we turned around and adopted their recommendations and that is really the policy that's in place. and this year, for 2011, data will be collected by our department about companies meeting that ratio and at the end of the day, companies who fail to meet the rat will ow their policyholders a rebate, but the rebates do not start until 2012, until data has been collected. >> thank you. my time is finished. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. madam secretary, thank you for being here. let me ask about an issue that is a little bit off the subject of your direct testimony here, but is a very important part of the bill that i would like to

see us move ahead with. relates to implementation of the workforce provisions that are contained in title v. central part of the reform, as i saw it, was creation of a new independent and nonpartisan national workforce commission. this is something which is not under your depament directly. it's an independent commission. it's tasked with providing congress and providing congress and the administration with clear information and guidance on how to align our federal resources to meet the health care workforce needs of the nation, based on recommendations at the institute of medicine made, and modeled after med pac, which, of course, provides us with expert guidance on medicare payment issues. it had strong support, i believe, bipartisan support when we included it in the bill.

it is my understanding that the mmission members were selected by gao. dr. peter burhouse is the chair. commission may provide a report as early as october 1, but the commission cannot begin its work until it gets funding to do its work. the appropriations bill that came out of the labor hhs subcommittee and that came -- we tried to pass on the smenate floor included $3 million for operation of the commission. it is unclear now what the funding status is. and so i wanted to just flag this issue for you. i know as i say this is not your responsibility, directly, but i think it is very important, a very important part of health care reform is dealing with the problem of how to -- how to --

how to channel federal funds to use the most effectively to meet our health care workforce needs. so i wanted to just flag it for you. i don't know i you are familiar with the issue, if you have any comments you would like to make, but glad to hear those. >> well, senator, i think that the issue of the health care workforce is an enormous issue whether or not we had passed an affordable care act is an issue that's been looming on the horizon and frankly for decades where are the providers that we need for the futurehat is the pipeline, how do we get there in an expedited fashion and what is an accurate snapshot in t? the workforce commission, i have seen the members' names andios and it is a stellar group and one that we look forward to working with. the health care act also

expanded the national health service core, which allows in exchange for scholarship and loan payment, providers who serve in underserved areas which is a significant step forward. it increases thanks to the prevention and wellness fund. there was $250 million investment and, again, additional primary care providers which will train about 16,000 new providers over the course of the next five years. we have, as part of the act, some nurse-led community health centers, increasing nurse practitioners and providers, but i think that the challenge of making sure that all americans have access to health care providers and particularly primy care gerontology, mental health providers, if we're shifting to a wellness system, we need the providers on the ground who are able to deliver that care and that is certainly

part of the effort that you all have begun with the aordable care act and accelerated what has been a long-standing challenge, but one that we are paying very careful attention to. and the president ha as a high persal priority, to make sure we have the workforce needed by the american public. >> could i just ask that you maybe have someone on your staff look io the issue of how we can get the funding for this commission to do its work? as i say, i think they're up and ready to go, they obviously need some staff to assist them, and they need to pay that staff, so it is not a substantial amount of money, but i do think it is a very important task that we have given them and if you could look into that, i sure would appreciate it. thank you. >> be glad to. >> thank you, senator. senator bennet? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to thank you and the ranking member to hefor hol this hearing. madam secretary, thank you for

coming back. if i had to sum up the last two years of the town hall meeting in colorado on this issue, i would say that what people are saying is we hated this system as it existed, the health insurance system, and we also believe deeply in your capacity, my capacity, not yours, to make it even worse th it is now. and i think the rancor of the debate on health care didn't do much to create a level of confidence in all of this. and one of the things i talked about was that when people said -- we don't believe government can do a good job here, look at what government has done before, i said, you have a point. at the heart of this reform in many ways is an attempt, a rare attempt, to actually change the incentive structures so that we can deliver higher quality at lower cost, something that we have historically not done, but something we have to do, not just for the health of our citizens, but for the quality of

the care that we have got, and so we don't bankrupt the united states of america. so one of the things i learned during the health care debate was because of the way the incentive structure worked, one out of every five medicare beneficiaries that went to the hospital were readmitted within a month for conditions that were completely preventable and medicare, as a result, was spending $17 billion a year on these hospital readmissions that could have prevented. it is one of the reasons why i work so hard on something called the community-based care transitions program, this innovative model ensures each medicare beneficiary at risk of being readmitted is assigned a coach to make sure they go in and out of the hospital, nursing home, and even their own home, and that they do the follow-up care and take their medications. this practice known as transitional care has shown a reduction of up to 50% in places with high readmission elivery ml

to create higher quality at a lower price and what can we do to accelerate that work? >> well, senator, i think that's a great question. the earlier discussion really focused on some of the market insurance market changes, but i think the underlying health costs and the amount that is spent on things that may not lend themselves to the health of anyone are areas that providers an employers and others are eager to work on. and the case of this, you know, coordinated care strategy, once someone leaves the hospital, we know it works. it is in pockets around the

cotry, but never really taken to scale. it is better for patients. it is better for their familie it is better for their health and certainly lower costs of unnecessary readmission. so having an oppornity to employ those best practices across the coury, deploy those tactics, that bundle of care, the medical home model which we know is, again, very successful, the kind of early intervention, a lot of those strategies are incorporated into the affordable care act. and give direction to our agencies to implement those across the board. and i think that will be very good for the americapublic's health and for our health care costs. >> i agree. and i will say, i think it has been lost in the debate, which is why i raise it here today. and the providers in my state that are working on these things, and in many ways have some of the most forward-leaning approaches to th are really excited about the possibilities here. and that really brings me to my second point, which is that we have heard discussion on both

sides today and throughout the debate about the cbo numbers. does this really save money? is it going to save money over time? i think the honest answer to at question is it depends on how well we execute. it depends on how well you execute. it depends on how well the states execute it. it is one of the reasons why i work with senator hagan and senator warner on a fail-safe amendment that would have said, look, if we don't save the money that we are committed to saving, that we said we would save, that we will look at it again as a congress and make sure we have those savings because we want to keep faith with the american people who reasonably are saying, we're not sure what to believe. we're not sure which side, you know, is right. since it is a projection, we don't really know. my own view is that if we put more of these transitional care models in, we may save even more money than we're talking -- we have talked about. i wonder whether you would be willing to work with me and senator hagan, senator warner and other members of the committee to see whether we might be able to write a piece of legislation that could give the american people confidence

that when we say we're going to save the money, we mean we're going to save the money. >> i would be delighted to do that. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator bennet. senator roberts. >> seems to me that i want to ask richard foster to join that group, save a lot of talking back and forth. madam secretary, thank you for coming. i should inform my colleagues that the secretary and i go back quite a ways from a family standpoint, and also from serving at the same time with the distinguished secrery when she was governor of kansas. i work for her father-in-law when he was in the congress and worked with her husband, gary who is now a very prominent judge when he was a rather rowdy student. >> just say he was younger.

>> when he was younger at kansas state university, home of the ever optimistic and fighting and losing wildcats. and -- >> i wore my purple for you. >> thank you. appreciate that. thank you. we have a mutual friend who has a precondition that we all know about, and rudy verdesco called and indicated he would like to talk with you, talked with me for about an hour. so i transferred him over to your office, so you can -- >> thank you. >> you can visit with him. i understand that dr. bere wick is back, he's not parachuted in, he's going to be recommended by the president or has been recommended by the president to again be the head of cms. is that correct? >> he's been renominated. >> he's been renominated. g good. i hope in the finance committee we can get to the challenges we face. dr. berwickas unfortunately been tagged with the title of

the chief rationer with all of the regulations that are pouring out of your department. i understand a couple of weeks ago that some bes were moved and he is now in charge of oversight of the regulations. they would have to be approved by you, but it was in the secretary's office and now it is under dr. berwick, is that correct? >> the office of -- >> cms. >> yes. yes, sir. >> so that's a recent development. i don't know that gives me pause or what, but at any rate -- >> senator, we did that to maximize, i think, efficiencies. it was going to be an independent office and once we looked at overhead costs of duplicating everything from front office help to legal, staff, it was seen as an expedited way to maximize and leverage our assets. maximizing dr. berwick does give me pause but let's go on to

another subject. as former governor of kansas, i know you're very well aware that we have 83 critical aess hospitals out in our state, most of any state, fully two-thirds of our hospitals and you also know that the ctical access hospitals are not, not part of the five-year exemption from the ipap review, the independent -- >> payment advisory board. >> yes. very independento say the least. i'm not happy with that. i think we are obligated our responsibility as individual members to set the medicare reimbursement rates as best we know them. that is a battle we lost in the health care reform and so we have ipab. but the critical access hospitals of which there are many in wyoming, iowa, everywhere here, are not part of that five-year exempt, from the ipab review. should the ipab recommend reductions that take funds away from these rural community hospitals, i can assure you

congress will act. it is a rather byzantine kind of way to do it. i'm sure the house would do it. if you did it the president would veto it. ash lean abilene is a good example. you know these folks and they know you. would you support such a recommendation to at least include the 83 critical access hospitals? >> well, senator -- >> i don't know why this happened. and x bachus doesn't either, pardon me for interrupting you. even on reconciliation i tried an amendment that would at least make them consistent with other hoitals and that was during the time that, you know, all those in favor, aye, aye, all those in favor no and there was a resounding no and that's the way it went. so what do you think? >> well, i share your belief

that critical access hospitals are incredibly important in states across the country. and i would just say that i'm committed to working with you to take a look at what the gap is and what can be done about it, short-term and i think it is important that those hospitals not be jeopardizeor the care they deliver be cut off from citizens around the country, including in kansas. >> most of us were very pleased to hear about the president issuing an executive order and applying the principles that each agency is directed, using best available techniques to quantify tests and costs as accurate as possible. but as we later found out, each agency, as they put up the yardstick to figure out the cost benefit ratio or situation with any regulation, there is another -- there is more language and it says, and this is the part that i have the most concern.

also to be considered are values that are difficult or impossible to quantify clueing equity, human dignity, fairness and distributive impacts. are you anticipating you'll able to determine which regulations including the ones recently released from the health care regulations that hhs would fall under this exemption? are you exempt, are you not exempt, are there regulations you're taking a look at? where are we here? >> well, we certainly don't consider hhs exempt from the directive by the president and we have already launched a process to examine the whole host of regulations with parameters that he outlined. so, no, we are definitely not exempt from that regulatory review. >> thank you, senator. >> i have a list that i would like to share with her, not now, but, hey, i will send you a list and i look forward to working with you. thank you. >> thank you, sir. >> senator. senator reed.

