>> for more than four decades, the libyan people have been ruled by a tyrant, muammar gaddafi. he has denied his people freedom, exploited their wealth, murdered opponents at home and abroad and terrorized leaders abroad. follow what key leaders are saying from the president and administration officials, from the house and senate floor all online at the c-span video library. search, watch, clip and share any time. >> in a few moments, house debate on a proposal to kill a program designed to help homeowners behind in their mortgage payments. in about 45 minutes, a ceremony dedicating a new building to the u.n. to the late ron brown, commerce secretary during the

clinton administration. after that, a hearing on the state of civil rights for american muslims. >> on "washington journal" tomorrow morning, we will talk about energy policy with gene green, ranking member of the energy subcommittee on the environment and the economy. the president and c.e.o. of forbes, steve forbes, will take questions about the economy, federal spending, the kevin sit and jobs. and wall-e look at what nato countries can offer in peacekeeping missions with stephen flan began. "washington journal" is live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> the house voted tuesday to kill an administration program designed to help homeowners stay this their homes. republicans argued that the hampton program is inefficient. the program provides incentives to mortgage services to modify

mortgages for borrowers behind in their payments. this portion of the house floor debate is 45 minutes. committee of the whole house on the state of the union for considerion of h.r. 839 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: union calendar number 15, h.r. 839, a bill to amend the emergency economic stabilization act of 2008 to terminate the authority othe secretary of the treasury to provide new assistance under the home affordable modification program, while preserving assistance to homeowners who were already extended an offer to participate in the program, either on a trial or permanent basis. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the first time. the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. frank, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from illinois. mrs. biggert: thank you, mr. speaker.

i rise -- i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 839, the hamp termination act and commend my colleague from north carolina, mr. mchenry, for introducing this bill. h.r. 839, the hamp termination act, would put an end to the poster child for failed federal foreclosure programs. announced by the administration in february, 2009, and launched in march, 2009, the program has nguished for two years, hurt hundreds of thousands of homeowners and must come to an end. according to the congressional budget office, this bill would save $1.4 bllion over 10 years. to date, the hamp program has already consumed $840 million of the more than $30 billion of tarp funds that were set aside for the program. for this extraordinary investment, the administration predicted that three million to four million homeowners would receive help.

sadly, the program has been a failure. in fact, hamp has hurt more homeowners than it has helped. the program has completed about 540 mortgage modifications, another 740,000 unlucky homeowners had the rug pulled out from under them, their modications we canceled. even the government accountability office, g.a.o., commented that borrowers had their trial modifications canceled than had received permanent modifications. earlier this month, on march 2, the financial subcommittee received testimony from the special inspector general for the troubled assets relief program, significant tarp -- sigtarp barofsky, he noted that, quote, there have been countless published reports on hamp participants who end up

worse off for having engaged in a footal attet to obtain the sustainable relief that the program promised. failed trial modifications leave borrowers with more principal outstanding on their loans, less home equity, depleted savings and worse credit source, unquote. he continued by saying that, quote, worst of all, even in circumstances where they never missed a payment they may face back payments, penalties and even late fees that suddenly became -- become due on their modified mortgages and that they are unable to pay. thus resulting in the very loss of their homes, said hamp was meant to prevent, end quote. mr. speaker -- mr. chairman, many of our own constituents, like homeowners around the country, were lured into hamp witthe promise of relief. in the end, these misled homeowners ended up with no permanent modification, tens of

thousands of dollars deeper into debt. one of my constituents reported that after many, many months under a trial modification he was rejected from the program and immediately handed a bill for $42,000 in back payments, penalties and late fees. how is that an effective foreclosure protection? hamp has been played by -- plagued by problems from the start and is beyond mere reform. many oversight bodies, including the g.a.o., have cited time and time again that treasury has failed to respond to recmendations to increased transparency, accountability and consistency of the program. last year, the congressional oversight panel, or c.o.p., that the pressbacks are unlikely to impve substantially in the future. c.o.p. also stated that billions of taxpayer dollars will have been spent to delay rather than prevent

foreclosures. it is clear that the administration has hold no intention on fixing the numerous problems in its flagship program, a fact that has not gone unnoticed by the public. americans for tax reform submitted testimony for our march 2 hearing saying that hamp has been the u.s. treasury and department of housing and urban development for combating foreclosure and programs and has been a costly failure. headlines around the country agree, a recent "washington times" article said that obama helping hard -- obama's hand -- obama's helping hand hoodwinks homeowners. mortgage assistance can be worse than nothing.

we must help programs that have hurt so many homeowners. unfortunately, programs like hamp were set up in haste and have done little to restore stability in the market. we need to stop funding programs that don't work with money that we don'thave. out-of-control federal spending is hurting our economic recovery. our nation faces a $14.2 trillion national debt and economists agree that reducing government spending will create more favorable environment for private sector job growth. that's exactly what unemployed americans and homeowners need, a ob and a paycheck, not a handout or other fail government program. i reserve the balance of my time. . the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. frank is recognized. mr. frank: i yield three minutes to a member of the committee, mr. capuano. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. capuano: i thank the gentleman for yielng. mr. speaker, this is a program that i'm the first to admit has

not lived up to what our hopes were. this program we hoped to help several million people. thus far we only helped about 550,000 people. i fully admit that this program, like all the other foreclosure programs, could use a healthy dose of reconsideration and improvement. i'm happy to work with that. but to simply repeal all of these programs is to walk away from individual homeowners, walk away from neighborhoods. in this particular case, last week before the break, we walked away from neighborhoods. we walked away from cities and counties all across the country. in this case we are walking away from homeowners. in this particular bill, as i said, this program short of what we had hoped, it still helped 550,000 home owntories keep their homes. 550,000 with approximately another 150,000 on trial as we speak. 550,000 homes just as a point of information is more owner

occupied homes than exist in at least 17 different states. wyoming, alaska, utah, nevada, new mexico, nebraska, and on all individually have fewer homes in the entire state than this program has helped. yet we are going to walk away. every single state in this nation has homeowners who have been helped. in illinois, 29,000 homes have been saved. in north carolina, 10,000 homes. in my own state, 12,000 homes. and counting. again, i'm not going to defend the specifics of every single aspect of this program that's been put together. and i am happyo work with anyone to make it better to help more people to keep their homes, keep their families together. but to simply walk away without offering an alternative means,

we don't care. this congress doesn't care if you lose your home. period. well, i understand that's what some people want to say, they are entitled to do th. they are duly elected, have the power and authority to do that, but i just can't imagine they could look at the individual constituents in their district and say to their face we don't care. and if you feel that strongly about it, then you should not just repeal the program prospectively, you should repeal it retroactively. and tell the 550,000 people whose homes have been saved, we didn't mean it. it was a mistake. we didn't support it then. and as far as we are concerned, you can leave your home tomorrow. i understand that that makes me a bleeding heart liberal according to some people, so be it. call me any name you want.

