amount of that money into large financial institutions and we bought their preferred stock. as i recall, is that correct? >> that's absolutely correct. >> what was the size of those institutions, was it $50 billion and above, help me with that? >> the initial rollout, the first $125 billion went to the largest of the financial institutions. over time as the capital purchase program expanded, ultimately it funded more than 700 institutions and we have breakdowns in our quarterly report the size of them. they range from investments even today with the retainment as low as $300,000 up to citi which is holding on to $25 billion. >> ok. thank you. when we injected capital into those institutions, they had an obligation to us to pay on our preferred stock dividends, is that correct? >> that's correct. 5%. >> and were there any opportunities for them to lower that 5% by lending money that

was injected to the -- for their balance sheet? >> to date that has not been -- that has not been part of the tarp program. it's part of the announced proposal for fblif. >> how are we doing in collecting the dividend income that's owned to the treasury? >> generally on a gross level it's going pretty well. there's been about 104 tarp recipients who've missed dividend payments . some have caught up. i think perhaps a couple dozen have caught up with those payments. so that leaves the balance that has not made payments. it includes a few tarp recipients that have failed and will never be making future payments . >> can you quantify the dividend obligations that are sort of not been fulfilled to treasury, just roughry? >> we do have it in our quarterly report. i believe it's $100 million-something. >> 100 and something million? >> i believe.

>> it's close enough. ok. so we've infused all these capital money. we bought this preferred stock. for the most part we're receiving the dividend payments that we were supposed to. a good deal of the capital has been infused into the balance sheets of these institutions, a lot of it is being repaid? >> absolutely. >> repaid essentially with interest with the exception of it -- with the exceptions that you mentioned. explain to us how we're doing on the war inside. i know we've been able to exercise the sellout -- and realize profits in billions of dollars. can you give us a brief update on that? >> the warrant sales have been successful. they brought back -- and for warrant sales it's pure profit for the american taxpayer. when congress designed etha, they had this warrant so taxpayers can share on the upside. and it has been successful.

billions of dollars have been returned from the sale of these warrants. we actually had an audit report that's going to come out on may 11 which will detail our analysis of how treasury's been doing in administering the warrant process. it started out with the congressional oversight panel a little bit rocky as far as the percentage of return. since that report has come out we have seen that they appear to be doing better. recently we've had auctions which again has appeared to bump those profits up. it seems to be a pretty successful program. i will be able to get a better detailed report on may 11. >> there are other institutions that have not been able to repay their moneys, their obligations to the tarp, that number is decreasing over time. >> it's about -- $46 billion,

$47 billion outstanding. >> i've been following in the press that they have at least reached agreement to sell certain assets. alco, a big insurance company, i think $15 billion. i've seen another one $35 billion. has that money been credited to other obligations to treasury? >> that money will go to treasury. the way the a.i.g. investment is structured, the federal reserve gets paid back every penny before treasury gets paid back. it's those transactions goes off as planned, it will help very much in reducing a.i.g.'s obligations to the federal reserve. but it's not that it will be nearly enough to get the debt paid to treasury. >> the moneys owed by g.m. and by chrysler come back to the treasury, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> and do i understand that g.m. recently paid $1 billion of its obligations to the treasury?

>> g.m. has paid $1 billion and i think they've announced they will be paying back the debt portion which is about $6 billion left in entirety very shortly. but we should be a little bit cautious about that because the way that that payment is going to be made is drawn down in equity facility of other tarp money. so it's good news in that they're reducing their debt and -- but they're using it by taking other available tarp money to repay the tarp. it's good because that money which was available for future problems with g.m. that there is a determination that they don't need it but we should caution it's not necessarily being generated out of earnings but other tarp funds. >> when do you think we'll hear good news out of g.m.? >> i don't have that. >> and chrysler, what's the story with chrysler's obligation? >> chrysler, their obligation -- we have an equity interest in chrysler so our future ability to recoup taxpayer investment is going to be wholly dependent on how

successful chrysler is and how successful the american automotive industry is. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. senator schumer. >> thank you. being in this room i 'em immediately get overcome with health care. because we spent so much time doing it. >> we are now talking about financial health. >> thank you. i want to thank you and mr. barofsky for your system and your service in overseeing the implementation of the tarp program. as unpopular as tarp has become, i think most who would look at it would say it was absolutely necessary to save the economy from complete collapse. i was in the room when chairman bernanke and hank paulson, president bush's treasury secretary, told members of congress, some of us just how serious the situation was. they told us if we failed to enact tarp we'd risk another great depression. we were staring into the abyss. when we heard it i think there