>> thank you, madam secretary. thank you, mr. chairman. recalling some of the discussions in the health care debate, one of the issues around the elimation of pre-existing conditions was t need to have essentially mandatory coverage. i think that was an issue that was pushed very aggressively by the insurance industry. >> that's correct. >> and in fact their view basically was that if we provide this benefit, which is -- could be the most popular, frankly, the popular -- most popular aspect of the health care reform, if you have the resources, you can buy insurance regardless of your health care condition. it was, again, just a little -- to put it in context, it was as much the insistence of the insurance industry than it is any sort of policymaker here in

washington that mandatory coverage has to be part of it now. >> i think, senator, it was brought to the table by the insurance industry, by the association of health insurance plans and others to guard against anned aversionly selected market place if only the sick are in an insurance pool, it is immediately unaffordable. >> so, you know, looking at sort of -- turning it aroundand the logic tis is that this provision, which people say is -- we really like that, i don't know if you've seen the polling data, i assume it is in the 80s, 90%. you've got to keep this. it would require that this universal approach to coverage thugh private markets has to be maintained also, is that your view? >> to have a viable private market, you have to have a pool of sharing the risk, yes, sir. >> but, i mean, again, there has been lots of discussion about what is popular, we'll keep what's popular, we'll eliminate

what's unpopular and that popularity is in the eye of the beholder, but in order to have a comprehensive system, where everyone can receive covere, can buy it through the private markets with assistance if nessary, you have to have essentially the framework you've set up that the interchanges and the requirements to participate fully. >> it is part of a market strategy that keeps a market solvent. >> one of the issues that senator enzi brought up which is very important the issue of child only plans and there is some states where there is actual departure of companies with these policies or threatened departures. i'm wondering if there is anything the states can do. we passed significant reform, but you are a former insurance commissioner. and up until the passage of this act, most of the action of insurance health care and otherwise at the state level, the other aspect of this

question would be what about the 40 states where some, i know, don't have the child only policies but have done things to ensure thachildren are protected? >> well, senator, you're absolutely right. again, the affordable care act doesn't change the fact that states have the leadership position in this framework, so whether it is setting up the insurance exchanges or the high risk pool or regulating their marketpla marketplace, it is a state-based strategy and we're working closely with those state regulators. and many states, since the passage of the affordable care act, and many of them before had taken action to say that it will -- if you want to sell insurance in our state, you must offer policies across the board. and a number of states have actually passed that legislation since the affordable care act and the companies threatening to leave the marketplace, feeling that that is a very discriminatory position r insurance companies to take. so that is, indeed, being

contemplated. and as i said earlier to senator enzi, there also are a number of companies who immediately said that they would likely not stay in the market who have reconsidered that position and are indeed very much in the maet. >> madam secretary, again, thank you. i think you've been given one of the most challenging assignments in washington. and you have been working tirelessly to get it done and i appreciate very much what you and your colleagues are doing. and i anticipate that the challenges will continue to appear along the road. but thank you so much. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator reed. senator burris. >> welcome, madam secretary. when senator enzi asked you a question about cms' projections, specifically they were that this would bend the cost curve up

$251 billion and the national health spending wld increase $311 billion. i heard you say, i think, that you disagreed with the analysis that came out of cms. >> again, richard foster, yes, is an independent actuary. >> what is the administration's position on fixing the sgr? >> the president has said since elected he wld like to see a permanent fix of the sgr. >> you used to make your case to senator enzi, cbo. now, cbo says in their estimates they failed to take into account a $250 billion that would be necessary to fix sg if the president's commitment is to fix sgr, then, in fact, that eats up all the savings you've talked about. is that correct? all the savings that come from health care reform will be eaten up by the addition of a fixed sgr, just by your numbers. >> it would cost -- yes, i don't

know what the cost is, but, yes. >> the health care bill create cretes s a new tax on medical devices. would u be supportive of repealing that tax? >> no, sir. >> well, let me ask you, does that not fly in the face of what the president said tuesday night to congress and to the country, where he talked about winning the future, and outinnovating the rest of the world. does that not make us uncompetitive and force innovation out of the country by taxing innovation? >> sir, i think there are tax on a lot of innovative products that actually don't deter the innovation from moving forward. i don't necessarily think that you have to remove all tax payments. as you know, the medical device equipment initially the congress looked at a significantly higher tax and in the course of discussion, and input they

decided to significantly lower that tax and not to -- to not impede progress. >> this is a new tax, on medical devices, that are being used by patients, which is one of the contributing reasons that the actuary says health care costs is going to go up because we have begun to increase the cost, not just of the delivery, if we fix sgr, but the actual cost of the products that are in the health care system. so let me ask you, nih is just talked about a new program where nih is going to get involved in some degree of drug development. isn't that something you're supportive of? >> well, senator, i have been involved in accelerating drug development. >> they have been involved in research, of promising compounds anddirections. >> that's correct. >> but i sense a distinct difference bween that and drug

development which is something that the private sector or academia has been engaged in almost 100%. >> well, senator, i know that you are -- come from a ate, as does senator hagan, who has a lot of knowledge and expertise in drug development. i think what dr. colins has identified is that there are still way too many promising ideas that die somewhere on the vine between the microscope and the marketplace and is trying to mobile i mobilize teams, activities, any incentives that can make sure we can actually get the patients those breakthrough drug developments. and too many of them never make it to the marke >> clearly i think that will have a cost involved in it. but it will also have a cost on the private sector's inability to chase those promising things if wchoose to do it as government. madam secretary, i think we can all agree that there are many things that if we sat down

today, we could tick off in this bill that we could all support. we could eliminate pre-existing conditions. we could make sure that every state had a risk pool. we could agree that children should stay on their parents health care plan until age 26. now, i lived it. i'm a federal employee. i'm a participant on the largest employer in the country. my kids were kicked off my insurance at 2 i guess i would ask you, for those members that were here until this plan was passed that are critical of the private sector having their insurance that limited children's inclusion to 22 or 23 or 24, but not 26, are they hypocritical in questioning that when they had the opportunity to change the opm guidelines and change the largest employer in the country to age 26 before thisassive health care reform plan was passed? well, senator, i d't think it was hypocritical.

i think it is an unfortunate oversight and we found that the contracts precluded us from changing as rapidly as some of the private market planscod change, but that change will be made a federal employe across the country including members of congress can look forward to keeping their children on their plan. >> in conclusion, mr. chairman, we have over a thousand employers who have applied for waver. 700 plus have been approved. 50 plus have been denied. in addition to that, cms estimates that the grandfather -- in the grandfather of regulation, it is estimated -- your own estimates, 80% of small business could lse their grandfather status. i'm not sure what happened, if you like it, you get to keep it, but you said, and i quote, americans will have more control over their health care. my conclusion, after reading the plan numerous times, what we

have done is the federal government has more control over health care, not the american people. i thank the chair. >> i thank the senator. senator isakson is gone. senator sanders. >> thank you, mr. chairman. madam secretary, thank you for being here. thank you for excellent work you've been doing on the very difficult circumstances. just two lines of thout that i want to pursue. in the health care reform bill, some of us, including senator harkin and many others on this committee work to expand community health centers. we believe one of the great crises in this country and one of the reasons that 45,000 americans die every single year is they don't have access to health care and in fact some of those people have health insurance. so we saw a crisis in primary healthare as a result of this legislation we doubled the numb of community health ceers, opening up an opportunity for 20 million more americans to get good quality health care, dental care, mental health counseling and low cost

prescription drugs. can you give us maybe an update as to how progress is coming along in terms of community health center programs? >> certainly, senator. again, i applaud your leadership on this issue. it is an incredibly important framework for health care improvements across the country. and i try to visit health centers every trip i make and they are impressive neighborhood community organizations, delivering high quality, lower cost care to millions of americans. we are working very quickly to implement the strategy that is laid out over the next five years. the first step was to put money in the pipeline for important improvements and additional services, additional dental care, mental health care. we have been putting out the new access point grant proposals that will be released this year and over the next several years.

and also an important feature of the community planning proposals are going out the door in 2011. so those communities which haven't quite gotten the wherewithal to acally make the full blo proposal will have an opportunity to bring together providers and community groups. but certainly that footprint of community health centers expanding across the country and new sites. it will be both new access sites and mobile sites connected to existing health centers, schools, vans or other -- >> i should tell you, madam secretary, vermont would make a real success. if you're really nice to us in the next couple of years and grant a few more requests, every part of the state of vermont, every county, every area in the state of vermont will enable its people to have access to community health centers, which think is a real step forward. would you be in agreement with the study coming out of george washington university which says at the investment that we made in fact is going to save

substantially more money than we spent because we're going to keep people out of emergcy rooms, we're going let them get to a doctor when they should, not get very sick and end up in a hospital at great cost. >> i haven't seen the study. but i certainly have seen that practice in place. and in fact, some of the most creative and i think beneficial work going on around the country is health care -- heah community health centers working in collaboration wh community hospitals. and appropriately sort of reassigning folks to care that -- >> other than utilizing an emergency -- >> you bet. you bet. >> let me switch gear and pick up on a point that senator mccain a moment ago and i'm sorry he's not here. as you may know, the state of vermont is giving serious thought to moving forward to a medicare for all singer payer program. our approach and our request for waver may be different than arizona's. we do not want to throw people off of health insurance, we want

to make sure every person in our ste is covered. we believe that that approach, and it was a study that just came out by dr. shout, who you may know as aeconomist at harvard, developed the health care prom in taiwan, we believe we can save many, many hundreds of millions of dollars through medicare for all single payer program. d i know that we have to work on that waver legislatively. that's not something you can give us on your own. but would u be prepared to work with us as we walk down that road saying that in a federalist nation, we have 50 different states, that maybe the nation can learn from what vermont or other states are doing with increased flexibility? >> well, senator, i was appreciative of the meeting that you attended with your newly elected governor. and applaud the work that vermont has done. states across the country often have been well ahead of the federal government in terms of creative health strategies to expand coverage to citizens and

we very much encourage the kind of flexibility, the state-based approaches which this bill is built around and i look forward to working with you. >>ur goal there is to maintain the high standards of the national legislation, but to give states flexibility to show how in their particular areas they may be able to do it better, in a more cost effective way. we would appreciate working with you. with that, mr. chairman, thank you. >> thank you, senator. senator hagan. >> thank you, mr. chairman and madam secretary i want to thank you for all the hard work you've put in to date. i want to talk for a minute about having the young adults on the parents' policies until they're aged 26. the state of north carolina

actually has done that for years for state employees. if the students were still in school. and i know that when i switched and became a federal employee, that i had to find -- my children had to find health insurance. and one son and one daughter and it was incredibly more expensive for the young woman to buy health insurance than it was for the man. so i'm very pleased that when you think of two young people going out into the workforce, getting the same pay, the young woman was drastically affected in a different way month to month because of her higher increase in just purchasing alth insurance. i'm pleased that that has been changed. in your testimony, you mentioned that the new benefit impacting hundreds of thousands of families from across the country allowing these young children to remain on their parents' insurance until age 26. and we do have about 37,000 of them that continue to be insured under their rents' health plans, and i know in the next

panel we'll be hearing about the impact of this new benefit, but i understand that it is so popular that congress extended that benefit to military families last year. and with that, i'm wondering if you could elaborate on the impact of this benefit and how many adult children do younow that might be participating across the country and could you provide some thoughts on what would happen if this benefit happened to be repealed? >> well, senator, think the situation you described in north rolina was in place, again, in a number of states, but often was tied to school, full time school. so if kids aged out of their policy at 22 and were not in school, they, again, lost their coverage. this is impacting lots of families, lots of different ages, and a very beneficial way. and, again, i think it is a great illustration of putting back together a larger pool of folks and bringing them back into the marketplace because the

number of young americans was the second highest category of uninsured americans, the highest was those 55 to 64 often who were really priced out of the market, but young americans were the second highest category of uninsured in this country. so this family strategy, i think, goes a long way. i can't give you exact numbers today. we would be happy to try and collecthose for you. but i think clearly this is impacting millions of young adults around the country and a very positive way. and allows those young adults to think about being an entrepreneur, start their own business, or strategies that, again, were impeding their ability to really launch into a professional career if it did not come attached with health insurance. like you, senator, i have two 20 somethings who lost their coverage once they got out of school.

and we were lucky because both my boys were healthy, but they had friends who were not so lucky and not so healthy who had a terrible time finding and purchasing health insurance. >> and on a whole, young adults areypically very healthy individualso it lps from an actuarial standpoint to have more of those on policies. but also in your testimony, you mentned there-existing condition insurance plans. and the inclusi health is running that -- the north carolina plan and has currently right now over 800 participants to date which i understand is one of the highest in the country. however, i know one of their challenges has been raising the awareness and getting those who are uninsured enrolled. and my question is, could you talk about some of the challenges that states are having in getting people enrolled and some of the other efforts that they are making to raise awareness among the uninsured population. andoes hhs offer guidance to

states on ways to increase this awareness? >> great question, senator. i think one of the challenges is -- as you say, that a lot of people weren't aware that these even existed. so we are certainly trying to help amplify that message that in every state, in the country, there is now a new option for adults who still are locked out of the market with pre-existing health conditions and we'll continue to do that. we have also done a loot in conjunction with states with outreach to disease groups, to faith-based communities, to community leaders, to, again, make them aware that these are new and many states, the benefits just became available late this fall, so we're talking about the early couple of startup months. but we don't miss an opportunity to remind people that this is one of the benefits of the no

affordable care act that did not exist before. and actually because the rates are pegged to market rates can be a much more affordable option for those who have been uninsured for the last six months. >> i will say north carolina, we had -- we put that in place earlier, though it is still a pretty exnsive policy. >> right, right. >> thank you, madam secretary. >> yes. >> thank you, senator. senator murray. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, for having this hearing. madam secretary, thank you for the tremendous job that you and the folks at hhs are doing of implementing this law and helping people get access as we had envisioned. i know we have another panel. so i'll ask one question and go back to your testimony. you talked about the new resources that the affordable health care act is now providing to states to help prevent unreasonable premium increases. and you mentioned that grants have already started going out to our states to help strengthen their ability to review and reject unreasonable rate hikes.

