everything dwow affects the lives of women and girls and we must all work together do that. collaborative effort that becky and preeta led and katherine and all of our agencies that you saw really demonstrates strength of that and i think really power in numbers that we have with everyone concentrating on it. it also evidences the report illustrates with the data and although not news to those of us in the room that women are getting more educated and in the workforce and yet paid less, i think the incredible coverage we got this week which i have to thank our communications team in the white house and particularly hanna august and deputy director of jenny caplan really spearheading give us an opportunity to get that information out in front of the american public. clearly people have not gotten that message. we did not get paycheck fairness through last fall and didn't get the message across and really demonstrates how important and how meaningful to really the

lives of american women and their families, their husbands, spouses, children, economic security of women are. even as we work to increase our educational levels, get more in the workforce, the fact that there's pay disparity and continuing wage disparity is a real issue we must continue to work on. the data also confirms a lot of things we have been doing in the administration like health care. i'm glad becky pointed out chronic health disease experience of women. enmoat of you in the room probably know how women experienced real problems with our existing health care system. and these are the system that the american public needs to understand what the impact is on the real lives on american women and their family how things like health care reform, how policy change and changes we are trying to make in the administration really address those issues. prevention care, women's

prevention health rules, many of the things that you see in the affordable care act are really intended to prevent things like obesity and heart disease and diabetes and to get at those causes and provide meaningful health care for the 40 million americaners who don't have health care today to address those issues. so having dwrate is an important piece of it. finally before i introduce the panel just touch again, and again work ago cross our many agencies and that is workplace flexibility. so the other piece heather noted, shriver report highlighted last year and this report continues and becky's slide on how women and men at home spend their time again demonstrate what's many of us know from our own personal lives.

and the balancing the demands of work, demands of home, not just when you have young children but when you have older children, elderly parents whfment you yourself may be disabled, when you're trying to get back to education to advance your career. this is not just wame's issue, as the president and first laudy talked about this is issue that affects the entire family. men as well as women. men who want to get home to soccer games and men who are disabled and need flexibility in their work. and it's not just an issue for the middle part of the workforce. up at the top of the top levels of our businesses all the way down to the line workers and there's probably no current issue in the workforce with that diversality. old, younger, top of the scale, bottom and every place in between i believe we're very much as we move forward with our

niv tives in the federal government to get the federal agency to be more work flex scale to have a conversation that our department of labor is having around the country. we have two of four major conversations around the country and as the private sector steps up, we are on the threshold of being able to reorganize work and the way we do work. in a fundamental way not seen since the industrial revolution. we have technology that enables us not to be 9 to 5 or do shift work religiously or do work more meaningful or adaptive to the needs of our workforce. at the end daste will be more competitive. will result in better results, more -- less turnover rates, more longevity in the workforce, better retire the transitions, better knowledge transfer so it's all very exciting and this report is say piece of it. with that let me turn to our

time and have time for questions for all of you as well. i'm joined by heather, our host here at the center for american progress. lynn rosenthal, first-ever white house adviser on violence against women. and the assistant administrator for women's business ownership at the s.b.a. and, again, another big piece of this report. avis, who is one of our great partners and one of the people who does come and or the of ask me to do things and yell at me but wonderfully always with a smile. i enjoy that. executive director of the national council of negro women has been a stalwart and great spokesperson for women of color throughout the world and finally barbara, the executive director and vice president for the institute for women's policy research.

i will start with barbara. one thing brar knows as heidi one of the first meetings hi upon arriving at the white house two years ago was with barbara or hide why and one of the first things in this skeers of people asking me to do thing that's occurred was barbara and heidi saying it would be great if we can have all of the data about women in the federal government in one place. here it is, barbara. if you can make give your observations about why that's important and what the significance is of this report? >> i'm happy to do that. thank you for the report. it is beautiful as data lover myself. i have to say this is a happy day for me but it is very important to bring the data together with all of the various issues affecting women today. it helps us begin a conversation about all of the various struggles and challenges women

face and how these interplay with one another f we look at the wage gap, we've been stuck for a while now. haven't made the progress we have to make. if you look at the public debate, there are people looking for simple solutions. we need to negotiate better. women need to make better choices smven that may be true fufment look at this report and look at women's health circumstances if you look at labor in the home and if women are spending more time taking care of the kids and housework, that gives them a little less time to bing a superstarp ott job. in a woman has a chronic health condition, that will affect her performance on the job. education affects earnings tremendously. these factors all interrelate. i think the way tina put it was great. we all have a role to play. if we're stuck, we can't just keep spinning the wheels of the vehicle. we to get out and start pushing. all of our institutions need to do something.

women need to start coming together and saying half hour per day is all i need and 20 minutes of rest. and then we'll be equals. we need some more of that kind of individual level, communal level women coming together and pushing us as a movement. but all kinds of organizations can make a difference, looking at this lort presents really shocking data on stalking. very common. and that really has an impact on women trying to get to work every day and just feel safe and calm in their circumstances. many businesses around the country tryering to do something about it. hospitals are doing something about that. so we all really need to come together and look at these issues as a whole and think about how we can push and make a change and make all of these puzzle pieces fit together to make that difference. get to the point where we don't have 28% of single working moms

in poverty. we can do better than that where we don't see that african-american women work harder than everybody else and get paid less than just about everybody else. we can do a lot better than that. it's time to really move. data thrike starts a conversation. it allows us to look at where we are, take a hard look and start working together to make a change. >> thank you. so heather just following up on that, what thoughts do you have on, again, why data is important and how to actually improve data, both collection of data as prieta asked for ideas on and then how it intersects with policy? >> well, thank you for the question. we have a couple of great ideas. first of all, some of the things that -- i can't remember who said it, becky or peter, there is this wide ahave a of data available. and foints to policy thing that's one of the area that's we haven't seen enough information is around those requests for the

issues you were talking about. we were very excited this year when we found out the department of labor for the first time in a decade is actually going to stud yim pilotation of the family and medical leave act. that's the first bill that really addresses workplace flexibility in the modern era and we did one survey that's demeel 1995 and one in 2000 and at this point i can't tell you how many people are eligible for the fmla and take it out. so it's exciting -- really exciting about that. but what we would like to see is because it is the case vast majority of mothers are bred winners for their families, most families don't have a state-run caregiver. this is the kind of data we need to track every year, and in fact would i argue every month. these are the kinds of things we should be tracking with the regular labor force data. for example we know the second thing the administration is doing is the american timing survey are adding a new model around workplace flexibility,

new mothle and vazz fantastic. we will know a lot more about what people have access to. what we're still not going to know is on a regular basis how many people are eligible for or using family medical leave act, how many people are el eligible for and using paid family medical leave and how many people eligible but how many people using paid family medical leave in california and new jersey. we can add one little followup question in the monthly population survey pitch here that will say if you weren't at work last week, is that because you were on family medical leave or paid sick time, and was it paid or unpaid? just small, nirs in the world of data that's actually an enormously heavy lift. paid family leave around the country tpwheend the information to sort of make the case for why this is important and what it means. thank you. >> i want to thank you for