but if you have the courage and audacity to look at your own constituents and tell them to get it, you don't care, i would encourage you to do so. thank you, mr. speaker. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentlelady from illinois is recogniz. mrs. biggert: i yield five minutes to the gentleman from north carolina, the sponsor of this bill, for five minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. mchenry: i thank the chairman. i thank you for yielding the time. the hamp termination act, which is the legislation before us today, ends what i believe to be a failure. of a government program. not just a failure to help those thre to four million homeowners that the treasury originally set out to assist and they have fallen well short of that, just over 500,000 modifications have

taken place in the two years it's been in existence. not only has i been a failure in terms of the metrics they set up to achieve the go, it's been a failure for the very people who enter into the program and yet are pushed out. now, understand this government program, i want my colleagues to understand what this program does, the hamp program, the home affordable mortgage prram, brings folks in. who are having trouble making their mortgage payments. they bring folks in and they will give them a verbal modification for their mortgage. and what has happened, this is what my constituents tell me, this is what the hard facts and data indicate as well, is that a majority of those folks that enter into this program are actively harmed by this federal

program. actively harmed. they are left 250er8ly -- materially worse off. let me quote from the i specter general for tarp, mr. neal ba roff i ask, -- neal baroff i ask , people who apply for modifications sometimes end up unnecessarily depleting their dwindling savings an ultimately futile effort to obtain the sustainable relief promised by the program guidelines. others who have somehow found as to continue to make their mortgage payments have been drawn into failed trial modifications that have left more -- have left them wi more principal outstanding their loans, less home equity, or position further under water, and worse, credit scores. perhaps worst of all, even circumstances where they never miss a payment, they may face back payments, penalties, and

even late fees that suddenly become due on their modified mortgages thathey are unable to pay, thus resulting in the further loss -- the very loss of their home that hamp is meant to prevent. treasury's claim that every single person who participates in hamp gets, quote, a significant benefit, end quote, is either hopelessly out of touch or a cynical attempt to define failure as success. those are the words of the special inspector general designated to oversee this program and to give us and report to congress and the public on the success or failures of federal programs. and ways to fix them. now, sadlyn the two years of this program and over a year and a half of criticism of this program, the treasury has refused to fix it.

my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have not offered legislation to fix it wen they were in the majority. so we are left with what is required today. is to root out this federal program. that spends our taxpayer dollars, yet hurts more people than it helps. one of my constituents from hickory said, we have been in the hamp since february of 2010 and still have no answer. we are being charged late fees, and we are -- we were reported to the credit bureau. we have been in -- underwater since april and on trial payments for six months which was only supposed to evenly be three months. we have not yet received an answer. this is a federal program. if the private sector were doing this, there would be lawsuits. if the private sector were doing that, my friends on the other side of congress in particular

would be filing legislation to make sure they were unable to do that. instead my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, this administration, are defending a failed program. and they refuse to reform it. they refuse to improve it. they refuse to do anything to it except defend it. and i believe indeed as a special inspector general said, it may be a cynical attempt to define failure as success. so i ask my colleagues to vote for this legislation and remove this costly ineffective and painful government program. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from illinois reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. frank: i yield three minute to a member of the committee, the gentleman from new york, miss mccarthy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york is recognized for three minutes. mrs. mccarthy: i thank the ranking member, barney frank, for yielding me the time. let me say something first, in the beginning of this program we

didn't have any service. that means there were no people t there to help those who were trying to apply. but we have seen encouraging signs in the economy, but we are still long on a path of economic recovery. many of my constituents are still facing hardship, including trying to keep their homes. while the housing crisis hit, the private sector responded by turning their backs on those that needed the help. as a result, congress stepped in and created housing programs to hold the industry accountable and to help these families through the worst housing crisis we have seen in generations. thanks to the democratic controlled congress, we are seeing more and more services adopting their own programs. largely based on the eligibility criteria within the programs such as hamp. but my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have brought those to the floor to determinate these programs,

claiming they have done more harm than good to the homeowner. and that struggling homeowners are in better hands with the private companies that contributed to the housing crisis in the first place. most of the homeowners gotin trouble because the prate sector is the one that got them into problems. i disagree with that and point to constituents who have reached out to my office to help because their services were not being responsive. the bill before us totally terminates the hamp program. however protects assistance to the homeowners in a trial or permanent modification. my amendment which was not made in order would have expanded that provision to include homeowners who on or bfore march 1 of this year submitted required paperwork for hamp. or had made a verified request to their services seeking that modification. my district office has heard from dozens and dozens of my constituents. who have been waiting for up to 16 months, 16 months for a

response from their servicer regarding the you will ingibility of the hamp. ey reach out to my office at the point of total frustration. due to the lengthy response time when they have submitted their required paperwork. i shudder to think what the response rate would have been without this program in place. it's very disheartening that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would like to shut down theseistressed homeowners before they even have a chance to qualify for the assistance. the hamp program was by no means perfect. everybody agrees on that. nor was it meant to be permanent. we all agree on that. instead it was meant to hold the mortgage service industry accountable. and responsive to those that needed the assistance. at a time when our hsing market is still very fragile and foreclosures continue to occur in record numbers, instead of terminating these programs, we should be trying to improve them. during the markup in committee when we were trying to improve

and we asked our colleagues, all right, let's not terminate it -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mrs. mccarthy: supporting efforts to terminate -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. frank: i yield an additional minute. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for a-- an additional program. mrs. mcyartcloyn -- mrs. mccarthy: mr. speaker, we have our disagreements. no two ways about it. but with that being said, to judge a program from the beginning when we couldn't get services, now we are getting services, now we are getting people to be responsive on getting people to stay in their homes, and think about it. all these homes that are being lost to families, where are they supposed to go? in new york you can't fi an apartment, so what are we doing? making more people heless? it was not the fault of the homeowners. i agree. there were many people that shouldn't have bought a house for $700,000, $800,000.

the majority of us in congress couldn't afford something like that. they should never have been getting that mortgage. all of us when we bought our homes had to go through the third degree, how much money do you earn, can you pay the insurance, can you pay taxes, that's why we also put legislation in there to have the service -- the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. mrs. mccarthy: with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: if i might inquire how much time is remaining on both sides? the chair: the gentlewoman from illinois has 19 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from massachusetts has 23 minutes. mrs. biggert: with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. frank: i yield to the gentleman from delaware, two minutes.