can you talk a little bit about how this process will -- how this will make the process of premium increases more transparent for all of health care consumers? >> certainly, senator. this is another area where the bill that you all helped to put in place contemplates that states are the leaders in the health insurance market and states are the regulators of their own health insurance market. but also recognizes that often those resources are not adequate to do a robust job of rate review, particularly tough budget times, a lot of states have cut back. and so there are additional resources available, and taken advantage of b virtually every state in the country, to increase and enhance the oversight provided by those state regulators. what we are doing right now with

health care.gov is publicizing rates for the first time. consumers can go on a website and get an overview of what rates are being charged by what plans in their particular jurisdiction. but two other very important pieces of information, how many people are denied at that rate, what percentage are not offered a policy at tt rate, and how many times the rate deviates from that. so that, again, is available and updated on a regular basis. and insurance commissioners are also committed to now, on websites, and their plans, making the rate revie process fa more transparent, askg for underlying actuarial information from companies, holding hearings, having available to the public what has often been a very opaque, very misunderstood system, much more transparency, much more openness, much more

oversight, and the combination of consumers being able to pick and choose finally, line up plans side by side and choose what is best for them and much more rigorous review has already yielded results where excessive rates have been turned down and new rates have been submitted that are far less impactful on the consumers with those policies. >> well, i applaud you in that because we always hear about competition is what drives the cost down. if you don't know, it is pretty hard to know how you can impact that. but i think this open transparent way that people can now view insurance policies is what we envisioned helping to bring those costs down. so i really appreciate your work on that. >> one could argue you could get more information on the toaster yobought than the health insurance plan for yourselves and your families and we're trying to work very closely with our prtners at the state level and give a very transparent, very open system and just lining the prices up side by side really does begin to change

strategies of companies. they don't want to be the top price in the marketplace. so that in and of itself has been very helpful. >> great. ank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. madam secretary, thank you very much for your aappearanppearanc and answering questions in great order. as i said, we leave the record open for ten days. some senators may want to submit questions in writing. i want to personally also ank you for your great leadership in all areas of health care and human services. but especially in the area of implementation of the affordable health care act. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i look forward to working with you and the committee. >> thank you, madam secretary. next we'll call our next panel.

the financial crisis a greek commission releases its final report. journal,'s washington a discussion about federal spending and the economy with matthew mitchell and isabel sawhill. we will talk to new york university professor paul white about the president's state of

the union speech. washington journal begins live at 7:00 a.m. eastern time on c- span. >> sunday on road to the white house, tim pawlenty. the presidential candidate spoke at a public takes event in bedford, new hampshire, part of a two-day visit to the state. new hampshire will host their first primary. as the gop field takes shape, tin in to the road to the white house. >> i need to save for the record, i philosophically have always been opposed to a taxpayer dollars being used for political advocacy of any kind. >> oklahoma republican tom cole offered a bill to reduce the deficit. all of the entire debate and the final vote on line with c-span's

congressional chronicle with time lines and transcripts of every house and senate session. congressional chronicle at c- span.org/congress. at george washington university today, homeland security secretary janet napolitano at spoke about her agency's operation. she also announced the end of the current color-coded terror alert system. this is one hour. [applause] >> good afternoon. distinguished members of the washington community, students, faculty, and staff of george washington university, it is a pleasure to welcome you to the homeland security policy institute forum. i would like to acknowledge two

distinguished guests. we have judge william sessions and judge william webster. welcome this afternoon. here at george washington -- [applause] thank you. here at george washington we seek to engage in the world and provide our students an opportunity to witness the power of knowledge in action. one way to do so s by convening discussions on the urgent issues of our time. it depends in many ways on our partnerships with the institutions and agencies that's around us. we are very glad to have as one of those partners the united states department of homeland security which has supported a range of policy research and educational efforts across our university. george washington's haleh security policy institute leads much of our work in this critical area. we also offer training programs

for first responders and graduate programs in the emergency management and security policy. i am pleased that our cyber-core students had joined us this afternoon. it is a particular honor to welcome secretary janet napolitano back to our campus for today but the event. we are delighted she has chosen this venue to deliver the first of a series of annual addresses of the state of homeland security and to launch a series of discussions at colleges and universities that will continue throughout the year. following her remarks, secretary napolitano has agreed to participate in a question and answer session that will be monitored by the director of only security. as the third director of all lan security, janet napolitano the state efforts to secure the

united states from the threats we face from human and natural sources. she has forced new partnerships with international allies and expanded information sharing with federal, state, and local law enforcement building a collaborative effort to detect and exposed rats early on. she was in her second term as governor of arizona where she was recognized as a leader on border security as well as immigration. she was the first woman to serve as attorney general in arizona and served as u.s. attorney for the district of arizona. please join me in welcoming the secretary for homeland security, if janet napolitano. [applause] >> thank you.

thank you very much. thank you president knack for that kind of production and for the opportunity to be here at george washington university. good afternoon, and thank you president knapp for that kind introduction, and for the invitation to be here at george washington university. i will be speaking at several colleges and universities throughout the year about different aspects of homeland security. i am happy to kick things off here, though, with an address on the overall state of our homeland security. so, thank you to the homeland security policy institute. i want to especially acknowledge the institute's founding director, frank cilluffo, who is a good friend of dhs. frank is one of those who were "present at the creation" of our homeland security effort after the 9/11 attacks. under his leadership, the homeland security policy institute has been at the vanguard of treating homeland security as its own discipline

that demands serious study. because of this institute, and other efforts emerging at colleges and universities across the country, homeland security is taking its place among longer-standing fields -- like international affairs and criminal justice -- as an area where major global challenges are being studied and addressed. for the students and young professionals here with us today, or watching online, you are the next wave of homeland security thinkers, professionals, and managers. you can, and undoubtedly will, have a significant influence on this emerging field. i also want to take a moment to

note that the very existence of the department of homeland security is due, in large part, to the efforts of senator joe lieberman. senator lieberman could not be here this afternoon, but all of us know about, and have tremendous appreciation for, his tireless, nonpartisan efforts to make our country more secure. i look forward to working with them over the next two years as we continue to expand and strengthen the field of homeland security. two days ago, president obama delivered to congress and the american people his annual address on the state of our union, a tradition that goes as far back as 1790 with the namesake of this institution. today, i am beginning a new tradition -- an annual

assessment of the state of our homeland security. i want to begin by telling two stories that illustrate the breadth and the complexity of our challenge, but also the humanity of it as well. just a few weeks ago, i had the honor of spending new years in kabul, afghanistan, with many of the men and women serving in our armed forces and our civilian mission there. i met with soldiers at the torkham forward operating base and was briefed on operations at torkham gate, a heavily- trafficked border crossing between afghanistan and pakistan. it is near jallalabad, not far from the khyber pass, and it is where afghan and u.s. officials, including border security and customs officials from the department of homeland security, work side by side to provide security, while allowing legal commerce and travel to get through. the second experience was very different, and took place a little more than a year ago at

ellis island. i was leading a naturalization ceremony -- another great honor of this job. i read the oath of allegiance to new americans from 48 different countries, including a 95-year-old woman from the dominican republic. collectively, in that room, were dozens of individuals with very different backgrounds who all wanted the same thing -- to accept the rights and the responsibilities of american citizenship. these two experiences remind us that the hard work of securing the u.s. homeland stretches from the mountains of afghanistan and pakistan, and other far-off places, all the way back to the main streets of our smallest home towns. they remind of us of why that hard work must be done, who we are doing it for, and how we must conduct ourselves while carrying it out.

and they remind us that securing the homeland means upholding the very values on which this country was founded, and honoring the millions who passed through ellis island and the ones still coming today seeking the promise and blessings of america. so, what, then, is the state of homeland security today? i can report that our young department has matured, building on the good work of my two predecessors, tom ridge and michael chertoff. i can also report that our homeland is more secure than it was ten years ago, and, indeed, more secure than it was two years ago. if these were ordinary times, that might suffice. but these are not ordinary times. the kinds of threats we now face demonstrate that our homeland security is a shared

responsibility. only a "whole of nation approach" will bring us to the level of security and resilience we require. so over the last two years, our approach has acknowledged that the department of homeland security -- indeed, the whole federal government and the military -- cannot, itself, deliver security. real security requires the engagement of our entire society, with government, law enforcement, the private sector, and the public all playing their respective roles. from day one, the obama administration has operated on the premise that security is a shared responsibility, that no matter who you are, from students and professors to first responders to everyday citizens, we all play a part. because of the trust we have in americans to share in our collective security, today i

announce the end of the old system of color-coded alerts. in its place we will implement a new system that is built on a clear and simple premise --when a threat develops that could impact you, the public, we will tell you. we will provide whatever information we can so you know how to protect yourselves, your families, and your communities. under the new, two-tiered system, dhs will coordinate with other federal entities to issue formal, detailed alerts regarding information about a specific or credible terrorist threat. these alerts will include a clear statement that there is an "imminent threat" or "elevated threat." the alerts also will provide a concise summary of the potential threat, information

about actions being taken to ensure public safety, and recommended steps that individuals and communities can take. the new system reflects the reality that we must always be on alert and be ready. when we have information about a specific, credible threat, we will issue a formal alert providing as much information as we can. depending on the nature of the threat, the alert may be limited to a particular audience, like law enforcement, or a segment of the private sector, like shopping malls or hotels. or, the alert may be issued more broadly to the american people, distributed through a statement from dhs by the news media and social media channels. the alerts will be specific to the threat. they may recommend certain

actions, or suggest looking for specific suspicious behavior. and they will have a specified end date. you can clap on that one. it is all right. [applause] today, we are beginning a 90- day implementation period in which federal, state and local government, law enforcement entities, private and non- profit sector partners, airports, and other transport hubs will officially transition to the new system, which flows from evolving practice in the last few years.

this means that the days are numbered for the automated recordings at airports, and announcements about a color code level that were, too often, accompanied by little practical information. as i said, this new national terrorism advisory system is built on the common-sense belief that we are all in this together, and that we all have a role to play. this system was developed in that same collaborative spirit. it was largely the work of a bipartisan task force that included law enforcement, former mayors and governors, and members of the previous administration. some of them are here today, and i thank them, and ask for a round of applause for their great work that led to this new tool in our homeland security arsenal. [applause] continuing to evolve our approach to defending the homeland remains critical because the threats we face today are real, they are persistent, and they are evolving rapidly. we know that al qaeda and other

groups sharing their terrorist ideology continue to target us. increasingly, this is done through al qaeda affiliates in places like yemen and the arabian peninsula. we are also dealing with the threat from terrorists who use the internet and social media like facebook and youtube to reach vulnerable individuals and inspire new recruits. historically, our domestic counterterrorism efforts were based on the belief that we faced the greatest risk from attacks planned, and carried out, by individuals coming from abroad, but the arrests of an increasing number of u.s. persons on terror-related charges in the last two years mean that we must move beyond this paradigm. these include najibullah zazi, a legal permanent resident arrested in 2009 for plotting to attack the new york city

subway system, faisal shahzad, a naturalized u.s. citizen, who attempted to explode a car bomb in times square last year, as well as more recent arrests in portland, oregon, dallas, texas, and here in the washington area. today, we operate under the premise that individuals prepared to carry out terrorist acts might already be in the country, and could carry out further acts of terrorist violence with little or no warning. we must all work to gain a better understanding of the behaviors, tactics, and other indicators that could point to terrorist activity. at the same time, we face the possibility of sophisticated attacks ranging from chemical, biological, and nuclear, to attacks in cyberspace.