spending a lot of time talking about women of color and how women of color are affected. talk about what the report says about women of color and maybe some of the gaps that are evidence in the report. >> sure. this is the best and times and worst of times all at the same time. we are seeing we have experiences that are very similar to women, like other white women, exceling as it compares to our male counterpart. we are doing very well particularly higher education. but when to comes to getting paid, as we lag behind on male counterparts and obviously as it relates to other women as well. we have a long way to go as it relates to that. one particularly disturbing area is health information. we lag far behind particularly to diseases mentioned earlier like diabetes, hypertension even depression. particularly black women are more likely to indicate they

were victims of depression as compared to other women. those are striking and very disturbing. when i looked at what happened with black women also as trelts to the plarkt, in recent years we see we have been particularly impacted by the great recession. you look at where other swrim been impacted as a result of that, you see increases in labor force participation most recently and that has happened as many people called this most recent recess the man-session. huge drop of employment among men but i would argue it wasn't just a man session, it was a black women's session too. because our labor force participates in rate drops for the first time we've seen recent history, even though we still have higher rates than other women, it has gone down where we saw labor force among other women went up. still with our disproportionally high level of participation, we are still most likely to be poor. our wages lag far behind on any level of education. there's still a lot more than we have to do and we are still working hard and doing all of the right things, plague by the rules, going to college and

getting graduate degrees. we're out there in the field and still not being treated fairly. >> i will say the other thing i noticed in the report and as we were putting it together because we were having this conversation is the places where we don't have aggregated data. even though we have the data over all for men and women, we don't have the aggregated data to break it down to really see the picture of women of color. >> still have a need for that and particularly as it relates to asian-american women and as it relates to american-indian women. not even included in this report so we need more help in those areas as well. >> not all data is good data. it doesn't always sort of come together in the right way. important data regarding violence against women, wless have struggles in that area. would you like to address that? >> one of the things i like to say about this report is the whole list tick approach tells us not just about how women are experiencing violence but the

wame experience and recover from violence is connected to employment, education and health so it gives you a full picture of women's lives. the report does show that since the passage of the violence against women act in 1994 incident, the testimony about violence dropped more than 50%. we know the intervention stat, then senator biden now vice president bryden, we have data today that tells us the model created in the violence against women act that brings people together at the local level, law enforcement, prosecutors, victim services to address violence women are experiencing works. when we fund these efforts to coordinate on the local level, we see better case outcomes and reduce abuse. we also know today that another hallmark, which is victim services in connecting victims up with domestic violence shelters, hotlines yount reach services also makes a difference in their lives.

the department of health and human services recently conducted a survey of 3,000 victims in eight states in emergency domestic violence shelters and they found women and -- in shelter overwhelmingly stay in shelter and their connection with victim services made them feel more helpful and set goals and help them understand more about their options. we also know from the research this set of services is connected with reduced abuse. so the reduction in violence we see success of the violence against women act and so to take us a little bit back in time and put human face on statistics, i want to tell you a story i know sbindy who was battered in 1975. she was 19 years old, newly married, experienced very severe abuse. her husband beat her with a

metal pipe on a public street, on a public street in the middle of the date, broad daylight. nobody intervened and stopped to help. she went to the hospital emergency room. many times she was too embarrassed to say what happened to her and then the health care provider said, how are these injuries caused or i see old injuries on your body, how were those injuries caused? she called the police many times. they came to her door and said, what did you do to make him so mad? every time she reached out for help, people blamed her and allowed the offender to escape accountability. interviewed cindy for a piece i wrote ten years after the violence against women act, i said what does this mean to you we have ten years of violence sherks said, you know, when i was going through this, i was completely alone. every time i reached out for help, people told me it was my fault. i know it's different today but that's how it was for me and followed me the rest of our -- the rest of my life.

but today because of the violence against women act, somebody like cindy would have a very different story to tell. whether the law enforcement officer came to her door, he or she would be trained to interview the parties, collect evidence, write a report, make an arrest if there was probable cause to do so. when cindy went to the hospital emergency room the nurse or physician would be trained to ask about all of the injuries they saw on her body, to talk to her privately and link her up with services. and one of the pieces of cindy's story that i didn't message is she finally fled the violence after she was so severely battered she spent a month in the hospital but she left the hospital completely on her own and was homeless for two years. but today because some of the programs with the violence against women act and some of the other services somebody like cindy would find transitional housing and find services and support to help her recover. i tell her story a little different than the numbers we have been talking about but i

tell cindy's story because it puts a women's face on the charts we're seeing and tells us about what this reduction in violence means in women's lives. i do want to say what we need to know more about, dwrate that shows this reduction in domestic violence and annual incidents of demensic -- domestic violence comes from the national crime survey, a self-report survey. and it's part of an omnibus survey of all types of clients so it may not cam chur all of the incidents of domestic violence that include stalking. the bureau of justice statistics is working on this, they understand the need for more specialized survey, methodology and capture data in these very sensitive areas and we very much support those efforts and want to work with them to make them happen. i should also say we need more data to understand intervention with various communities, particularly for women of color.

we need to understand what interventions are most effective. we know 234 in practice with the local level and in the hands of community-based organization rooted in culture and community, that's what works but we need more research and data to really understand this area. i think why we have -- while we have very good news in this report, there's still much we need to learn and we still have much work to do in this area. >> thank you, lynn. thanks for reminding us it isn't all just numbers to have and what we do affects individual women in profound ways. i love you're pointing out the things we all need when we get to q & a, new things we need to do. by putting the report together, it really shines the light then on all of those gaps that also affect real palestinian and their real lives. and i want to turn to you in the business front. this is a follow on report to

people who had to council women and girls -- it is -- women-owned businesses, last year which was so terrific and really pulled together and documented sentencing on women-owned businesses, the rise of women-owned businesses. yet as we still see the economic struggle women undergo. that's really something anna works on at the s.b.a. if you could just discuss that, what does it mean the rise of women business owners and what can we look forward to? >> the rise of women business owners is the perfect example of how good policy and good piece of legislation could be a catalyst for economic disparity. before 1974 only 5% of privately own companies in the united states were owned by women. then we had the legislation which equaled opportunity act and then to have loans without

having a male co-signer very easy, very quick. then we all got off the gate and started opening our own businesses. fast forward to 2007, 30% of presently owned companies are owned by women. i am going to refer to becky's report and that is 8 million small businesses owned by women. in terms of sales and receipts is 1.2 trillion, an economic force. of course, we're talking about jobs all the time. and that's 7.6 workers. so women bake an economic force. of course not. we want to create more women-owned businesses and actually jobs. so what do we need to do? women are still finding difficulty accessing credit. it's very difficult and we still want to find out why it is, is it because they don't seek it or

because they find it difficult and they're protected. so we're focused on women opening their businesses and we have a wonderful network right now of women business interests and only last year 110 women business centers counseled 160,000 women in the country. what is it we want to do? we want to learn the step of how to become independent and open their own businesses. it relates to what you were saying about pulling african-american women, hispanic women and also what you were saying too is that sense of once you come out of that violent situation, just knowing you can be the master of economic destiny by opening a business really makes a difference in any woman. and in many cases like myself, i chose to open my business