the chair: the gentleman from delaware. is recognized for two minutes. mr. cicilline: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to owe -- mr. carney: we ought to focus on how we can move together, democrats and republicans, to address foreclosure crisis and keep families in theiromes. since the housing bubble burst over nine million amerans have gone into foreclosure. my little state of delaware, annual foreclosure filings nearly tripled over the past few years. . and we aren't the hardest-hit states. every situation is different and frankly, not every homeowner can or should be helped. and most of the help should come from the banks and mortgage servicers but they are not doing nearly enough in the state of delaware.

what is incredible to me the hamp termination act, our friends on the other side of the aisle, have decided not to help at all. and that will mean a more dirt path to foreclosure for thousands of families. the claim is hamp has hurt more people than helped. that is a ridiculous charge. back in my home state of delaware the hamp program has helped 1,600 homeowners, by the far the most effective government program. that's 25% of the homeowners who filed for foreclosure last year. and i know a little bit about this. i served as chair of the foreclosure task force when i was lieutenant governor for over a year. the best result we know is for the private banks, i said, and the servicers to make the modifications necessary for the private sector to shlder the bulk of the burden, but they're just not doing it. and so public officials need tools to help out and hamp is

one of the best tools we have. the real question here is whether you believe there is an appropriate role for government to help homeowners facing foreclosure through no fault of their own. it's ok to use taxpayer funds -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. carney: my friends on the other side don't want to use a small amount to help homeowners. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: i yield myself 30 seconds. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs.iggert: the gentleman from delaware talks about his state. let me just say that in illinois if we look back quarter by quarter, hamp permit modificatio, for example, in second quarter of 2010 were 167,000. but the proprietary were 331,000,883. the next quarter 97 hamp and

346,910. i think -- and it goes on. i think that's something to keep in mind, that the private sector can do it better of the 401 -- the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expired. mrs. biggert: i yield myself 30 seconds. out of 4.1 million remodifications -- modifications was 3.5 million of those were private sector and the rest 550. that's 750,000 modifications that were made by hamp that were canceled. and with that i would reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from illinois reserves. the gentleman from massachetts is recognized. mr. frank: i yield myself 90 seconds to say that is an extraordinary bit of illogical that we just heard. nothing in the existence of hamp in any w has people

going to the private sector. if you listen to the gentlewoman's time has expired you have this fantasy picture that people are being restrained by the federal government not to go to the private sector, go to hamp. hamp is the private sector. that is part of the problem. no could he hergs by the government. yes, it's true, the private sector has done the easy ones on their own. anyone that wants to go to the private sector does not go to hamp. there is no requirement that people go to hamp. it's set up that it's a choice you have to go to one another. people a free to go to the bank. if the bank won't do it they can go to hamp. so this is an absolutely illogical notion that one blocks the other. the problem is that hamp is the federal government bringing people into contact with the private sector. it is still openly a private sector decision. part of it remains voluntary. you no you can go bankrupt with

anything but your private residence and my friends overwhelmingly blocked that from happening. absent that we don't have the leverage with the private sector we'd like to vfment but it's in every case the private sector that decides. the private sector does it wihout any hindrance. if there is a problem then you go into the hamp. the other point i've been waiting to hear members have said nor people harmed tn helped. that statistic shows nowhere in the record. i want to see that explained. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentlewoman from illinois. mrs. biggert: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from illinois reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. frank: let me ask how much time is consumed. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts has 19 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentlewoman from illinois has 18 1/2 minutes remaining mr. frank: well, then i'll defer to the gentlewoman from illinois, we've been going back

and forth. i believe it's their turn subsequently. mrs. biggert: with that i yield two minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fitzpatrick. the chair: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes. mr. fitzpatrick: mr. chairman, i rise today in support of h.r. 839, the hamp termination act. i was sent to the 112th congress to do something about the $14 trillion national debt. we've made many difficult decisions about funding difficult decisions. in a time when people are being asked to do more with less, we cannot continue inefctive federal spending. like so many programs hatched in washington, hamps about within of those -- one of those programs that has grossly mismatched its mark. helping people seeking to avoid

foreclosure, of the $30 billion of the program, only a fraction has been spent. only an eighth have seen any permanent moification. despite the fact that u.s. taxpayers have given lenders an average of $20,000 for each participating homeowner, there is nothing that prevents a lender from still foreclosuring after the modification. -- foreclosing after the modification. the bottom line of the hamp program is this -- false hope for homeowners who see the federal government send thousands to big lenders only to lose their home a few months later. according to the special inspector general of tarp programs, there have been countless a public lished reports of hamp participants worse off from having engaged in a futile attempt to obtain relief that the program promised. it leaves borrowers with more principal left on their home, depleted savings and even worse credit scores, closed quote. as we work to rein in

government spending to create certainty, confidence and ultimately jobs, this progm, well-intentioned as it is, has not been tax dollars well spent. i urge my colleagues to support the bill and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from illinois reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. frank: i yield to another member of the committee, the gentlen from indiana, mr. carson, three minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. carson: thank you, ranking member frank. thank you, mr. speaker. over the last few years, the united states has faced a devastating economic crisis. as a result of the econic downturn, many homeowners have lost their homes or at imminent risk of foreclosure. that is why the obama administration launched the home affordable modification program, to stem thess can lating tide of foreclosures and the dast russ impact it has on its -- disastrous impact it has on its communities. it helps homeowners foreclosure

by providing them with permanent loan modifications to terms they can afford. although this program is far from perfect, it has hped more than 600,000 families lower than mortgage payments and stay in their homes. h.r. 839, the hamp termination act of 2011, will end this program and is the latest effort by house americans to avoid foreclosure and mittcation programs. with forecasts showing there will be three million foreclosures nationwi this year and the housing turnaround not expected for at least three years, republicans have yet to offer any alternative to help solving our housing crisis. republicans have also failed to address the impact this crisis is having on minority communities. an estimated 17% of latino families and 11% of african-american families have lost their homes or are at an

imminent risk of losing their homes. eliminating support for distressed homeowners at this point in time would be disastrous for neighborhoods trying to recover from the foreclosure crisis. instead, we should focus our efforts on ways to make hamp a useful, wide-reaching program with meaningful goals. goals such as pushing lenders to reduce the principal on loans that are underwater and give struggling homeowners real relief. i urge opposition to this misguided bill. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back my ti. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: at this time i'd yield such time as he may consume to the chairman of the financial services, mr. bachus. the speak pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama is recognized for as much time as he wishes to consume. mr. bachus: i thank the

chairman. as republicans and democrats talk about what this bill does, this bill shuts down a federal program which spends money, and every dime of that money, over 1,000 million dollars has been spent. $1,000 million and they authorized $29.9 billion more to be spent. no that's taxpayer money and that's money that in 2008 we promised the american people when the banks paid it back that it would go in the treasury. that was a promise that we made. so this bill keeps that promise and that's the money will be returned to the treasury. now, why do we make that