was a collective gulp in the room. ben bernanke talked about it in his nonexaggerated, nonhyper tones. so congress came together and did the right thing, republicans and democrats, and the bush administration, which proposed it, signed it into law. so it's important to emphasize that the current financial reform proposal also contains multiple safeguards to make sure taxpayers are never again on the hook for rescuing the financial system. i think that's very important. any costs incurred in winding down financial institutions would be covered by the industry. sort of the way it's done in the banking industry with the fdic. we certainly can and should work to prevent any more taxpayer bailout, but we also need to close the book on the last one and make sure that taxpayers get back every dime they pay to rescue the economy. a key piece of that legislation was a provision requiring them

to assess the costs of the program and to, "submit a legislative proposal that recoups from the financial industry an amount equal to the shortfall in order to ensure that the program does not add to the deficit or national debt." that got a lot of people to vote for it. it was a tough vote even then, and i think we have to live up to those words. they should not be ignored. in keeping with the requirement under tarp to make sure that taxpayers are whole, the administration did live up to its responsibility. if proposed, the financial crisis responsibility fee to be assessed on financial institutions with over $50 billion in assets. and is proposed by the administration, the fee would amount to .15% of the liabilities of these companies other than deposits and tier one capital. there are to be sure legitimate questions about the details of the plan, and i salute chairman baucus for holding the hearings to try and answer them. but overall i think administration's proposal is a

commonsense way to make sure that taxpayer money is repaid and i believe it should be included in the financial reform legislation soon to be debated on the senate floor. i agree with the administration in this regard. as the president said when introducing it, it's our responsibility to ensure that the taxpayer dollars that supported these actions are reimbursed by the financial sector so the deficit is not increased. that's the end of his quote. so, mr. chairman, i want to work with you and all of our colleagues on this committee to get recovery legislation ready in time to be included in the financial reform legislation that will soon be considered on the floor. now, my question for you, mr. barofsky, is this -- you were talking a little bit before about minimizing the lawsuits the government still holds billions and billions and billions of dollars of these kinds of assets and things. what do you think the administration can do, congress

can do to minimize the potential losses? you indicated earlier it will take years to know exactly what our losses will be, but now we're moving on here and i think we ought to start looking at how to minimize our losses. could you comment on that, please? >> i think one of the areas that is near and dear to our role is to looking at inefficiencies in the program as they're run and to fraud vulnerabilities. those are going to be areas that are very preventable and avoidable losses. some of the losses with respect to a.i.g. and the automotive industry, that's going to depend on macroeconomic conditions, whether the economy improves, people buy cars. there is very little in the tarp program, perhaps, to address those. within the tarp program, you know, we tried to make recommendingses a that the -- recommendations that it maximizes each dollar spent and above all we make sure that the right protections are there against fraud so money is not lost, for example, by providing to institutions and the new

small business program that are defrauding the tarp and getting money and is ultimately going to result in failure to the system or don't carry out its goals. and those are areas we have been working hard to make sure when tarp money goes out the door it goes out efficiently and is not the result of fraud. >> my time has expired. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator, very much. one, small business. generally small business has been unable to take advantage of the funds that have gone to the big banks. whether tarp funds or federal reserve systems or what not. some who suggest banks make money by borrowing at low interest rates -- rather lending to small business, your

thoughts on how -- what can be done with the tarp program to help small business and how -- just your thoughts, how to we get more money to small business? >> i do think there's some definite merit in the administration's proposal about the small business lending fund and the idea to incentivize small business lending. that is unlike the original outlay of tarp funds in the capital purchase program or money was sent out without any conditions or incentives or carrots or sticks about what to do with that money they really had free range to do with it whatever they pleased. and back then, and really up until now, without any accountability because the administration's refusal for them to report on any use of funds, i think by incentivizing the banks through well within their dividend rate to encourage them to increase

small business lending i think will help. i think the administration is finally adopting our recommendation by requiring tarp recipients on reporting their use of fuppeds. so that there's some accountability of the use of tarp funds will also assist in helping to meet that goal, to further incentivize small business lending. >> are they referring how they use their funds? >> treasury has sent out a survey. it is due this past friday. they will be publishing the results. it will be quantitative data as well as qualitative data. and treasury will respond to that. we did that in a report back last summer. for the first time it was a voluntary audit report. first time treasury will report on how tarp recipients will use it. >> have you seen those proposed regulations? >> it's actually just a survey that was sent out. >> ok. are you satisfied with the design? or did you make some suggestions? >> we made some suggestions.