because a mexican mother that i am, i wanted to be home with my children. so that allowed me -- >> flexibility. >> it really touches on everything and we need to focus on women really getting prepared to handle this. it's not an easy thing. we want to prepare them to start the business of our way, grow it the right way and to finance it the right way. we're focusing at the s.b.a. and know we're pushing for women in every way we can to make sure we look through a level playing field in terms of opening business in their own economic disparity. >> before we go to the floor, i want to you say a little about the women and business role. >> absolutely. we're very very, proud of this. of course, we have a lot of bakeries to i. tirks companies and everything in between. for about a decade -- >> ten years. >> ten years, almost 11 years,

the federal government is the market that there's for -- the state is not going anywhere. we really wanted women to be part of the federal market. we see what this is for the federal government. so for ten years we have a goal, 5% -- 5% of whatever the government buys should go to women. so we have the goal but we have not been able to achieve it. for many, many reasons, incidents that don't much sense, like a study that really wanted to show, where is it women are not -- are underrepresented to the federal government? and that study really found out that women are underrepresented in four industries and i want to remember two. besides the one that traumatized me.

we reached the 5%. a new rule. it reinterpret its the study. often in the field, about 83. it is about 300 industries. it is fantastic that women can compete amongst themselves.

if you are a business woman, it is fair. we want to compete. we want to make sure it is a level playing field with the other programs. it is groundbreaking. women are extremely happy. we are just asking for a fair share. we will keep pushing up. after a decade, we can compete for those contract amounts. we're really happy about that. >> we have time for questions from the floor here. i think zandi will help us with a microphone. raise your hand and now try to do a fair and balanced job of calling people. >> if you could state your name and association.

>> first, i am what the national women's health network. i want to thank you so much for the report of having an evidence-base area for our health is important. we have been working to raise awareness for women about the benefits to women and working with are raising boys his campaign for the 1-year anniversary. we have launched another campaign so we are rangy -- awaiting the decision on those no-cost contraceptions. this report raises the question of the impact of this -- you both mentioned the ability of women to go and increase education. that impact on economic well- being and preservation of the

work force in packs all aspects of women's lives. if you could comment on this, we are all awaiting them. >> i can start. we are also awaiting a. for those of you familiar with what the process, within the affordable. care act -- within the affordable care act, in the prevention services role, there is funding as says that those kind of prevention services identified as -- they must be provided at an insurer at low cost or low pay. right now, that includes the well baby care, well child care. and for adults, paps mirrors, carbazole -- pap smears,

garvisil. there is not a comprehensive women's standards right now. there are bits and pieces like pap smears and mammograms, but nothing comprehensive like contraception, and reproductive care is not fully and completely represented. the interest in medicine, you can undergo a scientific analysis and their urban public hearings held on this. to develop that standard on a scientific basis. the report is do you around august. the secretary of hhs can take the finding of those that is to make a determination as to what part of the standard, what is an

accepted standard will be applied in this prevention services prepare. we are awaiting this. economist want talk about child spacing. >> in terms of the process, in some of these studies i look get labor supply and women's earnings. one of the pivotal moments in terms of having control over their employment and their careers was the introduction of the birth control pill which allowed people for the first time to be able to plan those education and careers and to a higher degree of certainty than they could have before that. if you care about women being able to plan their careers and time their families as to when that makes sense for them, then you have to care about birth control with large. -- writ large. i would think that it went under preventative but no one is asking me.

>> this report shows that america is becoming unmarried nation. we are getting married later, having children later. these are necessities, not only about women but as men -- about men as well. >> this is across class, that everyone needs access to. if professional women who want to get their ph.d. s and put off having children down and two women are starting to date and these are things that you need across class and across age. >> a question all the way of back -- in the back. >> my name is anna belle, a professional training clinician. my question is two parts. how large was your sample? and when you looked at women in the workforce, did you take into account the men and women who are coming back from the wars in

iraq, iran, and afghanistan, which has absolutely change their family situation, financial situation, and the needs -- because that is really quite important to look at -- they may have had both parents working, and now things have changed. the second thing i would like to ask with regard to domestic violence, because i have worked with women with domestic violence, and i am glad it is then put into place, but there are now more women beating up on men but it is not the pc thing to discuss and talk about. i noticed it is not appropriate for this conference, -- i know that it is not prepared for this conference but it is reversed. there is more domestic violence among women and i think that that is interesting. >> i enjoyed seattle.

hello to gary ross. >> each of these charts has a matching sections independence of the report. you can look up with the data comes from. this is the opinion of what the sources. there are representative of all the trends that we show here, the requirements for statistical significance are we would not have included it. with regard to veterans, we do not have anything here. but there is information on the website that frida talked about. >> in in my new role, the substance of your question, returning veterans, and regarding reserve an active military or current serving, the

particular administration interest of the first lady, i think we can look in the next month to a renewed and expanded initiative that we will be announcing specifically to support our military and are returning veterans and families and spouses. and we hope you'll join in with us. >> thank you for your question. this is an important issue to understand. data from the fbi tells us that 85% of the victims are female. it is up crime that disproportionately affect women. particularly if you look at partner homicide. those are women killed by male partners. there are some men affected. equal acts of violence, but when you put those in context, and you survey id you ask women what was happening, you find that

many of those acts are committed out of self-defense. it is a complicated picture to understand but it is important to put the context around that. in the fall, the center for disease control in the national institute of justice will be releasing new data from the national domestic partner violence and help survey, i think that is the name of that, where they will let it exactly that. they will look at the context around the violence. when women experienced pilots, let me say at this way -- what we know, mutt -- what most research tells us is that men are more likely than women to use violence as a system of maintaining control within the family. if the violence is only what you see. you might see the black eye and a broken bone but it is usually a part of the system of coercive control, intimidation, threats, economic control, women are driven into poverty with their expenses -- experiences. when you put it in that context,

you see a different picture than just measuring actual acts. and we also know that women are injured -- seriously injured at seven times the rate of men. while it is important to understand the full picture, and that is what we need to do, understand the full picture around families are experiencing violence. i can also say that we know it would complicate things more come gay and lesbian families as well, a complex picture. but from a public policy perspective, it is very important that we note that these crimes disproportionately affect women. >> standing in the back right there. >> thank you for addressing women's about his. that further picture, when we

improve this society, whether we really improve the families, and a for instance, if you're talking about that that act, whether it is reliable or you could look more about the data. for instance, i have looked into the data of the researchers and also as a patient's and as a spouse. i just found out some things that are immoral and unlawful. in domestic violence, you can see the real cost of the violence. it is ruining their families. they are really abused, both men and women. that is why we have to look into that.