promise and why do we defend that promise today on the floor of the house? beuse, ladies and gentlemen, we are spending our children and grandchildren into financial oblivion. we are threatening the security of this country. where do i get such a fact as that? where do i get it's a threat to national security which i said last week and i was criticized? well, let me quote defense secretary robert gates when he said two months ago, and i quote, the country's dire physical situation and the threat it poses to american influence and credibility around the world will only get worse unless the u.s. government gets its finances in order. and i was to, well, that didn't say that it was a threat

to our national security. but following that stement admiral mike mullen made this statement, the chairman of our joint chiefs of staff, the most significant threat to our naonal security is our debt. in case you weren't listening, let me say that again. the most significant threat to our national security is our debt. now, that wasn't a republican on the floor of the house. that was the joint chiefs of staff, mike mullen. we're spending $1.42 for every $1 we get. we e we're borrowing 42 cents of that. 12% of our debt is owed to the chinese. every day we write the chinese for $120 million. they could buy the most

advanced strike jet fighter in the world and still have $20 million to put in their pocket each day. in 1970 only 19% of our national debt was owed to other countries. today it approaches 50%. now, let's not talk about whether we can afford this program. let's talk about whether our children or grandchildren can because let's not kid ourselves. can't pay it back. now, do we want to spend $30 billion of our children and our grandchildren's money? well, rst of all, should we do that morally? but let's just assume that you say yes, we should do this with our chirp and our

grandchildren's money. well, who should we pay that money to? you talked about the banks. well, where does this money go? it goes to the banks. every dime of it is paid to a bank. you have a borrower. you have leaneder. as many of you have correctly said, and i agree with you, people want homeowners money they couldn't afford to pay back ad is that the taxpayers' fault, should they pick up the bill? no. it's the banks or it may be the homeowners. but the people that ought to pay it back are not the taxpayers and if it can't be paid back the banks ought to take the loss. but you talk about the homeowners. but it is the banks that will be paid and you talk about 500,000 americans that have been helped. you didn't mention almost a million that have been made worse off. now, again, is that some mean

republican saying they're worse off? no. today, march 29, a letter from the largest national hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the united states, you know who that is? now what did they say? let me quote what the largest and i think we'd all agree a very liberal organization, what did they say? i urge you to vote yes on this legislation, they said. especially the voluntary nature of hamp has resulted in an abysmal performance by mortgage servicers and hundreds of thousands of families losing their homes to foreclosure unnecessarily. they say this program has resulted in hundreds of thousands of american homeowners losing their family.

now, are they the only people that have said this? no. our own inspector general, our own neil brodsky, who was nut charge of monitoring this program, what did he say? let me quote what he said. hamp benefits only a small portion of distressed homeowners. offers others little more than false hope and in certain cases causes more harm than good. when did he say that? he said it this month. before our committee. this month. how about the congressional oversight panel, made up a majority of which are democrats, what did they say? they said billions of taxpayer dollars, billions, billions, will have been spent to delay rather than prevent foreclosures. now, that's not republicans who are getting some crazy idea that

this program isn't working. , it's democrats. and who did president obama -- has he applauded to temporarily run the consumer financial protection bureau? well, it's elizabeth warren. we all know the answer to that. what does elizabeth warren say about this program? let me quote what she said. just the facts, not spencer bachus, not patrick mchenry, not judy biggert. no. elizabeth warren. who works out of the white house, who's in charge of consumer protection. because here's what she sa, december 14, because treasury's authority to restructure hamp ended on october 3, 2000, the program's prospects are unlikely to improve substantially in the future. in other words, they're not going to -- they're not going to improve this program. so let's end by saying this, we

say shut it down, you say mend. let'send this program. why? let's not pretend. we're notalking about mending, we're talking about pretending. the treasury according to elizabeth warren doesn't even have the ability to do that. the administration itself, not someone here, but your administration, treasury official said that the mortgage banking conference february 24, st a month ago, you won't see any mainly new programs coming out. we may tweak around the edges but our primy objective in 2011 is excellent in the program we have. there's been no excellence in the program. it's flawed.

the largest hispanic group in america has said, end this program. but i'll tell you what, our grandchildren and children would say that and you continue to say and i agree with you, we've got 13 million american families underwater with their mortgages. and you want to pick and choose 500,000 of those to help. what about the other 21,000? should the federal government pay everybody's mortgage that's behind? one out of four american families are underwater on their homes. it just came out yesterday, 13 million vacant houses in america and almost immediately you come up with a cash for keys program. where you're going to buy these abandoned properties.

from the bank banks, from the speculators. i don't think you've listened to the american people. i don't think you've heard what they said in november. this program has been criticized every -- ever since its inception. you haven't mended it, you're talking about mending it today. where is your bill to mend it? is there a bill to amend it? have introduced it? is there a bill? mr. frank: will the gentleman yield? mr. bachus: i will yield. mr. frank: finally. yes, we are introducing legislation to make sure the taxpayers are off the hook. mr. bachus: you will be? mr. frank: yeah, we've introduced a bill to say, to restore a program of prosecute provision that was -- mr. bachus: -- you will be? mr. frank: it has been filed. mr. bachus: was it filed today? mr. frank:, no, last week. last week. if the gentleman doesn't -- mr. bachus: two years -- mr. frank: if the gentleman -- mr. bachus: i take back my time.

mr. frank: will the gentleman yield? mr. bachus: $29 billion of authorization, two years of a failed program and the week before -- mr. frank: will the gentleman yield? mr. bachus: the week before we come to the floor you file a bill. you file a bill. i'm sorry -- mr. frank: will the gentleman yield? mr. bachus: to say to the ranking member that you can file the bill, we'll take a look at it, but we're ending this failure. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. frank: i yield myself two minutes. and i regret the ranking member's -- the chairman's refusal to allow me to answer the question he asked. yes, we just filed the bill because we are restoring a provision that was in the financial reform bill. the gentleman who has shown very little regard for the taxpayers in his own vote, sendin money to brazil an cotton farmers, i wish he had listened to secretary gates and admiral mullen and not voted to force on them money for weapons systems

they didn't want. they said those things and they tried to gethe congress not to give em weapons they didn't want. but many of my republican friends in the majority disregarded that. but in the tarp legislation we said that in 2013 when this program ends any pennthat we spent and not returned to the taxpayers will come from the banks. will come from the hedge funds. d we can anticipate republican opposition to that because in the financial reform bill last summer, already passed, not recently introduced, we said that f many of these programs to recover the cost of the foreclosure mitigation and dealing with the results of foreclosure we would get it from large financial institutions and the republicans objected to that and the republicans insisted in the senate that it be knocked out. so every time we have tried to get money from the large financial institutions to pay for the cost of the damage, the republicans have opposed it. and i wish again that when it