indeed, in just the last year, we have seen the full spectrum of cyber threats, from denial- of-service attacks and spamming to attacks with spyware. finally, we know that our borders and ports of entry represent potential avenues, not just for terrorist travel, but also for threats in the form of smuggling, human trafficking, and transnational crime. so as i said earlier, our approach to confronting these threats has been to build and strengthen partnerships, and to build a shared sense of responsibility for our security by working with state, local and, tribal law enforcement, our international allies, partners in the private sector, and of course, the american people. despite our title, the department of homeland security

does not possess sole responsibility for securing the homeland within the federal government. our nation's armed forces may be thousands of miles from our shores, living in forwarding operating bases far from loved ones or the comforts of home, but they are every bit on the frontlines of our homeland security. they have helped to significantly degrade al qaeda's capabilities to mount major attacks right here in the united states and elsewhere throughout the world. the director of national intelligence, the cia, and the entire intelligence community, of which dhs is a member, is producing more and better streams of intelligence than at any time in the past. the national counterterrorism center has made critical improvements to our federal watchlisting systems and to the coordination of our counterterrorism efforts. and of course, the federal homeland security enterprise includes our strong partners at the department of justice and

the fbi, whose work has led to the arrest of more than two- dozen americans on terrorism- related charges since 2009. at the department of homeland security over the last two years, we have seen some extraordinary progress and hard work pay off. but that could not have happened without the dedicated, professional men and women of this great department, like the nearly 50,000 transportation security officers who work tirelessly, and often thanklessly, to deter and prevent terrorist attacks on passenger planes, the more than 20,000 border patrol agents who put their lives on the line to protect our borders, the more than 10,000 officers and investigators who enforce our immigration laws, and bring to

justice those who seek to traffic drugs, arms and people, the more than 40,000 men and women who serve in the united states coast guard protecting our maritime borders, or the thousands of scientists and engineers working on the next generation of security technology, the security guards at government buildings, the trainers of our law enforcement professionals, or the intelligence analysts working around the clock to stay ahead of emerging threats. but the homeland security enterprise extends far beyond dhs and the federal government. as i said, it requires not just a "whole of government," but a "whole of nation" approach. in some respects, local law enforcement, community groups, citizens, and the private sector play as much of a role in homeland security as the federal government. that is why i like to say that "homeland security starts with hometown security." for example, we know that communities can play a vital security role when they forge

strong partnerships with local law enforcement. in fact, this is something of an old story in our nation's history. americans have long helped to secure their hometowns, as well as their homeland, from our tradition of civil defense, to more recent efforts like neighborhood watches and community-oriented policing initiatives. a study just last year study found that, between 1999 and 2009, more than 80% of foiled terrorist plots in the united states were thwarted because of observations from law enforcement or the general public. at dhs, we also work closely with a diverse array of religious, ethnic, and community organizations and leaders. members of these communities have, in fact, been critical in thwarting violence and, like

all americans, they play very positive roles in enriching our national life. and so, every day at dhs, we are doing everything we can to get more information, more tools, and more resources out of washington, dc, and into the hands of the men and women on the front lines. that is why we launched the national "if you see something, say something" campaign last year to raise awareness of potential terrorist tactics, and emphasize the importance of reporting suspicious activity to law enforcement. you have no doubt heard this campaign if you've ridden on metro or amtrak. and we have continued to expand this effort across the country in partnership with professional and collegiate sports, shopping centers -- like the mall of america -- and retailers -- like wal-mart. we also see this effort as a

partnership between citizens and local police. therefore, we have worked closely with the department of justice to expand the nationwide suspicious activity reporting, or sar, initiative. currently active in over two dozen states and cities, and soon to be utilized by fusion centers, transit police, and other groups across the country, the sar initiative creates a standard process for law enforcement to identify and report suspicious activity so it can be shared nationally and analyzed for broader trends. i want to pause here to make an important point. both the "if you see something, say something" and sar initiatives have been designed, and tested, with civil liberties and privacy in mind.

both are aimed at identifying suspicious behaviors and increasing our shared ability to protect the country. today, we are also premiering several additional resources to better connect citizens and communities with the kinds of information and tools that dhs offers. i urge you to visit our new "hometown security" resource page on dhs.gov and to stay connected via the department's new facebook page as well. to give you a better sense of how our partnership approach looks, and -- to borrow a sports metaphor -- how we are fielding a bigger, better-trained team,

i would like to discuss four areas of focus for us in the coming year. our most fundamental responsibility remains preventing terrorist attacks on the homeland. and to support this critical mission we have worked very hard to strengthen and build our domestic information- sharing architecture by increasing the capacity of state and major-area fusion centers to serve as centers of analytic excellence. we have made historic strides in aviation security -- accelerating the deployment of new security equipment at our domestic airports, and launching an international initiative that, in october of last year, produced a first-of-its-kind global agreement by 190 nations to increase aviation security standards worldwide.

during the coming year, we will continue, and hopefully complete, negotiations with the european union on strengthening information sharing in the aviation environment, and extend such information sharing to other continents as well. we will build on these efforts by leading an international effort to strengthen the security of the global supply chain, which brings goods and commodities to our shores, and across our borders. this includes an initiative called project global shield that we have launched with the world customs organization, or wco, and 60 other countries to prevent the theft or diversion of precursor chemicals that can be used by terrorists to make improvised explosive devices. it also includes a new initiative with the international civil aviation organization, the wco, and other international partners,

to identify and protect the most critical elements of our supply chain from attack or disruption, including key transportation hubs. together with other federal departments and agencies, we are seeking to bolster the resiliency of the global supply chain so that if a terrorist attack or natural disaster does occur, the supply chain can recover quickly, and any disruption can be minimized. as tom ridge liked to say when he was secretary, the physical borders of the united states should be the last line of defense, not the first. our goal, quite simply, is to ensure the safety of all travelers and cargo as they travel across the globe. a second major set of initiatives involves border security and immigration enforcement. on these two fronts, this department has,

over the last two years, been both relentless and effective. 2010 was a historic year when it comes to securing and managing our borders and enforcing our immigration laws. there are now more resources on the southwest border in terms of personnel, technology, and infrastructure than ever before in american history. and we continue to see progress on every metric. the numbers that are supposed to go up have gone up, and the numbers that are supposed to go down have gone down. the number of illegal crossings -- the best indicator of illegal traffic -- is now at less than half its all-time high. at the same time, in the past two years, we have seized more contraband across the board -- illegal bulk cash, weapons, and drugs -- than we've seen in recent years. but we will not stop there. our priority continues to be the removal of criminal aliens

who pose a danger to public safety and national security. because of the dedicated work of our ice personnel, in the past fiscal year more illegal aliens with criminal records were deported from the u.s. than ever before, a 70% increase from two years ago. an agreement known as secure communities, which uses biometrics to identify and remove criminal aliens in state prisons and local jails, has expanded from 14 jurisdictions in 2008 to more than 1000 by the end of this month. it will be in every jail and prison by 2013. i recognize, too, that illegal immigration is driven in large part by the demand for illegal labor. as our economy grows, that

demand may grow as well. that is why we're working to make e-verify all that it can be to help businesses ensure a legal workforce. we must instill a culture of compliance among employers and we will continue to conduct audits to ensure all businesses are following the law. we are also focused on improving and strengthening the legal immigration system, including formalizing a policy that expedites citizenship for non-citizens serving our country in the military overseas and we continue to grant citizenship to record numbers of military service members. dhs will also develop an automated vetting capability for immigration benefit processing that will enable us to immediately address national security risks. we will roll out the e-verify

"self check," which will enable prospective workers to check their employment authorization status. and, we will begin transitioning from a paper-based system to a new customer- focused, centralized, electronic case management system for immigration benefits. while immigration and border enforcement have been longstanding challenges to our security, we also face new and emerging ones. over the past two years, we have increased our capacity to fight cyber crimes and cyber terrorism, opening a new 24/7 watch and warning center, and testing our country's first national-level cyber incident response plan, while increasing our stable of cyber experts by some 500%. we entered into a historic agreement with the department of defense and national security agency to detail the

division of labor among our organizations. we have also worked closely with the private sector to protect our nation's critical infrastructure, including new funding for port security and communication systems, as well as new standards for building and securing federal facilities. this year, we will complete the deployment of the einstein 2 threat detection system across the federal space, and we will continue to develop, and begin deployment, of einstein 3, which will provide dhs with the ability to automatically detect and disrupt malicious cyber activity. and we will work through our science and technology directorate, our dozen academic "centers of excellence," and our many partners in the

federal government, on technological advances. for example, to develop the secure and efficient airport checkpoints of tomorrow; design the materials that will make our infrastructure more resilient to an attack or natural disaster; and devise the screening and detection capabilities that will keep us ahead of threats from nuclear and radiological materials. through the hard work of fema, our national protection and programs directorate, and others across dhs, working with our many federal, state, local, and private sector partners, we have increased our preparedness for disasters of all kinds, and strengthened the resilience of our most vulnerable critical infrastructure. as the president announced in

his state of the union, the so- called "d block" of communications spectrum will be set aside for public safety, so we will work with first responders on the standards and requirements for interoperability of vital communications equipment during times of crisis. we will continue to improve and expand the disaster exercises so critical to disaster response. this year, fema will lead the largest exercise ever of its kind, testing our ability to respond to a major earthquake along the new madrid fault line that runs through the midsection of the country. to augment our global supply chain security effort, we will work with the private sector and international partners to expand and integrate "trusted traveler" and "trusted shipper" programs that facilitate legitimate travel and trade while enhancing security. we will launch the chemical

facility anti-terrorism standards personnel surety program, requiring high-risk chemical facilities to vet individuals with access against the terrorist screening database. and we will expand the transportation worker identification credential, or twic, program to ensure that only authorized maritime workers can access secure areas of regulated vessels. let me say something directly to the students in the room, because part of why i wanted to give this speech -- this first annual state of homeland security speech -- here at george washington was because i want to make a special appeal to you. i know you are not old enough to remember, but i bet you've seen images of the iconic posters of uncle sam, with his index finger pointed out, with the caption that read, "i want you." those recruitment posters encouraged a generation of americans to enlist in the u.s. army. now, i have always had deep

respect for the military. as governor of arizona i was commander-in-chief of the arizona national guard. the coast guard is in the department of homeland security, and i have had the honor not only of visiting troops in places like afghanistan, europe, and the persian gulf, but also talking to wounded warriors at walter reed hospital. my department today employs over 48,000 veterans, and through partnerships with the department of defense, and organizations like the american legion, we'll be over 50,000 by the end of next year. so, it is with the greatest respect that i say it is time for a new recruitment poster. today, dhs wants you. we want a new generation of americans to join the fight

against the new generation of threats to our homeland. dhs offers exciting careers in areas spanning law enforcement, intelligence, and counterterrorism, like intelligence analysts, policy experts, and international affairs specialists who help negotiate global agreements, secret service agents and investigators who are protecting our leaders, thwarting terror plots, fighting transnational crime, and breaking up human trafficking rings. we offer many opportunities for internships, and our various fellowship and scholarship programs attract top students from top academic programs across the country. all of these positions, all of them, come with the opportunity not only to do great work in this exciting field, but to serve your nation as well. i am often asked what i lose sleep about as homeland security secretary.