so that we can really improve. and about small business, i have a small business and everything you think a woman should have, i think i do. the problem is, in this society, [unintelligible] whenever you borrow money or you have your own savings, i but pretty soon it will be all done. no one will protect you, even when you promote a woman [unintelligible] they are not going to have women either. we have to really investigate all of those. >> thank you. i think the issue of debt as a starting point for looking at a broader range of policy issues is something that we talked

about in the panel. we see the report pointing to questions of policy question for deeply, to get data and context. lin has pointed this out, and a little more deeply at this. so thank you. i question right here? >> my name is stephanie clark, and i'm the national director for products in mom's worldwide. thank you for everyone who contributed putting the study together. my question is, i reviewed over the past year several studies released that had been focusing and researching the economic realities of single mothers in this country. unfortunately they are the same as what is revealed in this report. as far as the disparities, the continue to be consistent and

the bleak economic realities of single women raising children on the run. -- on their own. i had an opportunity in 2009 to attend the president's fatherhood initiative at one of his summits in chicago. my question is, as we see studies like this continue to reveal the plight of single mothers in america, are there any discussions around possibly doing a specific initiative to really address the statistics in helping to approve the quality of life for single women and their children? such as creating some kind of initiative from the white house to really explore and bring to the table the women who are brain impacted by these realities -- for being impacted by this realities as opposed to having decisions made on our behalf by people that truly understand why single mothers in the and the situation that they are and?

-- who end up in the situation that they are in? >> this is an important point, and an import statistics, something that we're very concerned about. i will say that one illustration of a policy, the broader policy concerned with this population, even most recently in the tax package that was passed, at the end of the year, an important part of what president and his economic team fought for to include in the tax package, the headline went to the continuation of the entirety, but for much -- but much more important was women and children and to be stimulated to the economy as well, but not only the extension of unemployment, but the continuation of the child tax credit.

and lowering the eligibility of that coming down the $3,000. a huge benefit to single moms in particular with children, the earned income tax credit extension as well, and heather can explain this better than i can. on those levels, i can tell you that we are very concerned and very focused on this population is evidenced by those policies. a lot of what we are trying to do with small business administration, focusing on of entrepreneur ship and annie talked about a pathway. >> it would benefit women, single women. also encouraging companies to invest in small companies, which to me was groundbreaking. it is forcing companies to seek the small ones, but definitely those policies are coming

together. it might seem disjointed, but they are looking at the comprehensive package, and it would actually benefit. for example, all the deductions for health care expenses of a woman that has around business, all that will become a more complete package. >> i am so glad that you raise that question. those statistics are sobering and they are largely unchanged. when we have seen this pattern for decades, the worst single women have poverty rates two times that of others. this is a deserving problem. but we are not political contest right now in terms of what is going on in congress, -- we are in a political context where we are on a strong defensive to fully fund or even maintain the level of funding that we have right now. a lot of the social support

mechanisms as single women rely on for themselves and for their children, just have a basic level of quality of life. to the degree that single women can band together with other people who are experiencing economic difficulty and decide to say, do not forget about me -- the reality is, that at that time where we are focusing on the issue of deficit reduction, the reality is that we are still on a society where we experience the highest level of poverty that we've seen as a nation since the statistics have been recorded, the highest level of food and security since the statistics have been recorded. -- food and security -- insecurity since the statistics have been recorded. i think we need to really be concerned about quality of life and single mothers and children, one main area that we need a lot of help.

>> to add to that, i think the ministers and focus on providing opportunities through community colleges -- the administration's focus on providing opportunities through community college for education for the population as a whole prison some good opportunities for single parents. my organization as a new initiative called the student apparent success initiative that is trying to look at how institutions of higher lining can provide services and support single parents so that they can prove -- pursue higher credentials to support their family over the long term. we think the long-term economic impact. -- we think that will have a long-term economic impact. [inaudible] >> ally like to share with you some of our efforts. >> for those of you who are not signed up with the white house council on women and girls come and you can go on to the web

site at whitehouse.gov and click over to the women and girls page. you can sign up for that information. senator kaplan is right there alan hall wayne, -- right there in the hallway. >> thank you very much. john michaelson. i have not heard a peep about in the report, speaking of quality of life, the environmental issue. environmental habits, women working in green businesses are starting green businesses. i am wondering if you have any of the research are where we might find it -- or where we might find it on women's habits specifically in this, is a more common among certain income

groups, moms, more common among certain regions of the country, for example, california is popular. we hear about it there but that does not mean that statistically that is what is going on. especially in support of the president's initiative to create a green economy, we need to know this data so that we can boost the green economy. >> there's still some is that we need to know, given that these industries are newly emerging in many cases. but the u.s. department of labor women's bureau has done a great job of the putting information on its website. that is emerging industries, it presents us with a new opportunity to not to make the same mistakes all over again about leaving women out of high- paying, high-quality job opportunities. here is a very important issue that think we all need to pay attention to it. >> nicole mason, if she could

stand up. her group produced a report that dealt with that issue is initially. p.m.,re coming up on 1:30 and we want to once again thank you for leading the charge on this. an amazing report. i open my remarks by failing to in knowledge the person who really was responsible for bringing us together. the president, i have to say, his vision and his commitment to women and children, and it is infused throughout the administration. that is how we got here today. i am so proud of him and i think all of our panelists and our host. the center for american progress for hosting this year, and for all the good work that you do

every day in promoting a robust and really informed dialogue on this important issue. thank you very much and thank you all for coming. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> next, the supreme court argument. and the administrator, lisa jackson. and then your calls and comments on "washington journal." on newsmakers, a kentucky congressman talks about the

debate over federal spending and the budget negotiations on the passage. this is a sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern time on c- span. and a professor is on book tv. she has written several books on the american revolution. join our 3 our conversation. taking your phone calls, emails, on c-span2 you can also find the entire weekend schedules online. weekend schedules online. they will seek a general-craft

-- ashcroft can be held responsible to rest muslim men suspected of terrorist -- arrest muslim men of terrorist ties. justice cake ended not participate in this case. this is about one hour. >> thanks. this seeks personal money damages against a former person of the united states for doing his job.

to view it any other way is high officials to lawsuits. it is based on their bad motive. improper motives are easy to alleged in the hard to disprove. they would have aborted some litigation and make it difficult for prosecutors to do their job. there can be little doubt that the statutory requirements section was met in this case. there can be little doubt that the subject of motivation the general was a prosecutor as to whether there was a fourth amendment violation that exists. [unintelligible]

the third reason in the easiest is the applicable lot is what it is. the warrant was issued by a neutral judge in idaho in 2003. neutral judge in idaho in 2003. >> it makes very little difference whether general ashcroft is held immune by absolute immunity for qualified immunity? once you say that motive is not introduce a bill regard to the qualifying question, and once you say he is using a witness subpoena, you cannot look behind it as to whether he was abusing it for some other. >> we think there may be a difference.