came to brazilian cotton farmers or weapons the pentagon didn't want or infrastructure in afghanistan or iraq security forces, all the things the gentleman from alabama votedor to come out of the taxpayers' hide and then he votes against and opposes our legislation already passed and just reintroduced to have the large financial institutions pay for this. so his concern for taxpayers comes into play when we're trying to help people who are in need but it's not in play when we talk about heavy defense contracters, brazilian american cotton farmers or the large financial institutions because he and his fellow partisans have fought every effort we have made to get the large financial institutions to bear this cost. but we do have still in the are? >> the house then voted to kill the home affordable modification program, known as

hamp. the bill that kills that program still has to be considered by the senate. president obama says he will veto it. in a new moments, a ceremony dedicating the new building for the u.s. mission for the u.n. for the late ron brown, commerce secretary during the clinton administration. in about 40 minutes, a look at civil rights for muslim americans. after that, a hearing so-called disease clusters. >> on "washington journal" this morning we will talk about energy policy with democratic representative gene green, ranking member on the energy subcommittee. the president and c.e.o. of forbes, steve forbes will take questions about federal spending, the deficit and jobs. and peace keeping missions with

sfeeb flanagan. "washington journal" is live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. now, a ceremony dedicating the new building housing the u.s. mission to the nunings. the dedication honors the late ronald brown, who was secretary of commerce for president clinton. mr. brown was on a trade mission to croatia in 1996 when he was killed in a plane crash. over the next 40 minutes, speakers include president obama and former president clinton. [applause]

. >> good afternoon everyone. thank you so much for coming. it is my privilege to welcome president obama and president clinton. let me welcome personally congressman charlie rangel -- [applause] >> for his extraordinary leadership in getting this building named for ron brown. i am also glad that we are joined today by martha johnson, the administrator of g.s.a., and this building's architects. they wanted to design an iconic tower that would become a landmark in new york city, and they have done a truly remarkable job. i want to pay particular tribute to this project's lead architect, who died in 2009 at

the age of 71. it is fitting that this building in which we represent america to the world is named in memory of a man who represented america so well. and i am so moved to see the brown family here today, especially alma, michael, tracy and their families. so let us begin the program today by asking the incomparable peat la belle -- patty la belle to sing our national anthem. ms. la belle? [applause] ♪ o say can you see

by the dawn's early light what so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous night eo -- oer the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming and the rocket's red glare the bombs burst continuing doctor bursting in air gave proof through the night

that our flag was still there o say does that star spangled banner yet wave ♪ ♪ oer the land of the free and the home of the brave ♪ [applause]

>> thank you, patty la belle. >> you're welcome. [laughter] >> it is a particular personal honor for me to be the first u.s. ambassador to the united nations to work in this magnificent new building with its beautiful architecture and extraordinary art provided by the foundation for the preservation of art and embassies. the reason is because ron brown was very special to me. when i was 4, my family moved into a house that backed on the brown family home. so i knew secretary brown well, and i grew up with michael and tracy. in fact, what very few basketball chops i have i got playing on the basketball court

in their backyard. i later had the great honor of serving with ron brown in the clinton administration. i particularly admired the way he mentored an entire generation of young african-american policy makers. secretary brown made the commerce department an incubator for extraordinary talent, and we are honored to have so many of those colleagues here with us today. second brown was also great company. i will never forget how much fun it was to travel with him to africa in 1995. and i will never forget the powerful reaction he engendered when he said, "the united states will no longer concede african markets to traditional colonial powers."

secretary brown was more than a great american commerce secretary. he was also a great diplomat, and he was an extraordinary role model. his life was cut far too short, but he lived more in his 54 years than most of us ever do. it's a wonderful testament to ron brown that we dedicate this magnificent building in his honor. now it is my great pleasure to welcome secretary brown's dear friend and old boss, president bill clinton. [applause] >> thank you very much. mr. president, ambassador rice, thank you for your service in both administrations. patty, thanks for singing.

alma, michael, tracy, kendall, morgan and retire, herman and college basketball, thanks for being here to honor your husband, father, grandfather. congressman rangel, thanks for your role in making this day come to pass. mayor jenkins, i am glad to see the two of you there all stiffed out in your bow ties. it makes me think before my time on earth is up, i might learn to tie one. [laughter] i would like to thank former secretaries rodney slater and alexis for coming. they are ron brown's colleagues and friends. commissioner kelly, thank you. i would like to join with what susan said in thanking the late architect for his wonderful work on this magnificent

building. when susan was talking about her basketball chops, it reminded me of something i sometimes try to forget. ron brown was chairman of the democratic party as all of you know before he became my commerce secretary. he never lost his sense of humor. we had gotten beaten in most of the last presidential elections, and we were often divided, and he made sure we were united in this election. so i asked him to be commerce secretary, but he said he didn't want to be a conventional commerce secretary. he wanted ordinary americans to know what he was doing. so he continued to travel with me in the country, to go out across america to meet with business people, to meet with working people, to meet with community leaders so they knew the connection between what he did and how they lived. one day we were walking in

south central los angeles, and i said ron, we need to go in that sporting goods store over there because those guys are great. they have done everything they could to keep kids out of gangs. they even took the parking lot behind the sporting goods store and put a basketball court up there. we need to go in there and thank them. we wednesday in and thanked the guys. then there are a bunch of kids playing ball out back. there were a bunch of young kids out there, and they looked at ron and me like we were freshly unwrapped mumies, and they asked if we wanted to play. we said sure, and we took off our ties and coats. i took a couple of kids, and he took a couple of kids. very shortly, he forgot his job and who appointed him. [laughter] >> and for the rest of his life to anybody who would listen, he

would say there bill clinton was with his hands in my face, all over my body, and i was 20 feet away, and the game was ending, and i shot, nothing but net. [laughter] >> he made us all laugh. there was something very serious, however, behind his appointment as secretary of commerce. i was the first president who had both the honor and the responsibility of serving after the cold war when the old order faded away. .