common sense would say that in an open society with 8,000 miles of land borders, and 95,000 miles of coastline, a terrorist could get through, or a homegrown one could succeed. a novel weapon could be deployed. a community could be temporarily overwhelmed. i am concerned about all of those things. but i want americans to know what i do not lose sleep over. i do not worry about the core values that have guided our country for more than two centuries -- the same values that the new citizens i naturalize are seeking to uphold --freedom, hard work, shared responsibility.

even if our enemies were to succeed in pulling off an attack on the homeland, they will never succeed in undermining those enduring values. in afghanistan, there is a plaque that hangs in the residence of the american ambassador. on it is a quote from president woodrow wilson that reads, "let us set for ourselves a standard so high that it will be a glory to live up to it and then let us live up to it and add a new laurel to the crown of america." so, let us set a standard that high for homeland security. let us strive for more partnerships, a bigger team, and an even greater willingness from our citizens to share

responsibility for our collective security. and let us then meet that standard, and add a new laurel to the crown of america. thank you. >> not only to kickoff your inaugural state of homeland security, but also to speak to students. it is a privilege and, personally, thank you for those kind words. my role has always been a small one, but it hopefully enables everyone to do the hard work which we are trying to do. you're very kind also to be able to provide time for questions and answers. one of the things i wanted to

touch on is that universities can and should play a role in arming the next generation with the knowledge to help better understand our adversaries, whether al qaeda, cyber threats coming over the horizon, natural disasters, but also how to defeat those adversaries, something that you're seeking. with that, i would like the students to ask the first question and then we will open it up to a broader question and answer. please identify yourself, your name and organization. i have a lot of questions. let me turn it over to one of our students. >> my name is brian hawthorne. i am a graduate student here and an army veteran from iraq. my question is about the upcoming budget cuts and are

ballooning deficit. how are you making the priorities for what you can afford to research and fund and continue to protect and what would you have to delay into future budget cycles that may be critical but unaffordable at this time? >> there are a couple of things. our department was created from 22 different agencies and departments. one of the major things we have done over the last couple of years is to really focus counter-terrorism, securing air, land, and sea borders, immigration enforcement, cyber, and what i call resilience, the .bility for quick response part of being able to budget intelligently is focus. we have set priorities and benchmarks, things we want to get accomplished this next year. last year, for example, we

wanted to finish an international agreement on aviation and security. we were able to do that this year and move it to the global supply chain. as we saw with the cartridge bonds in october, that is another avenue of attack. part of it is focusing. part of it is setting priorities. and then there are some things that might be nice that we will have to delay or phase in in a longer period of time. the president has not announced his budget yet. i cannot pre-stage of those. i can say that there are a few things that we have said in light of all of our responsibilities which need to be moved slower. they are not as urgent. i think both president obama and the congress recognize that our

department faces a unique array of challenges. i think they've your budget through the prism of the perspective as well. >> before i opened it up to the general audience, is there another student with a question, please? please stand up when you get the microphone. >> good afternoon. my name is charisma williams. i am a student here. i am focusing on a degree in homeland security. i have a question that goes more towards the "sees something/say something" program. i had an opportunity to in turn in a program that was more localized. these citizens were active in the sees something/say something approach. had was thatlem we hav

the people in charge did not respond and it created a level of apathy. what is dhs doing to interface with organizations, transit authorities, and things of that sort. to make sure that there is a proper follow-up after citizens do their part? >> you are absolutely right. follow-up is the key. that is why we did not do a blanket announcement for see something/say something for the country. we are rolling out unspecified locales. in the district, amtrak, and for all the locale's we are in, there has been training. there has been connectivity. most local law enforcement has some sort of a tip line or something of that sort. that is something that sees something/say something can marry with. if somebody reports something and there is no appropriate

follow-up, you can lose the sense of public shared responsibility. that is why we are doing it carefully and overtime. we will be doing another see something/say something announcement on monday in dallas. that is a tease for the media. [laughter] that is coming up. here is the architecture i would like to see established. at the individual level, the see something/say something. then you have sar, which is a carefully directed program for law enforcement of suspicious activity reporting, but carefully defined activity that helps us at the national level see what trend, behavior's, tactics or things we ought to be looking for. for example, is there a particular type of ied that is

being deployed? then we can get information about that. when you marry see something/say something with sar and you have acted infusion centers -- and that is an octave -- an architecture we are also building now -- then you have a system that is homeland security-focused and trained in careful ways and designed to maximize our ability to respond, that is really what we are building and how they fit together. >> i might note to our students that one of our challenges is building up the analytical capacity between state and local to be able to identify terrorist threats. >> that is right. >> that is all of you. that is the future. can we have one more question back here. please stand, wexler, in the back. ok.

-- white sweater, in the back. ok. >> thank you. you said that dhs is working to make e verify all it can be. can you describe more in detail what changes it will have on the system? can we expect e-verified to be mandatory in the near future? >> first of all, on e verify, for those of you who are involved in this field, it is for a way -- is a way for employers to check the legal residency of employees or potential employees. when i was the governor of arizona, i think maybe the first governor in the country to require that. we used it and our state contractors used it as well. now the federal government uses it. when i talk about e-verify, i

mean expanding the ease and there are improvements that we are or can make to prevent identity fraud, identity theft on e-verify. even though it has an extraordinarily high accuracy rate, some of the stories you hear about that are from earlier iterations of the system. we are always working to make sure it is as accurate as possible. >> other questions? over here. sorry, right here. then we will go there. >> thank you karen i am a senior -- thank you. i am a senior fellow here. with information sharing, one of the issues is what kind of information we're getting, too much or too little? i am more curious in terms of

how you are dealing with the problem like wikileaks were you have an enormous amount of information gathered by a private first class and our state and tribal and local authorities need information they can lay their hands on. >> the problem with wikileaks is that that was unauthorized information-sharing. >> he had access. >> he had access through the state department dot interface and that has been rectified and he is being court-martialed. that is my understanding. information-sharing, i could speak for hours about information-sharing and i will not. [laughter] here is the deal. information -- what i perceived when i moved here is that there was way too much information that circulated among intel

analysts here and did not give out to the country at large. even when it was kept in the federal family, it was not adequately connected to the operational needs that we have. for example, you may have a piece of intel that we need to get to somebody who is checking boarding passes in madrid. but it was not getting out there. so you have lots of information- sharing in lots of different ways. so we have really focused on that as follows. first of all, we center that within the intel and analytic directorate of the department. what i said was, look, there are lots of people who gather in tell and we gather in tel. but our real value-added to this whole enterprise is making sure that intel is analyzed and turned around and disseminated to meet operational needs and

state and local needs as well. we have been working very hard with the fbi in particular to improve our ability to turn around products and get things out in a timely fashion. that is somewhat new. one of the things i lose sleep over is whether what we send out at the state dental local levels is usable and used. one of the things we will do this year is follow-up and said, all right, we are now sending you this stuff at 1:00 a.m. in the morning or what have you, try to turn it around as quickly as we can. what are you doing with it? how is it actually being utilized so that we correct that issue and deal with that issue? then the other value-added that we bring this to take folks like tsa, like sea bp, the folks that actually have to -- like cvp,

the folks that? we have to do the security at the land ports and what have you, really make sure that their operational needs are being accommodated in the information sharing environment. information-sharing is an art, not a science. someone absolutely necessary information is somebody else's what is that? somewhere in the middle is the right answer. that is how we look at it, the underlying philosophy of what we're doing. >> he has a book on domestic intelligence coming out. >> i want to thank you and i want to thank president obama. we all wondered how you get somebody to come out. you have done really good so far.

to piggyback on some of the other questions. there are more churches than there are wal-marts and more churches than there are many organizations. yet no religious organization has gotten any response from your department regarding being a part of the seat/say it or do you think that this is a part of the sea it/say it or do you think that this is a part -- regarding being a part of the see if/say it. can we say something to the tsa it.icer about th >> yes, you can say something to

them. we can really emphasize professionalism among our tsa ranks. i really think they do a remarkable job under sometimes really stressful circumstances. we will continue to emphasize that we will address complaints when appropriate. our motto is very professional service and to move people as quickly and efficiently and securely as possible. when -- with see something/say something, we do a lot about reach with different religious, civic, nonprofit organizations. we have not ruled it out to those yet. why? because we going in a phasing approach. i like to think that some point, in the coming year, we will begin phasing in other not-for- profit and churches and

religious organizations as well. we will probably do by reaching out to associations that they have. one of the things we need to make sure that we can guarantee is that, if we do it, there is an avenue for follow-up. if somebody says that they see specifisuspicious behavior, thel be a proper follow-up. >> [unintelligible] >> sure. there are some dhs folks here. i will have to meet with you after this. >> the tyranny of time requires that i be a bit of a tyrant. we have a quick question? >> i will try to answer more quickly, too. >> national journal. madam secretary, as you are aware, the chairman of the household committee will be

reporting on extremism in the muslim community. i am wondering what your assessment is of that issue of extremism in the muslim community and how you respond to concerns that muslims are being singled out. >> i have not spoken with the chairman about those hearings in particular. we have had some very good exchanges over the last couple of years when he was the ranking member about different issues involving the terrorism threat to the united states. here is the way i look at it, which is to say that there are al qaeda and al qaeda-related groups that have the u.s. as a targeted. there are u.s. persons who are ascribing to their philosophy.

to their islamist philosophy. that is part and parcel of the reality with which we have to deal. but we also face security threats from other areas as well. when i look at the whole tapestry of the evolving threats that implicate homeland security, we are not able to and do not solely focus on one group or one set of beliefs. what i am really focused on our behavior is, tactics, techniques, developments that indicate that somebody is plotting or attempted to plot and carry out a violent attack. that is where the department of homeland security will be intervening. >> madam secretary, thank you. thank you so much. [applause] before i let you go, as promised, on time and clearly there is no calling raheem devaughn -- there's no calling

greater than protecting our country and protecting our values and our freedoms. i hope our students are up to the task. i am confident they are. but we also leave you here with a token of our appreciation, both figuratively and literally. this is our calling. thank you. -- this is our queecoin. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> up next on c-span, tonight's debate between chicagos candidates for mayor. the financial crisis in great

commission releases its final report. later, health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius testifies on capitol hill about the new health care law. >> tomorrow, former u.n. ambassador john olson talks about u.s. foreign policy and national security. live coverage begins at noon eastern time. and at 1:30 p.m., the congressional crack caucus holds a series of discussions on the recession and how it is affecting minorities. live coverage on c-span and on c-span.org. >> 9011 -- 9/11 redefined the presidency because it made it abundantly clear that i needed to protect the country. i did a lot of actions that were controversial.

to be told, if i had to do them over again, i would do them the same. >> sunday at 8:00 p.m. on c-span "q&a." >> the c-span network provide coverage of politics, public affairs, nonfiction books, and american history. it is all available to you on television, radio, all mine, and on social media networking sites. find our content any time through c-span video library. and we take c-span on the road with our local content vehicle, bringing resources to your community. it is washington your way. now available in more than 100 million homes, created by cable, provided as a public service. >> chicago voters will be selecting a new mayor on february 22. tonight, the leading for candidates participated in an hour-long debate posted by "the chicago tribune" and wgn tv.

the supreme court ruled that former white house chief of staff rahm emanuel is eligible to run. ♪ >> the 2011 chicago merrill you -- the 2011 chicago mayoral debate. i will be here with bruce bowl. the top four can routes for mayor -- the top four candidates for mayor, ron emmanuel, and jerry chico, miguel de gaulle -- the top four candidates for

mayor, seated in no particular order rahm emanuel, gery chico, miguel del vall, carol moseley braun. welcome, everyone. the format we have all agreed to is quite casual. there are no time limits. bruce and i will cut you off if needed so everyone has time to be heard on the topic. we encourage you to question and respond to each other. it should keep the evening quite likely. the debate is just under one hour. we will start with some big issues are city is facing. bruce has the first question. >> just a couple of hours ago the illinois supreme court ruled that mr. emanuel would it remain on the ballot. is that the right ruling? >> i am a lawyer and a former prosecutor. i do not question the ruling of the courts. the ruling stands. the fact is that the field has not changed. we are still in this and are trying to get our message out. i want to talk about job creation in chicago, getting our schools fixed -- i am talking about the issues that affect real chicagoans. >> mr. chico, is this a distraction to the campaign? >> no. i am not challenged anyone in my career, including rahm.