i think the qualified immunity question in this case is one about motivations. it is not limited to the fourth amendment. if the prosecutor has a bad motive, somehow it pierces the veil of absolute immunity. that is something that this court has never accepted. >> i thought the argument was that this is not as close to the core of the prosecutorial function as a some of the other functions to which we have given absolute immunity. since it is so dangerous and there is such potential for abuse, we should look at

absolute immunity at this particular context. i do not understand why there is any difference whatsoever. >> they are making that argument in this court. the only difference is here they had a bad motive. talk about a bad motive. these are material witnesses being sought in connection with an ongoing investigation by a prosecutor. this has happened for hundreds of years. they are exercising the

prosecutors professional judgment. prosecutione pending? >> yes, it was. prosecutors learned in march that they were going to saudi arabia for an unspecified time. this is essentially what prosecutors do. to see it other -- any other way is to expose prosecutors to lawsuits. >> was he released? >> there was an acquittal and then other charges were dropped. are they still in custody. is that after the trial was over? over? he had a travel restrictions

placed upon him until the trial was over. that was after the resolution there was a hung decision among others. the government took it very seriously. we reached agreement with them in writing. the person would leave the country and not come back. that was in exchange that we would not prosecute him any further. further. there were a suite of safeguards to look at this.

congress set of several different things to prevent that. the prosecutor needs to show this. the prosecutor and his ability to detainee anyone -- the condition or combination of condition would assure the appearance of the individual. then a formal procedure where they have a right to counsel. they will present evidence. this is to show that they should continue to be detained. >> i would like to come back to the question that i think justice scalia is asking.

this does not violate the fourth amendment where statutory requirements and establishing the maturity alidade are met. there is absolute immunity when a prosecutor seeks this? >> that is the way that they have historically gone about it. they do not reach constitutional questions. here you have a non circuit decision. absolute immunity can be pierced by a prosecutors bad motive.

the epa is it in charge of the recovery in the chesapeake bay. i hope you take that seriously. a lot of the runoff issues that have been neglected should be addressed. i know you are trying to do that. >> would you yield? >> you're not suggesting to take

money away from the guirguis sound are you? >> no, that would be wrong. i just like to see the budget debate little more help to the puget sound. we have had discussions about this. i would love to see the great lakes and in action agenda, a plan. i do not think they have a plan. a scientifically credible plan that is verified by independent sources -- that is what you need to do. that is what we did in the state of washington. >> i would just say to the ranking member that with the puget sound has 20% of the world's fresh water, you can make the case to take money away from us. >> we had the most endangered species in the country in puget sound. it is also a priority. let's try to be fair. the administration's budget was

not out to puget sound. tommy is doing a good job. but we have been the forgotten party. it has always been the great lakes, the chesapeake bay, and the everglades. puget sound has been, i think, not as important. this is a very important body of water. i had used my time up. we want to work with you on this, but we hope to get that budget request up in the future. i think it is totally justified. i think we have done what we need to do with our action agenda and our partnership is moving forward. i yield back. >> thank you, chairman. i can assure the chairman that puget sound will certainly not be forgotten. >> thank you. >> any time.

the gentleman sitting to my left and i represent the inland empire in southern california. years ago when i first became involved in public affairs, there were over 250 days a year you could not see the mountains that surround this valley for almost 360 degrees. it is a beautiful valley. over many a year, many of us have been involved in air quality questions because of that. today you can see this mountains almost every day of the year. i would never forget taking a trip to detroit. we spent a whole month one weekend in detroit to talk about air quality questions and what the american automobile industry was not doing in terms of

improving our automotive emissions. it was not until foreign manufacturers produced cars with better gas mileage that there began to be a change. that contributed to the cleaning of our air. i will never forget that during voicesar's there were that said we should be cautious with regulations and policies in the arena of air quality. there are times we do not know what we are talking about. it is easy to point to the smokestack and say if we solve that problem, we will solve 95% of the problems, so forget about the rest. you and i note that the automobile continues to be the problem. i would be interested in what the epa is thinking about --

what is having a direct impact on how people deal with their transportation needs. please do not talk to me about high-speed rail. that is hardly a solution. in the meantime, the air quality -- it helped us with trying to deal with some of these problems. i once converted a convertible to propane. the car never ran again. that was by way of legislation that was moving that would suggest that we should take all automobiles with a stationary source, major pools of cars, and convert them experimentally to propane to see what that they have. someone told me we should be cautious about this because the research is showing things we

did not anticipate. it would appear that propane creates a thing called propylene and that may be worse than the standard emission we are concerned about. we talked a lot about scientists, research, and dependent peer review, etc., but a lot of times we do not know what we're talking about. if we are going to promote regulations that and that people's lives and spend a lot of money doing it, we should know what we're talking about. i want you to comment on that general area. back in those days, a community in my district had the largest

cattle herds in the country numbering thousands perform. within your air quality arena you talk about animal gases. it is astonishing to me, and i agree, i would like to see the background of those experts that talk about animal gases. the people would wonder if we know what we are talking about. thank you for being here. i would be interested in your thoughts and where you are taking s by research and otherwise. >> thank you. just a few things, i began by telling your state as one that has driven us towards cleaner vehicles in this country. taking the lead out of gasoline single-handedly made eight tremendous difference, but also

enable the catalytic converter that is on cars all over the world. it is an american invention. california has a history of leading the country with respect to vehicles. the clean air act recognizes california's leadership by giving the state a special role. we have 1 million more cars than we had in 1970 in absolute numbers. emissions are much lower than the emissions from 1970. we are dropping more cars, but they are cleaner and more fuel efficient. that was a benefit of fuel efficiency, a greenhouse gas card deal that was worked out last year. as cars become cleaner, as the population grows, we need to

continue to push that envelope said that we make our cars cleaner. i am a scientist by training. i recently visited our an arbor laboratory which is not in the state of california, but is an impressive place. we would invite you to see it. you would be struck by what an engine of economic development that is. many of the car companies locate their research near us. they note that they are going to have to design cars that are more efficient. with respect to animal emissions, greenhouse gas, methane emissions -- the epa has no plans to regulate such. those that are required to report their greenhouse gas

emissions is zero. that has been discussed and is a source of worry. i find myself getting reassurance to ranchers about that matter. >> i really want to hear from you, how do you think this committee can't help you accomplish the epa's mission without overly impacting overall air quality -- without overly impacting a very fragile economy. there is little doubt that we can take a small piece of the money that some people are asking for high-speed rail and at the other end of that line used a small piece of money and buy more buses then we would

know what to do with to replace that high-speed rail, moved a lot more people in that fashion. please tell us how we can help. >> i will be happy to work with you anyway i can. obviously my colleague i think very highly of, what his work and the epa is looking at the transportation after the future, we are happy to share with you the information we are sharing with him. i think that communities are differently situated when it comes to jasper station choices. are -- transportation choices. my belief is with technological

innovations including mass transit, we do not have to do that. >> those of buses at the other and, hopefully have cleaner driven engines. you could perhaps put together a major study to help us change the patterns of what people are willing to do in terms of transfer -- in terms of transport. it is an incredible challenge. we are a long ways from turning the corner. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i respect seniority and i respect their ability to make my life miserable if i went first.