"i am a muslim, born and raised in the united states. i suppose, by most people's standards, much of a was normal. i went to school, tried to get out of doing homework, and spent entirely too much time watching tv. the truth is i was pretty lazy. but that changed when i went to high school. i attended estero high school in is there, florida where i was introduced to the junior army officer training corps. i love the day rotc program. it taught me how to be a leader and why it was important to take responsibility for my actions. i excelled in my program. i was the first to become a cadet officer and reached the

highest rank of lieutenant colonel. but it is not my success there that i remember of high school. what i remember was the confusion, the fear that overcame me on september 11 when the teacher turned on the question television just-in- time for me to watch the second plane crashed into the second tower of the world trade center. i knew that my country had been attacked. so i did when i knew was right. five months later, i listed in the military. i listed in the florida national guard and i transferred to regular active duty on july 27, 2003. in may 2007, i left active duty so i could go to law school. while the student's name is muhammed t -- he was expected as only one of five students to in turn. -- one of 25 students at two in

turn to become a jag officer. the second individual that i want to talk about is a young woman by the name of miss shayla hern. at the time, she was 11. her story begins in oklahoma. at the time, she told her sixth grade teacher that she was muslim and that she wore a head scarf as part of her religion. but the teacher did not object of the time. as she happily attended school for the next month, that changed on september 11, 2003 when her teacher asked her to remove her head scarf. the school permitted students to wear baseball caps, but wanted her to remove your heads up because it frightened other students. she was sent to the principal's office. the principal insisted that she removed her headscarf. which refused to do so, she was suspended. i authorized the justice

department to intervene in the case. eventually, after court action, she was permitted to return to school wearing her head scarf. i speak about these two individuals because they highlight some important principles, critical principles that make our nation great. the first principle is that, foremost, we are all americans. mr. aldesarni is an american. listen to his words. " i've understood that my country had been attacked. so i did what was right. i enlisted five months later." the second principle is religious freedom. school officials could have taken the opportunity to talk about america's early settlers and their search for freedom to express their faith. school officials could have taken this opportunity to teach basic civics, a topic which is sometimes lacking in our system of education.

they could've taken the opportunity that here is wrong and that tolerance for other faiths is right and that these are founding principles of our nation. instead, these public school officials fed the fear to their fellow sixth-graders that there -- they should be afraid and that her faith should be surprised. in her case, and forcefully, there is an insult to our nature. -- in her case, unfortunate, there is an insight to our nature. we respond to attack with resolved. but we need to temper that resolved with wisdom. president george w. bush understood this, when he visited the islamic center of washington to remind our resolution that those who could intimidate or take other angler should be ashamed. president obama has understood this and spoken out as well. 10 years later, as we're

approach the anniversary of 9/11, i feel obligated to reiterate the obvious. as a nation, we do not forget the events of a decade ago. emotions remain charmed -- charged. the desire to blame remains high. this is a good time, a critical time to temper our resolve with wisdom and to recall and remain true to our american ideals and freedoms, making sure that all people in this land are free to practice their faith without repression or reprisal. i look forward to your questions. >> i have been in the senate a long time. i cannot recall a panel so impressive. i think all three of you for your testimony. it is heartfelt and will make an excellent record of what we're trying to talk about today. i want to raise an issue -- i want to address an issue raised by the cardinal.

i'm going to, you here. "where is the respect for religious freedom in compelling in religious and duty to act in ways that contradicts its most basic moral principles?" now let's move this principle of thought to the question of sharia law. you heard the question i asked earlier about where the line should be drawn. we certainly know the excesses of sharia law. the killing of this man in pakistan who made controversy by saying he was opposed to the blasphemy laws, he gave his life for speaking out for tolerance. the same thing suggested the stoning of women for certain transgressions in muslim countries pared those, for many people, are the images of sharia law. but with the cardinal said in

the context of sharia law and what we know to be excesses in some context to be muslim practice to be peaceful in other contexts. >> as you pointed out, for everyday american muslims, what she really means it is the guidelines that guide our everyday lives. whether it is prayer, fasting, issues of marriage, in the way that religious law guides those everyday activities for christians and jews and other faith communities in the united states. the kinds of -- should i say excesses of sharia that you have outlined, i cannot imagine the circumstances under which they would be tolerated here in

america in our legal system. there is a legal matter, the supremacy clause which ensures that the constitution is allowable and, no religious law, no for law. and that is absolutely important. -- no foreign law. and that is absolutely important. it is something i am personally very thankful for. i think these efforts to ban- area are woefully decided and -- to ban sharia are woefully misguided, and they are chasing a threat that does not exist. but the implications, if they are actually allowed to be enacted, taking the oklahoma one, could have serious consequences of religious practice for moslems here at home. that is why it concerns us. >> i will as you to go a step further. in the oklahoma case, he said that it was sure real law that -- sharia law that instructed

him of how he would leave his property in his will. the stereotype of sharia is extreme. can you give me a other illustrations of sharia law in the life and of -- life of an american muslim that you believe should be invested by most? -- should be understood by most? >> the example that you gave is a good one. should someone decide to leave a will, decisions to get married under religious law in terms of how to go about their life, things like the prayer, how they brick, when they pray, fasting, which is also a cornerstone of the faith, those are just some of the examples. >> as well, i believe donations -- >> yes, charitable giving is an obligation for american muslims, as it is for many people of faith in this country. >> and the haj. >> yes.

[laughter] which was a topic earlier in the hearing. that is something that is required. >> i did not know the pillars of islam. >> mr. acosta, will you address that, this question of sharia law. >> i will try to do so. i will confess to not being familiar with the details of sharia law. i guess i have two thoughts. first, i would have concerns about equal protection issues while a legislature or state can certainly determine to what lost -- laws a state court will look. there are concerns when a particular type of law or a particular type of religion is singled out against others in much the same way that you

cannot ban a headscarf but allow other head coverings. second, i would also note that, as a general rule, courts to not apply for an laws or religious laws -- foreign laws or religious laws. that context that that might come up, a contract or a of well, references another jurisdiction, it is the individuals who are signatories that are asking the court to look beyond the local jurisdiction and apply that other law. this is a fairly unusual circumstance that would come up. >> i do not want to miss state your position. initially, you said neutrality. >> yes. >> you would put whatever that religious belief is in the context of american law. >> absolutely. >> that is the way i see it, too. i do not understand the other point of view and i wanted to see if you could point to some

difference that i do not see. i think we are in agreement with that. i want to ask you about a delicate and can -- and controversial issue. you played a role with the controversy that rocked the nation for weeks related to the park 51, the proposed islamic center in lower manhattan. i understand that you were involved in an inner faith effort to stand in solidarity with american muslims who were experiencing religious discrimination. can you tell me how you got involved in this and describe that effort to the committee? >> actually, i was involved only tangentially because it was it was a new york question. we learned years ago to not get involved in other people's property because you have enough troubles on your own. it became such a national issue that people became very

confused about it and the archbishop in new york spoke to it, as did others. i think it was because i am very much involved with the muslim leadership here in this part of the country, especially with the islamic society of north america and its leadership. we have been trying to work together to look for peace in the holy land. so we have a very close relationship with the leadership of the muslim groups and with many of the jewish groups in our area. all of us are looking for the two-state solution. we have become friends over that over the years. it was the french ship which -- it was that friendship which wanted us to speak out more carefully. another difficult issue, an issue for you could understand the reasons behind both

positions, but i think we felt that you could not say this wasn't an american thing. you could not say this was something that would destroy the unity of our religious french -- friendship and our religious working together. that was basically that we wanted to keep it above the level of saying that this is something you have to do -- you have to attack, you have to speak against. you could see that people of goodwill could look at both sides. but you had to make sure that they were looking at it at a level where they understood. you had to look at it that whatever you decided, you could not be condemned for, because there were good arguments on both sides. that is a position that is the best and first to take. we run into a world where everything is black and white. there are a lot of praise and our world -- grays in our world

and it is important recognize that. >> the former assistant attorney general just passed a couple of questions about sharia. it is one thing to say that it should not ban, but that it could supplant u.s. civil or criminal law. would that be a correct way to look at it? >> i do not see why any of foreign or religious law could or should supplant u.s. law? >> it is merely a guide by which people should live their lives from a religious point of view, as described here, it could not and should not allow things like underage marriage or polygamy or things of that sort? >> i think the supremacy clause makes clear that the u.s. what -- law is the law the lan. -- is a lot of the land.