i am had been privileged to serve as chief of staff for the mayor, president of the school board where we brought our schools but from the brink, parks chairman where we built parks for our children. i will not do what ron emanuel has done which is proposed the single largest sales tax -- >> do you think politics was at play in the appellate court decision? >> the good news is now that we have the supreme court decision, it is final. a flea this will be the last question for all of us about it. that decision is -- i have always said that the voters

will make the decision on who will be the next mayor. i think that what is facing the city is a real debate not about my presidency but about what the residents of the city of chicago care about which is our schools, our streets, and our economic finances so we can attract businesses rather than seeing companies leave. we can keep those corporate residents appear in the city of chicago. >> we are going to talk about a lot of great ideas you all have over the next hour. none of them will get done at the city does not resolve its financial crisis. we are looking at more than $15 billion in underfunded pension obligations. the city has got to more than $1 billion in just a few years in a parking meter money. we have debts on top of the pension obligations.

how are you going to answer this crisis? will you find cuts or will you raise revenue? >> we have to begin by looking at the entire budget. we know there is waste, fraud, inefficiencies in this city's budget. we need to look at each department. we need to conduct audits. the popular term is a "forensic audit." we have to look at each line line by line and immediately began to cut back those deputies that report to the deputies, those patriot's petitions that have existed in the city of chicago that are protected by the aldermen and other folks -- we have to send a strong message to the voters that we are going to reform government and we are going to start by getting our fiscal policy in order. that means collecting all of

those unpaid water bills because someone knows someone who works at city hall and do not pay their water bills. we will take the surplus dollars in tip money that should have been going to the district in the first place. we created to meet debt districts in the city of chicago. we have to change the way we pick up garbage, change it to a grid system. we are going to have to patch together a budget to get us to this difficult time. there is more than $1 billion in revenue that we had in 2007 when the recession started. we will get that revenue back as the economy improves. there is a lot of sacrifice that has to be made. it has to be made by those who have been able to get by because of their political connections and because of the big fat contracts they got from

city hall. contractors will have to reduce their costs. a lot of pain for a lot of people will be necessary. >> the city will have to come up with a $550 million property- tax increase. >> we will have to go back to the general assembly and get a amendment to that all that will allow us to wrap up over a period of years. the property tax is the most unfair tax that we have. >> even if you run to the legislation, you still have the obligation. >> i was just getting to the other part. if we are able to get dollars for the employer contribution, i am, that we get the unions back to the table to talk about increasing the employee contribution. i, as an employee, will not

agree to that unless my employer contributes to that fund. >> we have budget problems and issues to resolve, but i would not go so far as to call a crisis. that panics people. we have to do several things. we have to grow the economy, balanced growth, take into account job creation in the neighborhoods, not just downtown. we have to put what we have to better use. use the efficiencies in the way city government operates. if we modernize some of the back office functions, it is estimated we could save almost $80 million just by doing that. then there is what professor simpson talked about as the "corruption taxpayer "it is $50 million a year that goes to kick to the commissioner and

talk to another deputy. it is difficult for small businesses to get started in chicago. if we roll out the red carpet to them, it makes it easier for them to get started. we can give the medium-sized business is the kind of support they need. we have great assets here. we have all kinds of assets we can bring to bear to help stimulate the growth. continued growth, innovation, and exporting from the city -- we can rise from the ashes of this recession. >> i believe this. i am the only person on this panel this evening that as but a municipal budget together. i have but 16 of them together. each and everyone has a surplus.

there is no doubt you have to overhaul the city government operations. you got to have a plan first. we have excess of management in our cd system that has to be eliminated. we have excess management in our city system that has to be eliminated. the city clerk's office has become irrelevant. in addition to a number of cuts we will have to make as reshaping downsize the budget, we will have to adopt best practices. propped bill pay debt. right now, we do not pay our bills on time and it cost us money. you have to grow new entrepreneurial sources of revenue. i have talked about advertising. bring the 14,000 lots the city owns that pay no taxes back under the tax rolls. i will not tax people and get a whole new way as mr. emanuel has suggested. we are talking about imposing a

sales tax on barbers, child care, car washes, you name it. >> let me answer your first question. i believe you have to go to the budget and ask the fundamental questions. i propose we spend $500 million on health care in the city. a comprehensive wellness plan white the private sector. if you centralized procurement across all functions -- the corporate fund as well as the other funds and centralize it, $40 million in savings. i have laid out specific ideas addressing exactly that to make these statements and change the way you do business in the city

government. also, residents pay water bills, businesses pay, the nonprofits do not pay. they do not have to pay the same rate, but didn't we subsidize them in the tax code, they can also pay to make up the difference. those are specific ideas with specific numbers on how to solve that problem. >> you were opposed to taxing the nonprofits in the editorial building. >> no, not at all. i was the first candidate to say no to taxes, number one. >> no, not at all. i was the first candidate to say no to taxes, number one. as for the nonprofits, the water and sewer subsidies we currently provide is one that does not make sense anymore. i think we should end the

subsidies. >> she did in the editorial board agree on that point the that right now residents pay, small businesses play, nonprofits do not, and that is not fair. it is not the same rate, but there is a big hole there. i had the same issue on sales tax. i propose a 20% reduction in sales tax. we have the highest sales tax in the city. we have the highest sales tax in the city. i do not think it is fair for a single mother with two kids who is tryingo buy school supplies to pay higher sales tax to people probably do not pay. people who rent a limousine do not pay. i think a single motr or a family buying school supplies should pay less and the retail merchants will report a 24% reduction in tells tax. it will provide $200 for working

families while -- i think a 20% sales tax cut for the city with the highest salesax in the country, it is time to give working families a 20% cut in the sales tax. >> it is not a 20% cut. it makes no sense to call this a luxury tax if the way it is described right now as far as i understand it is to charge the same single mother for child care. to charge the same single mother to take your pet to the grimmer to get clied -- 9% more. i do not understand it. >> can i say one thing? when we were at the wttw, you said y're for cutting sales tax. here, you're taking a deposition. that's ok. i proposed exactly how to do it. a 20% cut in sales tax, because

i think a working mother should not been paying more than a person who rents a limousine or a corporate jet. >> here is a place we will have to spend a lotf money. discuss how to get rid of crime in the city. >> if i may, it is not just a matter of taxes. it ia matter of fees as well. we pay more to park in downtown chicago then they pay in manhattan. we are faced with giving away the right to collect those revenues for the next 25 years. i think that -- first, no new taxes. take a look at how the policy decisions that have beemade before and correcting some of that can move the city in the direction of balanced growth so that making men and women can be encouraged to stay in chicago, refit -- -- rick locate here to the city.

>> you're saying you would reverse the parking meters? >> absolutely. it was a bad deal for chicago in every way. they -- the city sold $100 million. that is what the inspector general was worth $3 billion to $5 billion. i think we need to renegotiate its, bring the parties to the table. there have been two lawsuits. if we do have to pay it back, we will have the benefit of the revenue coming to the city. right now, it is revenue from the parking meet -- right now, the revenue from the parking meters do not come to the city. >> there has been a very oppressive climate created in the city of chicago as a result of all the fees, tickets, red

light cameras, and the parking meter deal. there is a need to review the entire revenue structure in the city of chicago and to make modifications. we give people big issues over two tickets. we need to collect our revenue, but it is time for us to be sensitive to what is happening in the neighborhoods where people have had it up to here with the city. it is time for us to do a total revamping of the revenue structure. that means all the fees, all the fines -- and come up with something that makes sense that allows us to be able to implement our walls, but not in an impressive -- not in an aggressive way. we see people coming into the

clerk of this -- office with a hardship cases and we give them the cold shoulder in e city of chicago. we need to be more sensitive while at the same time making sure we watched that bottom line. we cannot continue to stand and raise revenue on the backs of the middle class who are trying to survive. it is tough out there. because it is tough out there, government has to change. >> miguel is right. people feel nickeled and dined on the taxes and fees across the city. i have proposed a 20% reduction in the sales tax for the city. i have also proposed eliminating the employee a head tax. the number-one reason some plants are not competitive is because of the head tax.

i have also opposed the way we tax natural gas and utilities. the fact is, people across the city filled nickeled and din med. we can provide sensible and balanced tax cuts for the working families. it will help companies and people -- help companies add people. >> an elegy modified the chicago police department? mr. -- >> was to put more officers on the -- mr. chico wants to put more officers onhe street. >> i think the number one issue on the minds of people is public safety, without a doubt. yesterday i proposed a crime and safety plan. standing with me s a woman by

the name of gloria patron. she had lost her 13-year-old son to gang fire. she was struck six years later. i promised her i would do everything in my power to bring the right amount ofolice to our city so per side -- so her son or any other child would not have to get through that again. in 1993 we brought 1000 police officers onto the force. i think i am the only person who brought officerto the force. >> you cannot take credit for what mayor daley did. >> i recommended it. we let our manpower drop down to a point that is dangerously l right now. we have ravaged our caps program. we are usi one-man cars.

we are not able to have the righamount of foot-patrols. we can hire 2000 police officers i get a budget of $6.50 billion. that amounts to about 2.5% to 3%. anyone who cannot modify a city budget to come up with 2000 police officers, which is the number-one issue for people in the city, should not be mayor. >> i helped president clinton passed the assault weapon ban -- the brady bill. the simple strategy for 1994 which was novel than about putting more police on the streets and getting guns off the streets. i know how to find 1000 additional officers. second, a comprehensive after- school program. two-thirds of juvenile violence

occurs between the hours of 3:00 and 6:00. we have to prosecute the gun laws we have on the books. i think jerry reese needs to go. the philosophy should not be about addin more bureaucrats to the central office. it is about understanding the beat officers are the backbone of the police department. my father was a police officer for 25 years in the city of chicago. all but also like to know it that the after-school program is essential. i was down on the south side pd i was preaching -- on the sell side. i was greeting visitors. a young man stopped me and said,

", like to show you something." people out a contract. he said, "i started my own after school con -- after-school program. the parents sign a contract involving them in our academic life." that is the academic approach we should be taking. >> this is not just about adding more police officers. it is about building communities. you do not build communities with a program here and a program there. you build communities by addressing the issues that are confronting them on a day-to-day basis like unemployment and the lack of a quality education. we need community learning centers at each school, which is what i have opposed, where the entire family is engaged in learning and building counities. when the school because the anchor of the neighborhood,

small businesses are developed. we still have small businesses that cannot get started because they are waiting for the city council to approve a permit. that takes two months. you can have a three-point plan or a four-point plan, but if you are not organizing committees said that they become strong communities, you will continue to have public safety problems due out the city of chicago. we are not headed in the right direction right now. >> my brother is a police officer as were my uncle and my father. i was a former federal prosecutor myself. law enforcement cannot just the top down, it has to be bottom up. you have to do with prevention. -- you have to deal with

prevention. i have unfortunatelyave to take the blame for the three strikes and you're out. if all enforcement -- what we have now is a dearth of attention to prevention. a lot of these young people are hanging out on street corners in getting into trouble. my grandmother used to say, "i do not like the devil's workshop." we are not giving these kids anything to look forward to. they do not have music and physical education in the schools. that gives rise to the sky high dropout rate we have in our city. they also do not have jobs to look forward to when they leave school. >> the chicago unemployment rate is 9.5%, much higher in some

neighborhoods. when wal-mart wanted to bring jobs into the city, the city council existed and block the expansion of wal-mart. >> the answer comes not with the giants like wal-mart, but with dr. been worse. if we encourage entrepreneurship in the communities to create jobs these young people can take, wheat will be able to adjust the balance growth issue for our city as well as give young people opportunities. if the giants want to come in, they should come in. you cann have people working for less than minimum wage and expect to have the help the city. it costs $5 an hour to park at the movies. it is $4.50 to take the bus to go somewhere. people have expenses that the less than minimum wage will not cover.