[laughter] >> yes. >> that was faster than i thought. thank you very much. it is a great pleasure. i want to commend you for the courageous way in which you lead the epa and the kinds of things you have been able to do quickly in the context of the circumstances you inherited. your mission is to protect human health and the in government and that is exactly what you have been working to do. i applaud you for it. i think your work on the clean air act is saving lives and keeping people healthy. it is providing enormous benefits across the country.

as you know, we need a strong epa to safeguard our children, the community, and our future. there's a recent series of articles in the new york times that are fascinating and are producing a significant amount of information that is presented in ways that are more understandable than they have been in the past for many people. in fact, stories like little or note testing for later -- radioactive levels. i just want to ask you a few questions along these lines. among the issues raised was a hydraulic fracturing waste water contains regular activity at levels much tighter than previously known and it is being sent to waste water treatment plants that cannot remove the radioactive

materials. these plants are then dumping this contaminated water into rivers and streams and those rivers and streams supply drinking water. as a result, there is a threat to the health of millions of people. little or no testing is going on. i am wondering if there is a thing that can be done to deal with this. will the epa ordered the immediate testing of water from the facilities that except tracking waste as well as testing drinking water intake systems downstream from the treatment plants? >> thank you. i think the epa is very interested in getting data on real activity in flowback water. we will ordered the testing. i would like to have an

opportunity to speak to the states involved, specifically pa., who has done some on out of work. i attend due to our office in philadelphia to had these discussions. >> i appreciate your saying that. i think that is true. a lot of the states are doing things that are not strong enough. a pennsylvania is one of them. there is a lot of drilling going on and in pennsylvania. the rapid increase will cause a whole host of problems if there is no oversight. it be looked close to pennsylvania and find a pennsylvania is dumping a lot of the radioactive materials into rivers that are on the border of your state, then you have to be concerned about it too. leaving the situation is open to individual states will not do it. that is part of it.

you're so glad you are interested in this. let me ask you something else. the narrowing of national fracturing study and funding other researches, they raise serious concerns about the process behind the epa's study on hydraulic fracturing. i believe the epa has put advisory panels that are positive. i commend the agency for not falling into the industry's trap of narrowly defining the drilling process. we are seeing that all over the country in state after state. they are doing this in this trap a narrowly defining the drilling process. you're able to overcome that because you're under pressure to do so. what has been let out of the study is what i would like to discuss. according to the times, initial versions of the study's scope

recommended research on a number of dangers, dangers of toxic fumes, the risk of contaminated runoff where drilling waste is disposed, whether rivers can sufficiently dilute waste water that is discharged from treatment plants, and a whole host of other things. documents were sent to the advisory board late last month. they included none of these topics interestingly enough. agency officials expressed concern about the public's reaction if it was discovered that the study scope was being narrowed and staff were discouraged from putting anything in writing about the national study on last vetted by managers. it cannot be in the freedom of information act when the

regional administrator apparently instructed his subordinates do not spell out their grandest vision about what the study should examine last the public see all these concerns. these are the things we know are very dangerous. there are a lot of activities going on to try to keep adverse circumstances quiet. now, the epa had a recommendation from congress on what to discuss, specifically drinking water. the agency's scientist felt there were areas to examine, such as air emissions. the public and congress should have been made aware of those. contrary to assertions from the industry that the language was a congressional recommendation, not an order, and the epa had the authority to ignore or

expand on it, instead what we see are deliberate attempts to shield from the public additional concerns expressed by epa scientist. a lot about the did things were going on by the scientist under your leadership. there are clearly other risk worth examining that have come to light since this report language was first drafted in june of 2009. should the public be made aware of all of the concerns epa scientists have about the risks it poses to public health? why would managers believe this information should be held? why would epa not allow these additional topics to be submitted to the advisory board? furthermore, at a january meeting in washington, regional

directors were informed that a national study would be the only forum for research on hydro fracking. there is no justification to stop research outside the scope of this study. one other issue, should the national study be the only forum for research even if other scientists and researching rest outside the scope of the steady in response to public health concerns keep rising and get more serious? >> let's give the administrator a chance to answer that. >> on the issue of the congress having access to what we know, absolutely. i have committed the agency to transparency in information.

there are some concerns that are located in philadelphia. we have 10 offices across the country. the one in new york is in new york city. they set strong and principled comments on the draft. many of the states are very involved in this issue. it affects them while we do this big steady. it will take two years. texas, we have taken enforcement actions it there. there was a dispute with the state. we believed we needed to take those actions. i want to start by saying that we believe it is important. it must be sustainably and responsibly produced. future generations should not somehow bear the bargain of a rush to produce it. you asked about withholding

information. i want to clarify one thing, we des looking at radio nuclei' as part of the study. it was not left out of the study. the study is with our science advisory board. we have used the transparent consensus based processed to scope this study. we expect the board to have a meeting of the study parameters on monday. there are people who sit on the board who do not have conflicts of interest said it people are not worried the study was somehow skewed. all the safeguards we put in place, i will not be close minded to say we do not need to make sure we are doing everything right. i will go to marty pennsylvania

to our office to try and understand what the state of play isn't there. the budget this year calls for six meighen dollars for that national study. -- $6 million for that national study. the only thing i will say is we have to spend money wisely. i will not say the national study should be the only study, but after a study that rigorous to try to outline a steady, i would want my science adviser, my head of research and development to understand what additional work is happening so we are not somehow being redundant. we want to make sure what we are doing works. that is only fair. it is a wise use of money. we should certainly not be tying

the hands of our scientists. we must recognize maybe we did not be the best job of portraying states have done significant work of regulating the natural-gas recovery process. taking a timeout said they can make sure they get it right. >> i deeply appreciate that. i know you are doing a lot of important things that need to be done. there is a lot of damage that is taking place. the damage will increase dramatically over the course of the next couple of years. if nothing is being done to control and to oversee what is happening, there will be a lot of damage to a lot of people. one of the things -- there are a number the things that could be done. one of the things that should be done by this congress is to correct a piece of legislation that took al an important

federal act which was put into place in 1974 to regulate this drilling and to ensure whatever drilling is being done, it is being done honestly and not being done in ways that are corrupted and corrupted quiet late said that nobody knows about the corruption, nobody knows about the danger, including what is being injected into the context of this drilling. >> i think the gentleman for his comments. >> i wanted to follow up on those comments. regarding non stationary sources. i think he has credibility on this issue. he with the clean air act for the state of california. we understand that not stationary sources are the problem. automobiles, trucks, trains that

cause a significant part of police in. -- significant part of pollution. one successful program has been the emissions reduction act. senator feinstein, senator boxer, and myself have been supportive of that program because it is removing old diesel engines from the inventory and replacing them with clean diesel which has a significant effect on particulate pollution. that program works. there is a lot of things we do that do not work. a lot of us were concerned when use the road out that program. i wanted to bring that to your attention. my home state of california as you mentioned, we have our own environmental laws. i in -- in almost every case we

meet or exceed standards. we have a process in california called the california environmental quality act that receives -- a exceeds your requirements. one agency after the other, because we have a significant job problem in california. our unemployment rate is 12.5%. the requirements are causing significant delays in permitting processes in order to get projects under way. have you given any thought to states such as mine where permit applications, documents that are submitted by the state's such as california that exceed requirements, that the requirements can be waived. i cannot think of a state that

has more stringent environmental laws than the state of california. do you not think that is a way we can work towards getting these projects under way quicker? >> i have not focused on that process. it is run from the white house. it is not entirely in our jurisdiction. it is not mine to manage. >> the epa certainly has input into this in supporting a new process in which it can be waived. >> we will take a look get it and discuss it. i will say this, obviously for our the environmental programs, there is delegation for the permit issues.