>> cardinal mccarrick, the u.s. constitution and the teachings of your church of americans to practice in the faith of their choosing or no faith, is that correct? >> that is. >> it would allow people to convert to a different faith, would it not? >> yes, i am not happy about that. [laughter] but that is certainly part of our piscine rigid position in -- part of our position has been always. >> that is correct. for those who would condemn others and hateful language for doing that, well, that speech would be permitted but it would not be speech -- well, that speech would be permitted but would you condemn -- i'll ask it this way. would you condemn people who use hateful or insightful speech -- inciteful speech against people to convert? >> in general, you should love your neighbor. even if you do not love the actions that your neighbor has.

you have to have respect for your neighbor. you might tell your neighbors did you think that they are wrong. that they are sorry that they are doing this, but to attack them as being anything less than your neighbor, it would not be a christian point of view. >> let me ask you a similar organization. -- a similar question. you belong to an organization which has been clear about his positions on the website. had he made public announcement -- i wonder if you had made any public pronouncements or statement condemning those colleges leaders call them -- who employed by letter or hateful rhetoric? >> by way of background -- >> you know that my time is very limited. three quick questions here. have you done that? >> my organization's work is

focused on protecting and of holding our constitutional values. >> you have not condemned the hateful speech of those who criticized others in the way that i mentioned, then? >> i guess i would have to know more specifically which particular case you're talking about. >> would you today criticize threats of death or physical harm directed at writer's work commentators who have criticized islamic extremism? you would contend that today, would you not? >> i think we have a very terrorist fidelity to the first cherished fidelity to the first amendment. >> i am not questioning whether people have the right to speak, the question is, whether you agree that that speech is helpful or hurtful and whether you would condemn it or be neutral about it? >> those who would threaten to kill somebody because of their political views, religious views, that is inappropriate.

>> i am specifically talking about the website, i guess i should identify your site here, which i will in just a moment. >> muslimadvocates.org. >> thank you. let me refer you to several cases just last year and ask you about something on your web site. just last year, u.s. intelligence agency and our justice system uncovered and prosecuted a number of attempted terrorist attacks planned by radical muslim extremists. a compilation produce it by the investor did a project on -- by a project on terrorism based on justice the varmint reports

listed just the following incidents. one was sent to ed to predict attempted to explode a car bomb. arrested for attempting to assist others who he believed to be members of al qaeda and planting multiple bombings in the metro area here in washington. october 19 -- said his 24 years -- he was sentenced to 24 years in prison for attempting to block a skyscraper in dallas tx. five were guilty of detonating -- attempting to detonate explosives near a synagogue. august 2 -- a conspiracy to attack john f. kennedy airport by exploding fuel tanks underneath the airport. on june 24, attempting to detonate a car bomb in times square. he was sentenced to life in prison. on march 18, guilty to charges in planning the november 2008 attacks in mumbai, india which killed 164 people. everyone of these incidents could resulted in the deaths of hundreds of people, and headley plot did, including six americans.

all this terrorist were in different to whom they killed, including women and children. i think we owe a debt of gratitude to those who stop- loss -- those who stopped the plots before they could be carried out. in view this history, i was curious about your web site, the community alert section, which is apparently directed to american muslims. it says the fbi is contacting american muslim to solicit information and advice about addressing violent to extremism. muslim advocates strongly urged urges people not to speak to law enforcement officials without the presence of a lawyer. i was stunned to do is to that -- that you would issue that kind of instruction to people who would read your side since of his legal abortion from -- that sense cooperation from muslim americans is one of the best was the law enforcement can uncover terrorist plots like

the one i described. it seems to me that the specific obligation of all americans is to assist in preventing these heinous crimes, especially given the participation of muslims and all the attempted attacks that i mentioned. within the muslim americans would be feeling a special obligation to help but rick this out. do you think it is wrong to investigate, prosecute the individuals that i mentioned, and you stand by the muslim advocate community alert instructing them not to cooperate with the fbi and other law enforcement investigating potential as of terrorism, or at least not without a lawyer present? >> senator kyl, i fully understand that threats that we are facing. on september 11, i was working right here in the capital. i ran from the capitol with my colleagues because we thought planes were approaching. i fully understand that threats. those who engage in criminal acts must be stopped and brought to justice. and every american has a civic duty to report a criminal activity to law enforcement. i might add that attorney general holder has actually

said that the cooperation of the american muslim community has been essential to detecting and forging terrorist plots. -- porting -- t hwarting terrorist plots. at the same time, every american has the right to seek legal advice. that is a right guaranteed to every american, and i know you are a lawyer, we are both lawyers, we both know that our legal system is quite complex. encouraging community members to seek legal the fis as they interact with law enforcement is something that every american has a right to do. >> you stand by that statement on your website. >> i stand by all the statements on my website. >> thank you very much. >> a few weeks after 9/11, when i ran from the capital is you did that day, i flew into o'hare and as i went out to get a taxicab, there was a man wearing a turban in the cab. i got into the cab and sat in the back seat.