some were adopted. some of which were not. overall we were ok with the design and what treasury's plan was. the question is always in execution. we think getting the quantitative date ande matching it with the qualitative data the information that's received from the regulators as well as from the banks and putting that together and putting together a comprehensive report will be helpful. one of the recommendations that we made is that they don'ted was to make sure that those returning the survey had a high level official certify it under the penalty -- criminal penalty and we think that will help assure that those people who are signing that will have the incentive to be accurate and truthful. we'll monitor how treasury performs. >> ok. i appreciate that. any other thoughts on small business? i've heard so much from community banks and also small businesses and a lot of small businesses say they can't borrow because banks aren't

lending. >> it's a very difficult problem and i think a lot of it has to do outside of the controversial of the tarp. we've all heard anecdotal information about the push and pull of regulators who may be typing certain lending restriction. the possibility that's been discussed of -- as you mentioned, the banks are getting the money very, very cheaply but reportedly a lot of them are returning it around and lending it back to the federal government by buying treasury bills instead of lending it out and getting -- lending it out to small businesses. what we try to do in this report as well is to do an overview of small business lending. we do a five to six-page tutorial, what the role is. what we do come down is, there's no way we could have lasting economic recovery without a return from small businesses. there are' just too -- they are just too important as far as net job growth. >> i understand that very much and i hope we can find a better

way. all of this discussion of tarp assumes everything son the up and up. is there -- everything is on the up and up. is there any fraud so far as you can tell? >> the tarp is a giant several hundred billion -- multihundred billion pot of honey. it will draw some beeses and it will draw some -- draw some flies. as i mentioned in my opening statement, we've secured several criminal charges. we've had -- that was just in the past quarter. we are gaining some investigatory division. they really apply across the tarp. not just into the bank program, although a lot of our resources are structured on those who tried to steal from the tarp through fraudulent applications in that program but we're also

looking at the housing program, within the public-private investment program, really across the board. yes, mr. chairman, unfortunately, there are those who are seek to take criminal advantage. i think what we tried to do on two fronts. with you is through detecting and referring to the department of justice for prosecution. we've also committed a significant amount of resources in deterring. both through being very public being out there. i think we've had -- and a great example is the federal reserve's program to lend asset backed securities. when that program was first described to us, january of last year, it had virtually no protections whatsoever. it was going to rely solely on rating agencies and investor due diligence. basically the two things that got us in this entire mess, the financial crisis in the first place. i can't give the federal reserve credit enough for

working with us. a whole team came down from new york, and i do believe this program as it ultimately became designed is a very safe program . they followed our recommendation and didn't put residential mortgage-backed securities in it even though it was publicly announced that they were going to do so. i think that's one of the areas where we had some degree of success. >> my time has expired. senator grassley. >> thank you, mr. chairman. one of the top programs ramping up at treasury is a public-private investment program. this is a $40 billion program and it's the only tarp program designed to buy toxic assets. i understand your office is investigate -- has investigated potential conflicts of interest involving this program and what the -- and that the investigation might include a wall street investment firm named blackrock. as i understand it, blackrock has a deal to work on maiden

lane for the federal reserve bank in new york as a tocksity asset analyst. while the blackrock company has a deal with treasury to participate in the public-private investment program to buy toxic assets. is there a conflict, and what can you tell the committee about the results of your investigation? i don't expect you to tell us anything that would violate any investigation you're doing or stall it but anything you tell us i would appreciate it. >> sure. senator, there's two different areas here. on our audit side we are doing a number of audits that touch on blackrock's role and it's an extensive role throughout this financial crisis. there is three different audits that touch on their role. so for example, we're doing an audit looking at potential conflicts of interest and compliance rules in the p-pip program. we're doing an audit on the citibank program which they