we issue a permit and in california the issue a permit. i do not disagree with you in terms of the popularity or effectiveness of the program. it is a tough budget full of tough choices. the only consideration i would offer for you is that there was zero money included in the recovery act. that money is about 50% spent. in a year of tough budget choices, the thought was a wicked let that money hit the street if you will. that was the basis for the very difficult decision to not add money to the program. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, administrator

jackson, for coming to testify today. on behalf of my constituents and citizens, your help is much appreciated. in fact, i have valentine's for you. you make the air we breathe cleaner and water we drink safer. we face tough it -- we face tough fiscal times, but the health of our children, our seniors, and are more than or -- more vulnerable population cannot be sacrificed. there has been a lot of talk about jobs and what can or cannot happen. i was reading a story about some previous hearings that took place in other committees.

there was a story that talks about what happened when we were working on controlling and removing ozone depleting cfc's. there was a warning that we would see shutdowns of chilling machines that warm that -- that cool our large hospitals. it happened five years faster than predicted and cost 30% less than expected. i was working for a company that did major appliances. it was doom and gloom about what was going to happen. people got it when they replaced

the refrigerators. people understood it. they understood they were making the air better for their children. i never heard a consumer complaint about what was moving forward. in fact, it caused a lot of increase in technology. thank you for the work you do. i think lots of times we focus on what our problems with people understanding regulations and we do not celebrate our successes. i do want to talk about something i am concerned about. we talked about balancing your budget. the chairman has been very thoughtful on how we coordinate climate change and other things to make sure we use the best science and not duplicate it. yesterday we heard from the inspector general about the demands on the epa.

you do not have to deal with it a few years ago. contaminants are an emerging concern in our water. isthe epa's budget significant to address, these issues as well as working on past issues and the mandate you have in front of us. we also heard from the inspector general that the difficulties of the epa has regulating toxic kennels. -- toxic chemicals. chemical companies are not required to fully disclose health and safety data information. this puts the burden on the epa, the taxpayers, to look at the chemicals being sold for profit. this is in contrast to the european union's approach.

i am concerned about how he will make it your priority with a degreasing budget and fulfilling all the other things we heard about today and backlogs involving water accounts and the concern the gentleman from kentucky had about ongoing litigation. i think my questions get together. how can you carry l your chemical safety and vote -- carry out your safety? >> your question is about the new challenges we face at the epa. one challenge has been putting together this budget.

we understood the president's strong call. i agree that we have to find efficiencies and do what americans are doing which is trying to find a way to get our job done on lower budgets. that is fair. i think we should be embracing that. we have identified toxics as a area of focus of -- an area of focus and concern. we are hopeful that we will get around to it that soon. we hope congress will continue its work there. we increased our funding for top six in this proposed budget. it is over $16 million to deal with some of the issues you mentioned. we are proud of challenging confidentiality claims when we can. we will have people doing the legal work on challenging these

companies to open up the window shades if you will and let scientists see into these products. that takes legal resources. there are challenges under the law. we have made cuts, but we tried to increase those places where we believe with the challenges we see before us we need to increase our resources. >> i was in a cab today. the cab driver did not know what i did for a living. he asked me where i was from. i told him minnesota. he asked me if i faced. he asked that i thought he was crazy. eight used the term indican disrupter. we have our work to do to protect future generations.

thank you. >> if you are next. >> thank you, mr. chairman? -- thank you, mr. chairman. i'll read the question. were due processes and basic medicines of paris were centered when you issued a permit on a power plant? if this does not meet clean air standards, would eight cult led be able to do so going forward? >> i do not know the issue very well. >> is that mexico? >> i wish i could tell you something more specific. >> i think he is talking about a title role in five position.

>> it has a native american angle to it as well. >> we had significant concerns raised by the state of new mexico in downwind areas that were very concerned this plan that would contribute to regional hayes and disability issues of the grand canyon as well as additional pollution issues. i can get more information. >> please do. i would appreciate that. i have one more question. it is on drinking water issues. what is the epa doing right now to assess small water systems with making compliance? >> our work there continues. i have had discussions about that very issue. we have two roles. the first is to put out

standards. the other is the drinking at acknowledges there is affordability issues. we are looking at both. we have encountered some minor resistance from communities that state because i choose to live in a rural area does not mean i choose to have water that does not meet federal standards. we err on the side of resources to meet the standards. we are increasingly looking at providing guidance on affordability as well. i do not think we have finalized the guidance. >> i do not mean this to be adversarial. i want to give you an opportunity to state a broader case. as was mentioned earlier, we have an awful lot of amendments on cr-1 aimed at the epa. i get more questions about your agencies about any other agency

in the federal government. i run the gamut. if it is water -- if it is farmers, they wonder if you want to regulate dust in the air. you cannot farm without having best in the air. if this is oil and gas people -- i recognize the legitimacy of this issue he raises, particularly in areas that have not had oil and gas activity in the scale in decades. we think we regulate it very well. we have using it -- we have been using it since the late 1940's. i have a whole industry that worries they are on the verge of having a federal regime they have never had to deal with and closed upon them when it is a practice they have been doing safely for a long time. i have committed these that come

to me and say they keep raising the standards on water. we get unfunded mandates. he pointed out in your testimony the environment is bipartisan. it was nixon that created the epa. roosevelt, the national park system. air and water is better today than it was 20 years ago. everybody appreciates that. somehow this administration, whether deliberately or not, has stumbled into a situation where it is becoming very partisan. is that because the science or the technology has changed so much or -- again, we clearly have a clash in an area where we do not need a class. i just ask you to reflect a little bit about why all this political controversy is happening around the agency.