we cannot have a tale of two cities. we have to have a city that works for everybody. that means job creation, focusing on neighborhoods, focusing on under a partnership and innovation. >> i think you -- i think to become a small business friendly city, we have to concentrate on job creation. we have not released that created an entrepneur will spirit that can lead to innovation, that leads to the development of new products, and can happen because chicago has done that before. our history shows that. we do not have that kind of climate in the city of chicago. what we talk about? changing the residency rules that allow police officers, firemen, and teachers to live outside the city of chicago. we are training the city of the middle class that is needed to provid balance and economic growth throughout the city of chicago. we need our role models in our

neighborhoods for our kids. we need teachers. we need firemen. we need police officers. we the city employees. we needed to keep their tax dollars here. the contract dollars are paying their salary. >> i think after 40 years we may entertain the topic of residency in the city. i think the city is strong enough to do that. i am not worry about losing the middle class. this is something that rahm and i can talk about. the issue of jobs is absolutely critical. i was at a press conference yesterday in a small coffee shop with three people. ght next to it was a sandwich shop with five people working in it. that is a jobs. 80% of business in chicago are small businesses. just this morning, i was with a group of hardware store owners. there was a guy he wanted to

open a new hardware store on the north side of the city. he was waiting one year for permits. that is unacceptable. that is outrageous. we can change this. i put forward a jobs plan that calls for a recent court -- we orientation a city hall to get it behind businesses that want to expand. we are losing opportunity after opportunity. we have 14,000 parcels of land in this city that they never taxes. we should give those away if necessary to bring companies and jobs on to those parcels. we need to write down the rest for a short period of time to bring people to these abandoned storefronts, picks them up, and give small businesses going again. it is important to realize that a 3, 4, 5, or 10-person company really defines what chicago is. >> within the first two months

if im elected mayor, i would call not only the big box stores,ut regrets street store owners into the office. it is cheap economic development. it is good, stable jobs. i have talked to walgreen's where they are bringing in fresh tertiaries to their sales in parts of the store. there are parts of this city where if i was on roosevelt, people are driving all the way down. that is crazy. i will bring them in. i would like to them the facts of life. there are areas of the cy that should have pressed restores. target, wal-mart, the the other stores like walgreens -- get them investing in those neighborhoods and economic development. number two, the university of

chicago is an example. they are talking about a new biomedical program. let's move that forward and give them exactly what they need out of zoning. there are other companies that want to turn it into a biomedical campus to bring the types of jobs necessary to chicago. the university of chicago's research facility can bring the -- can be a leader in the biomedical space. >> must talk a little bit about schools. >> i am the only person on this panel that has actually started a small business. i started -- we are talking law firms. that is a slightly different conversation. we can talk about law firms if you want to go there. [laughter] my little company is in a food

desert. i have an organic beverage company. i know what small busisses have to confront try to do business in the city. it is very difficult because of all the different steps and changes. our city government all too often operates like a criminal. you do not know where to go. >> how would you be as a stard of the city? >> given that we are coming to a recession and i g a business going -- ian my employees. i did not fire anybody. i think we could do a lot with a little. >> what we're taxes consistently late? >> because of a strike to keep a small business billing that was a start up in the middle of the recession. there are other novels of this panel who pay property tax -- there are other members of this panel that pay their property taxes late.

i created a job in the inner- city within organic -- in the inner city at the start of a recession. we are still in business. hopefully we will be able to grow now that the econo is turning around. >> i paid it was late. i moved to washington to work as president obama's chief of state. out o 24 times, i was on time 23. >> mine was when i started my new company. there was a reason for it, but they were paid. all my taxes were paid would never supposed to be paid. i paid penalties for paying later than the first day for payment, but i paid the penalty and i was able to balance my company's budget and we are doing fine.

i started a business in the inner-city in a food desert to try to get attention to the food supply and the toxic chemicals in our food supply. i was on a mission. that mission, so far, has been successful. >> he made $320,000 in 14 months. you had an accounting scandal on your watch. did you earn the money? >> first of all, i was appointed as vice chair to the housing authority. secondly, that was the reason that president clinton appointed me over 20 other people. third, the report that you talked about does not mention me at all. the reason i was on there is because we were doing innovative things in the city of chicago. that is why i got the appointment. >> you have an advertisement that says politicians should not

get rich off the backs of people. >> $320,000 is what they pay at the time. >> do you feel bad about it? did you earn it? >> i was the vice chair of the chicago housing authority. we were doing something innovative here. the reason i was asked by president clinton is because he wanted somebody's approach on that as it related to freddie mac. >> mr. chico, -- >> i did not hear an answer to your question. >> you were one of the main partners at a law firm. had you explain what happened to the fa and the role you played in its collapse? if he could not manage that, how can you manage the city of chicago? >> i am not happy about what happened, but there is a vote of about 57 partners to close our business. we welled up our affairs and

moved on. i did too. startedy business after that with two people. in the middle of that same recession, i have grownt to about 40 people. i am very proud of it. >> if i may, i have in my career never profited from public service. i have no government contracts with my little company. i took no government loans or anything like that. let's be honest, most of your clients are people who do business with the city of chicago. you have gone from one government -- one revolving door to another. quite frankly, rahm, you have gone from one government appointment to another. there is a difference in public service for the benefit of the public's versus public service for the benefit of your own pocketbook. at is the distinction in this race. how d.c. public service? is it something to profit from

personally for yourself, your friends, or your family? or is it something you allude to the trust of the public as a whole? that is a distinction tt should not be overlooked when you talk about my small business versus a business that depends on people doing business in the city of chicago. >> each time i have been asked to serve as the mayor's chief of staff, school board president, park board president, i stepped up and never has there been a suggestion that i did anything but pursue the public interest. i just want to state the facts. >> you had 89 clients that either lobbied the city arts discussed business with the city. will they step back -- that either lobbied the city are discussed business with the city. >> is a duet long memory for

this kind of thing. >> -- you seem to have a long memory for this kind of thing. >> we will start with then empowered inspector general. right now, the inspector general is to water down. we should just have one. i proposed that -- i propose the and it to no bid contracts. we do not need banking and lawyer contrast handed out to people. i said i would and the revolving door practice that people find so wrong. if hworked for the city where you are appointed for the city, which you leave for two years, you'll be unable to do business with the city of chicago. >> i said clearly i would not accept of late -- campaign contributions from businesses contrasting with the city. that is the only way we will be able to separate money from politics. it has to happen. we are known as the state of

"pay to play." we have millions and millions o dollars that had been brought in by rahm and gery. they influence the decisions that will be made at city hall. that this the neighborhoods at the real disadvantage because they will not have their telephone calls returned. the telephone calls will be returned to those who've contributed millions and millions of dollars to these campaigns. we need to level the playing field so that neighborhoods pilot have a voice in the election, where we have to except the fact that it will be buness as usual in city hall and we will not get the kind of reforms we need. you are not answering the questions about the connection between politics, campaign contributions, and contracts. >> the polls show you trailing the other candidates. how would you be able to stay in

this race? >> i just talked about the distinct disadvantage in have because i am sending a bit that -- i am is sending a message to the voters that i am ready to reform chicago politics s chicago government. i am talking directly to the voters. thank goodness we had these kinds of debates. we need more of them because, otherwise, the voters would never see me. if they receive the fancy 32nd spots that rahm emmannuel can't afford any fancy -- that rahm emanuel ancan afford. we have to do it the old- fashioned way. it is time to put the people back into the definition of liability for the candidate. that means being out in the neighborhoods. it does not mean raising millions and millions of dollars and having a campaign that will cost $12 million.

>> we gave you a chance to ask each other questions. we learned a lot for the questions as well as the answer. >> i think i will just wait. thank you. [laughter] >> mr. chico? >> i have a question for rahm. this does concern me ever since you proposed it. that is the single largest sales tax we have ever seen. i am very concerned about that because i care very deeply about the working men and women throughout this city. i cannot see handing another 9% on common services -- barbershops, child care, pet clippings. i do not know how you can do that. >> what i propose is that the wttw -- a 20% cut in sales tax

is a 20% cut in sales tax. i believe a burnley says we are talking about working families that a mother who is buying school products or clothes for key is to start school is paying the highest sales tax of any city in the country where people who rent and shorter private jets, limousines -- are not paying anything. i do not think that is fair. for a working family, it is a cut of about $200. ford motor co. is tnking of a third shift. they put it as the number-one reason they are at a disadvantage. i propose another change in reform of taxes. as the price goes up, you pay more.

it forces energy efficiency. i would note that the retail merchants on sales tax support this proposal. it would be a big win-win situation for the basic, working, middle-class family. that could change where u actually have a tax code because finally some of the people coming in and out of this city would actually pay the corporate tax. they would hire the people and pay a sales tax. we would see working families get a 20% reduction in their sales tax. they deserve that. the people that i sleep -- >> tis not a cut to go from 0 to 9%. >> i have a question for gery.

i talked to someone today to was laid off by at&t. the individual said they are going to go back to school at a community college so they can get new credentials and be able to find another job. when you were with the community colleges for a short time -- it was about seven months -- you proposed eliminating the development of courses in training those for community- based organizations. i would say there is not enough to offer that service, but in the process of eliminating the development of courses, you are looking out a huge population that is in need of a second or third chance to be able to transition to college-level courses that will allow them to be more competitive out there as they are struggling to find emplment. why did he propose that? >> it is simple.

as the government, we have to take fresh looks at things. we felt that 100 students beginning to pursue sac's degree, only seven ever got one. it told us there was something wrong with what we were doing. we never ever wanted to lead a student behind. what we wanted to examine was how we were providing the service. here is what was happening -- and i agree with you. many students do need developmental courses. we want to help them. at was happening in the situation we saw was that students were burning through basic recovery courses and their pell money ran al. we wanted to see what we could do more effectively to help people. there is a wonderful committee- based organization that does a better job of its nursing program that we did at the city college. i think that is important to

allow for community organizations, which i know you come from, to let them have a role in educating our kids. >> because i developed one of those programs at the community level and spent 20 years in dealing with education policy, i know that the capacity to do what you are proposing is not there. those students are going to be let out on the streets. >> i think that is a bright line. the attitudes toward privatization of education, both elementary, secondary, and college level -- and there is an attitude that says we are going to privatize the community colleges instead of keeping them public institutions that are open to everybody. we are going t have a charter schools instead of focusing on the neighborhood public schools. that attitude is one i am

against. gery has embraced over the year and i do not want to speak on rahm's record, but i know for a fact that might view that public education is a public good is something we should all be concerned about. >> if you oppose charter schools? >> i do not oppose charter schools, the ones we have already. i would not focus on developing more of them. i think the issue is to develop and bolstered our neighborhood schools and to improve public education. public schools have to take everybody. they cannot decide what to do that they want. they cannot cherry-pick. the charter schools can cherry pick students. the question is, how many kids e we going to wind up having left behind because their parents do not have the ability to provide otherwise for them or they are children that have other issues that a charter school does not want to deal with? what happened in the

neighborhoods? when i was going up in the city, i could walk to school in my neighborhood and get a quality education. we have to get back to that in the city of chicago. the schools serve everybody. i wish i could do this over the dinner table with my kids. it would be helpful. community colleges have made life blood -- are the lifeblood of our economy in the sense of training workers who want to move on from one job to the next. you havtouched on an important topic. to many of our kids coming out of high school are going to committee college. they are borrowing money, paying loans, and repeating what they should have learned in high school. we have a good model of a pilot project in the city of chicago

where high school students get up to the level where they end up going to community colleges. during the high school years, they are already getting the training they need. we need to scale back up as part of the proposals made last month. we need to make sure that high schools to -- i schools and community colleges are linked up to these kids are not borrowing money and getting behind. the second thing is there -- that is something we ought to challenge the for-profits to do for r kids. if you do want to go on to it for their education, have the skills and knowledge ready. >> you are referring to dole- credit -- dual-credit. >> this is anssential point.