served as role -- an advisory role. and we are looking at the toup. and even for two months they served in that role. as you say they have a role just beyond those three programs with the federal reserve's $1.25 trillion purchase of agency mortgage-backed securities, with respect to mainly, to a.i.g. program. mainly, one, the bailout of bear stearns and we are considering doing a more overarching audit on the role -- on their role throughout the financial crisis. on our investigation side, we do have a pending investigation into a -- one of the fund managers. we have not identified who that is because of the pending investigation but it is looking very specifically into a conflict of interest, specifically things that show a fund manager who was managing

two funds, one being a p-pip fun and another private fund bought it back at a higher price. and we're investigating that as a potential conflict of interest. i have to note that that -- the strict ethical walls applying to p-pip managers. >> now, a little bit on the point you just made. why doesn't treasury just exclude wall street investment firms that already work for the fed, aren't there enough wall street investment firms available that don't already work for the fed that could be doing this work? >> it would appear to be so. but based on the repeat performance of certain players in different aspects of the financial recovery, it does appear that from treasury and from the federal reserve's

perspective that may not be the case. >> would you please conduct a review of any and all conflicts of interest related to blackrock? and i am making that request of you. >> we will going geth back to your staff. i think it's something that we have considered before. it's something that needs to be looked at. >> on friday the securities and exchange commission announced that it would -- was charging goldman sachs with civil fraud in connection to selling mortgage-backed securities that were essentially designed to fail. the s.e.c. aledges that goldman misled investors by telling them that the pool of mortgages was put together by quote-unquote an independent advisor when in fact the hedge

fund manager who created it at goldman was secretly betting that the investment would go bad. if the facts that are alleged is true then it will confirm our worst suspicion how they could use their position to reap the game in their favor. as i understand the s.e.c. is only looking at one of a series of investments known as the abaca security and some of them were secured by a.i.g. since a.i.g. is a tarp recipient and losses on these securities may have contributed to the need for taxpayers to bail out a.i.g., i hope that your office will be examining the entire series of transaction in detail. has your office been involved in this investigation into goldman, and if not, would you please investigate these kinds of transactions and provide an independent assessment to us

about any of a.i.g.'s taxpayer subsidized payments to goldman can be recovered if they were based on this kind of fraud? >> absolutely. we were not involved in the case announced friday. ultimately the insurance that was written off that wasn't by a.i.g. it was a company that was picked up by r.b.s. i believe there are seven of these deals. the credit default swaps were written by a.i.g. i have been in contact with the s.e.c. we will coordinate with thefment we are going to lead the charter. we will review these transactions, working with them and -- as well as the department of justice if necessary to get a close review of these transactions and to see if there are allegations, if there are basis of fraud and if a.i.g., as a result of the american taxpayer, were victims of any type of similar types of fraud. we will do that. >> i will ask my last question in writing if you'll respond, please? >> absolutely. >> thank you, senator.

>> senator snowe. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. barofsky, in safeguarding the interest of the taxpayer and providing transparency to this program that regrettably congress had to approve during the financial crisis. you are doing great work i think on behalf of tchun. i want to thank you. >> thank you. >> one of the issues that has arisen with respect to tarp is eligibility of the net operating loss carryback provision that the chairman and i worked on during the stimulus program, for example, extending it from two to five years. and what emerged in an article in "the wall street journal" is that jpmorgan had repaid their funding to the government but nevertheless will now benefit from the $1.4 billion net operating carryback loss due to their purchase price to washington mutual. it was clearly and explicitly

stated in statute that, you know, no tarp recipient, either current or prior, would be eligible to use this net operating carryback loss. who is responsible for making this determination? what should we do to correct this because clearly this is not the intent of congress? i think we need to go back to the drawing board to make sure this does not repeat itself. >> right. we've been closely monitoring this situation. right now it's in bankruptcy court. the fdic's receiver is in discussions and there's been discussions about a settlement with jpmorgan that may allocate, as you say, a portion of this tax break, you know, to jpmorgan. we've been in contact with the fdic who has been in contact with some of the creditors who have been objecting to this. and we're going to continue to monitor this operation. we have not taken any action because we're waiting to see how the settlement breaks down. but that's where it is right

now. it's in bankruptcy court. ultimately, you know, whether it will be a negotiated settlement or the bankruptcy judge will make a ruling, there are arguments on both sides we have been reviewing. we have been taking a backseat and watching the process and see what actually happens before making an evaluation. but we have been on top of this from our legal division to follow it. it's certainly a very complex discussion with the intrick is is of bankruptcy. -- intricisies of bankruptcy law. it's a very complex issue that we are very frankly getting our arms wrapped around. >> we do provide us with your thinking. once a decision is made, again, we can't preempt any decisions at this point on this issue. we'll certainly evaluate it.