>> i wish i had the benefit of history selected reflect on these times. it is fair to say there is a backlog, especially under the clean air act, but not only under the clean air act. standards have been overdue for a while either because the previous administration set the standard and the courts overturned it. that is the case for mercury and other toxins in the air. or transport of pollution's from the western half of the country -- the air blows west to east. in general. i should have said in general. there is a backlog of at dating of standards under the clean-air act. none of these standards are without cost. it is my job as administrator to make sure the analysis shows that it is done in a transparent

way that protect public health but does not surprise business. we have been in a stasis in that for quite some time. the other issue -- i make this offer with some trepidation -- many of them have to do with our ability to communicate what is going on within the walls of the epa with people who should not spend most of their time worrying about that, especially the agricultural community. we have doubled our efforts with the usda to communicate better. particulate matter, which most people would call dust, there has been no regulatory changes proposed. there has been a steady. the study interestingly enough says against a kuwaiti maintaining the current standards as it does changing

them. there has been a regulatory decision made. we just as sessions in iowa and missouri about that very matter. we need to find ways to get out and speak to people where they are and explain to them. i actually agree with you. americans do not want dirty air. farmers rely on clean water for their livelihood. we need to ensure we are doing everything we can to communicate with the usda, but also the states. >> my time is about up. i would ask you to recommit or think through that. i can assure you that the political backlash is real. it has real consequences. i do not know if we are going to fort too fast. i have opinions on these things individually.

attitudinal league and atmospherically in a political sense, there is a reason all of this is happening. sometimes it can be too zealous or to quit. i do not mean you personally, i am talking about in general. agencies can get ideas and move further and faster than the public was them together. i think we are in one of those situations. we will continue to have class is in progress unless we find a way to go forward. we have done that in the past. hopefully we can do that going forward. >> it is an honor to be a member of the subcommittee. >> it is an honor to have you here. >> if only to make 21 years. [laughter] before i began, in this 21 years i realize that every day you

earn -- you learn more. i did not help in the south bronx in the oil wells and i do not have any farmers. we enjoyed the results of the hard work they do, but i do not. on the other hand in looking for a balanced in working with the epa, i know that people what whatever balance we need to strike, but not to go back into the days when the air again york was totally polluted. i also have a river. we had the broadest river. that is a great name for it. most of it -- most of you live in communities where rivers or

ponds or waterways or something you take for granted. or the whole committee worked on cleaning up that river and it became a special place. the epa played a major role in making sure the fish came back to the river and animal life in the neighboring area. some may say that it is a little melodramatic. when you are in a city with a lot of cement, it is extremely important. we have to make sure that we do not move back on the advances we have made. that is my comment. thank you for your work and for your service. i know the next couple of years will be rough once, but we stand here ready to assist you. i had been actively involved in working with the epa on finding ways to adjust the public health impacts on a window

caulking and balanced in our schools. new york city announced it is moving forward with a plan to remove and replace all contaminated systems do not the schools. based on current science and epa guidance that was issued in december, the you think in order to protect our schoolchildren that the city needs to resolve this problem sooner then announced? secondly, separately from the light fixture problem, there is concern about the ones contained in window caulking in our schools. can you update me on your efforts to have york city address this issue as well? we cannot afford any further delays. lastly, is this something that happens in a city like new york

more than other places or is this an issue that affects everyone? >> this is not a new york city only issue. it has to do with the generation of the building. to quickly summarize, if this cancer causing. it is found in ballasts in fluorescent lights. they can be found in caulk. that was phased out in the 1970's. we were gratified to see the city's announcement that they were going to move forward to adjust the ballast issue. the city and signed up to do an investigation. it was showing up in the air. they came to understand through quick sampling that the bigger problem might well be the ballast. they could start to leak and

they can be a concern. our next move is to meet with the city and encourage them -- 10 years is part of the budgetary at this. they are looking at an energy efficiency and updating revamp. they may be able to do this work, replaced the lights and the balance, and that could pay for itself over time. we are going to focus on the places where we think there is contamination so we do not have some child or teacher that ends up being of the 10 years side of that. we would like to have assurance there is tree august in this situation. the city in general has been dealing with this issue. other areas around the country,

and we now have guidance on our internet site. it is not a regulation. >> you answer the last question i was going to ask you. at the citi cooperative? you feel that they have. -- past the city been cooperative? you feel that they have. janet years may be a budget peace -- 10 years may be a budget peace, but can we wait 10 years? >> we knew are talking about a health issue especially a children helped issue, we do not have a lot of data on how pollution or toxins affect them more or less than adults. urgency is always called for. i have not been dealing with the city in day-to-day situations.

they have stepped up. they say they now know and understand the need to be aggressive. i do not need to discount that. our goal now is to ensure that they improved even their tin your plan, which is a wonderful improvement and a step forward. always with children in mind. doing it within their budget. the city schools have their own set of challenges. the mayor and officials are quick to point that out. we are trying to help them deal with this issue in a way that is protective, but also mindful. >> thank you so much. >> process, mr. chairman. thank you, miss jackson. the fame seems to be -- the

famous sees to be -- the theme seems to be --just a couple of weeks ago, the wall street journal talked about a new role -- a new role -- new rule that suggest dairy producers have a spill prevention and control and countermeasure program to deal with oil spills nears shorelines and navigable waterways. this is done because of the percentage of animal fat which is a non petroleum oil in milk. it requires, my understanding is mitigation measures be put in an

derry's train first responders and cleanup protocol, build containment facilities. i do not milking a cow. i would love to read been told by dad, sorry there is no buerm or around the barn. hal with a straight face can anyone in the epa say that given all the problems and the need to maintain the progress we have made in a budget environment like this, that in the epa promulgate new rules like this? it will not cost the epa much, but it will cost the dairy industry and farmers a lot. what is next? what are we going to do?

please explain how that is not overreach. we seem to deflect any criticism of a thing the epa is doing. is this not overreach? >> it is not accurate. we wrote a letter to the editor. the epa and has proposed to exclude milk stores tanks from the program. this common-sense decision was announced months before the wall street journal rather inaccurate article. the epa stayed enforcement requirements for tanks pending final agency action. the epa will take action on this. i can give you a personal update. epa has already sent the file exclusion drop to the white house. we are on schedule to do that.

i have no idea what the wall street journal chose to accurately report this. we tried to fix the record, but i do not believe they have published it. >> that sells like these rules the been promulgated and now you are trying to make exceptions to it. >> that is not entirely accurate. when we promulgated the role at the same time we made clear we were announcing a proposing an exemption. it takes a bit of time for the regulatory process. no producer was subject to a rule that we did not intended to be subject to. there has been a period of time where anyone has been subject to worry about whether spilled milk is going to be regulated. we have announced we do not believe that is an area where regulation is necessary. >> the epa spent a significant

amount of time promulgating the role in the first place. >> they all look -- the rule is for any oil facility that needs containment. we wanted to ensure there was an exemption for the fat in milk. >> there has been no effort to include or subject dairy producers to the spill prevention and control and countermeasure program. no effort? >> no, sir. there has been an effort to exempt them. there are rules to deal with preventing and spills of large amounts of oil into inland waterways. that is part of our requirements. because this unintended consequence came up, we issued an exemption. >> it is still inaccurate to say this was not being considered by the epa and time was not spent to subject -- there was a rule

finalized to subject dairy producers to this the is now being considered or exempted. >> anytime a rule is finalized for oil content may -- oil containment and storage facilities, the epa proposed to ensure the milk was exempted treated there has been time and effort, in my opinion, just the opposite of overreach. we made it clear to our rules that we were not intending to have milk as a substance regulated regardless of whether it was over 1 million gallons. you ask why i cannot entirely by end to this idea of of reach. many of the things we are accused of our attempts to misinform people about what is nicely happening. what is happening is we are not

what is happening is we are not