47% of the kids in the city of chicago are dropping out of high school. they drop out rate in committee college is higher because they do not have the basic skills. i propose we get a new curriculum thateaches towards college or career training. 53% of disputes to go to college end up going to committee colleges. i am am a song supporter of charter schools. i belve in constitute -- in competition and choice. when you take out north side and you ke out walter payton, the best performing high schools or charters. they are not the solution, but the choice they provide is a solution to the problem. >> i am happy to ebb ushered in charter schools in 1995 and 1996.

-- i am happy to have ushered in charter schools in 1995 and 1996. theyave parents a choice. that is what this is about. in regards to miguel's question, we have dueled-enrollment. in the last 10 years, this is don silent. i agree it is wrong. it has to come back. the chicago public schools have lost their momentum. i believe that. things like this have gone into the deep freeze. they need to come back out. >> if you are going to the taudic again on public education, you can hang up a side that t -- if you are towel on throw in the te public education, you can hang up a sign that says they are

close. they do not have to take all the kids at arter schools. if we are going to build a strong city, we have to have balance in the way we approach the issue. i have a friend that has a charter school for girls at the high-school level. research shows it worse for girls. let's define things in terms of innovation. i have no problem with that. you cannot just throw in the towel an not focus in on rebuilding the infrastructure of our neighborhood schools, making certain that every child, every school, and every neighborhood is one ahild to give to to get a quality education. the child should be left behind were turned away. that is the important thing. >> so time ago the decision s made to set up a parallel

system of public education in the city of chicago which once had been selected and roulette, and schools, charter schools and the other being neighborhood schools. i talk with families everyday to struggle with the decision on where to send their preschoolers to school because they do not believe the school down the street from where they live is good. we need to protect as many academic options as possible. the fact of the matter is, until we improve our neighborhood schools, we areoing to strengthen the neighborhoods. that is the bottom line. >> we are down to what we are calling the final five minutes of the debate. it went by so quickly. we are going to get each one of you a minute. let's say you are knocking on the door to the people out there, what is or stop speech? why should they be voting for you as a mayor? i do not want to hear anything we have already heard.

>> first of all, i think the city, as yogi berra would say, when you get to the fk in the road, take it. we cannot keep doing what we are doing and expect results. that is true about our schools and investing in the quality of our teachers, giving parents of the sidelines and involved in their kid's education. we also have to do something about crime. we have to have somebody u.s. the strength, determination, brit, and resilience to see that change through. in my public life, whether it was taking on the insurance companies to get kids health care where taking on the and are a -- or taking onhe nra -- i have taken on special interest and at the resilience to see that change through. >> thank youor having us. i believe so strongly in the

future of our city. i know we can do this. there is no doubt about it, our problems are large financially in the city and public schools. i am very optimistic. it will not be done by wishful thinking or an idea here or an idea there. it takes planning so that we are following a path to get there. i am very proud of my career of having dealt with these issues and balanced 16 municipal budgets. this is the kind of experience we need to get into these situations, but these budgets back in shape, and give us the tools we need to bring js to our city, bring police and other programs we need to get our neighborhoods safer, and to make sure families stay in the city. we do not want to lose people. they will not stay if we do not offe them a quality education, good jobs, and public safety. i am prepared to bring each of those three to our city.

people should have confidence that we have a bright future. >> i love this city. this is my home. i stepped forward and not because of any interest to serve myself, but to serve the people of chicago and to bring to bear the skill set i have developed over the years in local, state, national, and international government to help grow our city in a way that serves every community, every neighborhood. every neighborhood matters. we are all proud to be part of the city. we need to bring each other together as people and tap the rich diversity of our neighborhoodand bring all the talents we can muster to solve at work to our respective problems. we all know what our problems are. they have to do with rebuilding our neighborhood schools and public safety in our neighborhoods. i was on 87th street the other day and gunshots force made to

the floor of the car. we have to make our communities safer. our seniors are not hostages in their homes. i am getting close to the end of my minute, right? i want to bring thexperience i have to bear on solving these problems. i am always been a fighter. i had to fight my own party to run for the united states senate when nobody thought i could do it. i intend to bring that determination to working out the issue that -- the issues that our city faces. >> i think the neighborhoods are calling out for us. what type of reform are we talking about? reform that is going to ensure there is balanced growth, balanced development. reform that is going to make sure we eliminate patronage, waste, and corruption in the city of chicago. reform that is going to see to it that we lift that oppressive

cloud that hangs over the city as the result of the feast, restrictions, and hassles if people are put through just try to make a living on a day-to-day basis. i say to them that i am the candidate who is ready. i had the experience -- 20 years in the legislature, four years as a city clerk. i am getting my did message directly to the voters. -- i am getting my message directly to the voters. if they want a my york appealed to special interests and big money, i am not their guy. if they want someone who cares about individual residents and will work night and day to make our city if a true world-class city with world class neighborhoods, then i am the person to work for. >> thank you very much. did you have a good time? [laughter] thank you very, very much.

i am hope everybody enjoyed the debate. we are encouraging all of the voters to get out and vote. we are also helping choose to become the next mayor of chicago. we asked our viewers to stay with us for a special edition of "politics tonight." i am micah materre. good evening. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> on tomorrow's "washington journal," matthew mitchell and isabel sawhill. then a discussion with paul white about reducing the size of government. >> no question that 9/11 redefined the presidency. it made it clear that my most important job was to protect the country. i made a lot of controversial decisions to do that. if i had to do them over again, i would have done them again. >> president bush talks about his best selling memoir, "decision point," with the students from smu.

>> the -- talked about clean air and water programs and the is top on communities. this is 15 minutes. thank you so much. i would like to introduce to you the deputy administrator of the environmental protection agency, bob perciasepe. he served undethe clinton administration previously. unfunded mandates is one of the top priorities in our metro agenda. i am pleased that you, mr. administrator, with you and administered jackson are willing to engage with us and he as meaningful dialogue about this issue. welcome. >> thank you. [applause]

thank you all. thank you so much for your leadership with the conference of mors and for your time now serving on the local government advisory committee for the epa. it means a lot for us to have the conference leadership on our advisory committee. i hope that will continue to bear a lot of fruit on many issues you just were alluding to. i want to thank all of you for all the work that you do in the cities that you are elected mayors of. despite all the different experiences and backgrounds that we all have both between yourselves and between the epa and you, we have done quite a bit of work on the environment together. we're also very excited as the secretary mentioned earlier, secretary donovan, about the epa, hud and dot partnership of the federal level. we are working together as three

agencies as we never had before and it is a very exciting time. i have personally participated in some of the training sessions and workshops that have been set up with that partnership and would some of the regional planning grants that the secretary mentioned. every community wants to breathe fresh air and dri clean water. every committee wants to have a healthy environment and every community wants to also have an oprtunity for growth and prosperity. americans are entitled to these things but they are not always easy to obtain. many of you know the challenges involved. thats why it is important for us to work together. it is vital tt the cities of america and the protection agencies at the federal level and that the state level and in your own local agencies work so closely together. in the last 40 years, there has

been a tremendous amount of work done by this partnership. i have spent the bulk of my career at the federal level, but i also spent 11 years of my career working for the city of baltimore. i may be the first deputy administrator of the epa who has that kind of local government experience. i know that many local governments are in the midst of budget difficulties andrisis and are laying off workers. we have to learn to work smarter together. you hear that theme throughout some of the presentations today. i know the cities have some of the most difficult and most important day to day responsibilities for environmental protection in america. you are the ones who have been implementing these protections for the last four years. that is how long the epa has been in existence and that's how long our partnership has existed. you have seen first hand the effects these have had on your friends, family, and your

constituents. today, there is ample evidence of the fruits of that partnership and that labor. today, almost all americans have access to water that meets the national health standards. we and our kids breathe air with half as much dangerous pollution in it as there was four decades ago. less pollution has made us health care, cleaner air alone has prevented more than 200,000 premate deaths in the united states. i want tpoint out that every child in america today has le lessad in their blood -- has lesslead in their blood than 40 years ago. [applause] it is almost incalculable benefits that is a crew into our communities. environmental regulations on the other side have also led to the

creation of a world debt leading environmental protection industry in the united states that supports 1.6 million american jobs. this is an important fact that jobs are also related to whether it is clean water or clean air. we have many jobin america that are directly related to the work that is going on to provide those benefits in the local communities. we are healthier and cleaner and stronger because these protections that you have helped implement and that the epa has helped develop, in the last two years we have let pure science and the rule of law guide us at the epa. we have improved protections. we have reached out in that process to people across america and we have heard ideas and we have made common sense, cost- effective decisions providing flexibility where appropriate and more time to comply when necessary. we want to work with you, the

mayors of america, so that we can continue to look for ways to innovate in how we get this work done. we are hoping battle local government advisory committee is one of the many but not the only way that we continue to do that. president obama has gone one step further. i am glad you're able to spend time with him is morning. he is directingll feder agencies to have regulatory responsibilities to make sure and review their regulations and make sure that they are a efficient, flexible, and transparent. people need to know the requirements are and they know how to implement tm. his executive order formalizes a lot of the work we have been doing at epa and will continue to do in the months and years ahead. last year, administrator jackson outlined several priorities. i want to talk about them briefly and the progress. for meetings like this one and others with a local government

advisory group, meetings in your communities to regional offices, we are building a strong partnership local governments, state governments, and tribal governments and bring in new voices into a conversation on how we get this work done. that conversation on environmentalism is being expanded to communities that are sometimes hurt the most by a collision yet have had the least voice and helping solve the problems. this is a very important priority of epa, to build a larger base of involvement in our work. we're also taking action on climate change. mayors have often led the way in this work with the efficiency programs andocal recycling programs, all of which have reduced anergy and reduced emissions of greenhouse gases. are taking some action at the federal level with the endangerment finding that was done last december. the first requirement for greenhouse gas emissions, marc train and the first division standard for the largest of the

emitter's of greenhouse gases. these are we are taking common- sense approaches and looking at this and say as a primary tool in the early as of this program. we are also improving the quality. the first national limits on march 3 from cement plants and the clean cars program. when a talked-about lead earlier, part of that solution has not only bn painted in the homes and in our house and also the lead that was in gasoline that left a legacy for many developed parts of the country. we continue to work for the automobile industry on cleaner cars and we are not only setting the first greenhouse gas emissions standards for automobiles but that is also reducing greenhouse gases but also reducing the use of gasoline and fuel the efficiency saving consumers money and reducing harmful conventional pollutants as well. more of the automobile is clear,

the cleaner the cities are going to be in the united states. weant to ensure the safety of chemicals. we have proposed that the toxic substances control act be reformed and enhanced to deal with today's modern production of chemicals. we are now waiting for that. we are developing our own internal process to test chemicals and lo at the existing law and how we can improve utilization of that existing law to further protect against chemicals used that may provide -- that may create contamination. we are looking at cleaning up communities more swiftly. and recovery act, as has been mentioned several times today, brownfield's and superfund cleanups were provided. many cities were involved with getting that were done. along with this can invt and water infrastructure and historic efforts to protect places like the chesapeake bay,

the great lakes, and the gulf of mexico. i don't need to tell those odds about the importance of the epa brownfield's program in looking at underutilized and abandoned property in urban areas and making sure they can be brought back to productive use in a cleaand healthy way. cleaning the water ian important part of your work. just as it is important work of epa work. the water challenges today highlight concerns throughout our society, growing populations, urbanization, new chemicals in our products and environment and in our bodies and adaptation to climate change. our waters face on conventional pollutants. we have only recently had designed to measure some of these pollutants. they are also affected by what is not commonly thought of in terms of sources of pollution like storm water runoff. like storm water runoff. we