but it clearly was not the intent and was very expressly stated. so somehow it's gotten wrapped up and, you know, allowing this to happen and to providing that to a former tarp recipient. and i think, you know, certainly should not, you know, not be the case. so what we need to do is address it ultimately. certainly is something we should, you know, consider. >> yes, senator, i'll be happy to have my legal team to sit down with your staff on the issues. >> ok. in the nonpayment of dividends and you say there is $198.9 billion worth of dividends, disconcerting. when 74 companies have missed three or mohr payments . so this -- more payments. so this could become an issue. why is it and what are you doing or what is treasury doing to recover, you know, those dividends that are not being

paid in a timely fashion? >> well, unfortunately, those institutions that are not paying, often case because the regulator has directed them to stop making payments because they're in trouble. and because the financial institution is in trouble and their capital is bleeding, taking capital away through dividend payments is feared it could lead to the failure of the bank and then a complete loss of the tarp capital investment. one of the things we're doing, obviously to our investigations division, all these banks represented themselves to be healthy and viable before coming into this program. and for those that rapidly digressed from being supposedly healthy and viable to being unable to make quarterly payments on a 5% dividend payment, that raises important concerns and issues. from an investigative point of view we are looking at some of these institutions and seeing if there was misrepresentation. the other thing treasury is doing for some of these struggling institutions is actually recapitalizing the

investments. we detailed that in the quarterly report where they are taking an upfront loss in some circumstances by turning their preferred investment into common or mandatory convertible preferred share at a discount. they are recognizing this loss because basically they've come to the view if they don't do it the taxpayer investment will be wiped out and hopefully the bank will recover. >> and how many institutions would be in that category? >> i think so far there have been five institutions that have announced. citi was the first. the current stock prices would make a profit. bank of popular down in puerto rico announced it. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. senator carper. >> i'd like to go back and pick up where i left off, if i

could. and we were drilling down, if you will, who owes money to the tarp and what is the likelihood of collecting what is still out there. i think you mentioned that chrysler owing money to the tarp we have an equity position in chrysler. could you take a minute and talk about that equity position? >> right now it's about 10%. that number can go down if fiat meets certain performance metrics of introducing a smaller car. that may come down to 8%. essentially our ability to recoup that money will depend on how chrysler does. the goal ultimately for both chrysler and g.m. is to get to an initial public offering of stock. that way treasury will have a method of liquid ating its interest through public sale of stock to the public. so the goal is that these companies can get back on their

feet, return to profitability so that the shares of their stock become attractive to the market and then treasury will be in position to sell off the shares and ultimately regain -- >> it remaineds me a little bit about what happened in -- it reminds me a little bit about what happened in 1980 when they provided loan guarantees to chrysler and chrysler was able to find funding in the private sector. and we -- the federal government guaranteed the loans. but we did have that granted to us once. chrysler stock returned to higher levels, we took the warrants. i think we had warrants -- about $10 a share. or buy it at $10 a share several years after the company begun to recover. and after that point in time we exercised our right to buy it at $10. we sold it for $30 a week or two later and made about $30 billion for the treasury. how does the situation with

chrysler resemble that or differ from it in this instance? >> i think it's dramatically different because we have this direct equity investment. as you said before, and by no means an expert on the original chrysler bailout. but my understanding, as you expect -- here we're not guaranteeing debt. we have actually given the money. and a lot of the money has been written off. the investments to chrysler propreceded their bankruptcy. a good chunk of it was recognized as being lost in bankruptcy. it went to the old institution. there's a bankruptcy plan that's right now pending and hasn't been improved with the money that we have that's been lent to old chrysler. and there's no real expectation that we are going to get that money back. >> how much money was that, roughly? >> i don't have it. >> roughly $10 billion? >> don't have those numbers in my hand but i can certainly get them to you. >> thank you. >> but a good chunk of the amount was there, but because we had an equity investment