as we started to pull away, i said to him, how of things been for you since 9/11? he said, i am sick. i wear this turban everyday. some people give me the finger, some cursive me, someone might get into my cab. most just fine. i wish they would get in my cab. i like to show them something. he reached over and pulled down the passenger side pfizer and there was a picture of a young man in a u.s. military army uniform. he said, this is my son. he is someone now oversees in the middle east and cannot even tell me, but he is fighting for my country. and my other son will enlist in the marine corps. people occurs at him, if they only knew that this man was putting his most to prized possessions and service to the united states, risking their lives to keep the station free, -- to keep this nation free, i cannot quarrel with anyone who argues that we have a threat of terrorism and have to deal with

that honestly, and what i hope this hearing has suggested is that among the millions of muslim americans, the overwhelming majority are petri audit, law-abiding people who -- patriotic, law-abiding people who simply want to live their lives as we all do in this great and free country. we have work to do. most americans and those were nine. the purpose of this hearing was to make it clear that there are some basic and fundamental principles that should guide us and our relationships with one another. your testimony today, for all three of you, it is an extraordinary. i like to close as i mentioned i would thanking you again, but also noting some of the groups that have submitted statements in support of this hearing. subcommittee has received statements from 43 different organization -- the aclu, interfaith alliance, as lummoxes cited north america, leadership conference on civil and human rights can military freedom society, south asian american leaders together,

southern poverty law center, and the united methodist church. without objection, i will put the statements into the record. one called shoulder with shoulder, of holding american values. among others, this coalition close the american baptist churches, usa, the disciples of christ, the episcopal church, evangelical little church, he reconstructionist rabbinical associations. here's part of what they said in their statement. we remain profoundly distressed and saddened by the incidents of violence consider it again -- commit against moslems across america by the desecration of islamic houses of worship, and by the destruction of sacred text. we stand by the principal that to attack any religion in the united states is to do violence to the american religious freedom of all. we encourage all to honor freedoms guaranteed by our constitution and unable to free

at exercise of religion across our land. that is an appropriate note to close. if there are no further comments, i am going to thank the witnesses again and tell you that the hearing record will be open for two weeks, and additional materials and questions may be sent your way which i hope you would be replying to in a product manager -- in a prompt manner. thank you for being part of this hearing. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> in a few moments, a hearing on how the entire month of disease cluster. "washington journal" is slated 7:00 a.m. eastern. -- is alive at 7:00 a.m. eastern. a couple of live events to tell you about today on our companion network, c-span3. the senate appropriations energy subcommittee will look to the

safety of nuclear power plants in light of the situation in japan. members will hear from the head of the nuclear regulatory commission at 10:00 a.m. eastern. tonight on c-span3, live from the annual congressional correspondents dinner. speakers are scheduled to includes senator rand paul, anthony wiener, and others. to in more than 40 so-called disease clusters have occurred in 13 states since 1976. according to oral report by the national resources defense council. on tuesday, the senate environment committee looked at the potential environmental issues related to disease clusters.

>> i like to begin by thanking our witnesses for coming to testify today. in particular, i would like to welcome trevor schaffer, a brave young man who has overcome so much in his life already by beating cancer when he was just a child. he has come out of this experience with great purpose, and has decided to devote his life to helping children who also face the frightening reality of having to beat cancer. trevor and our other distinguished witnesses are here to testify on a very important issue -- the need to better protect our families and communities from dangerous diseases that occur in clusters. i like all " -- also recognize the two other witnesses from my state of california, ms. erin brockovich, who i think most know from the introduction, we

know of her work, and dr. gina solomon, who has done a great deal of work on cancer clusters. without a doubt, our country has made great strides in addressing devastating diseases that were once commonplace. our nation invested in drinking water treatment plants and waste water treatment facilities, and these facilities are now essential parts of our public health infrastructure. despite these great advances, we still have more work to do to address diseases, such as cancer and birth defects to take the lives of our children and family members. according to the environmental protection agency, from 1975 to 2007, rates of childhood cancer have increased by more than 20%. i want to say that again. according to the epa, from 1975 to 2007, rates of childhood cancer have increased by more than 20%.

so consider this hearing and alarm bell. the country needs to pay attention to a statistic like this. according to the national cancer institute, the canny as the most common form of childhood cancer, accounting for 20% of the incidences. the greatest number of childhood cancers occurs during infancy, the first year of life. our youngest and most vulnerable in a our society should not have to shoulder such a devastating burden. when the same disease suddenly impacts and entire family, for an entire neighborhood, or community, people are rightly concerned that a common factor is the cause. scientists do not always know the exact cause of cancer, but we know that when we look good cancer, they usually find it is genetics or environmental causes. just last year, the president's

cancer panel so that it, and i am now quoting, particularly concerned to find that the true burden of environmentally induced cancer has been grossly underestimated. let me repeat that. the true burden of environmentally induced cancer has been grossly underestimated. and i would ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the report from the president's panel without objection. i will do that. the panel urged the federal government "to remove the carcinogens and other toxins from our food, water, and air that needlessly increase health care costs, cripple our nation's productivity, and devastate american lives." clearly efforts to address diseases such as childhood cancer and birth defects deserve focused, coordinated, and effective action at every level of government. so that we respond to the most effective manner when a cluster of curse.

that is why i introduced along with senator crapo, s. 76, the strengthening protections for children in communities from disease clusters act. it is designed to increase a coordination, and transparency, accountability when federal agents is work to investigate and address potential disease clusters. it is designed to give people at -- in communities a seat at the table to better understand such investigations. if we learned anything about the battle about chromium 6, the community did not know where to turn. they had to find out that things were going on in the community that were making their own experiences. this bill by itself is not going to in disease clusters, we know that. it is an important step in

helping our communities effectively investigate and address devastating diseases that still impact our families, our neighborhoods, and our society. the critical importance of our bill can be stated in the subway. if by working together we can establish the cause of a disease cluster, we can then take steps to end the problem and not waste precious time when so much is at stake -- the very health of our families. and that is the simple truth about our bill. and now i am delighted to: mike cosponsored, senator crapo. >> thank you, madam chairman. i appreciate you working with his and at i appreciate you calling this oversight commission. this is an important issues you have indicated. i really am glad that our committee is looking into it. on a thinker witnesses for coming today, erin brockovich and dr. belzer and dr. solomon, we appreciate you making your time to be here and appreciate

the information and testimony you will provide. i want to extend a special welcome to trevor schaefer, who the chairman has indicated is from idaho, and he himself as an incredible history that helps us to address this issue. trevor is the founder of trevor is foundation. we're proud that is they're doing this great work. it was just 13 years old, trevor was diagnosed with brain cancer. with the love and support of his family, and i want to point out that his mother charlie is also with us here today. >> stand-up if you would. >> charlie, thank you for being with us. trevor relocated from mccall, idaho to boise, idaho to undergo chemotherapy rid -- chemotherapy. after surviving his grueling

ordeal, he decided he wanted to help children with cancer. in 2007 along with his mother, he founded trevor's trek foundation. for raising awareness and research funds to providing mentoring services for young cancer survivors, it is a shining example of how the selfless action of an individual can make a real difference in the lives of those in need. and is that trevor's or the foundation is not enough, he is a volunteer with the make a wish foundation in idaho, and he has helped the comprehensive cancer alliance for idaho create a strategic plan. he is a youth ambassador for the national disease cluster alliance and is organize the first childhood cancer awareness walking in idaho. he conceded he is very committed. all these things have been achieved by a young man who just graduated from boise state university in 2008. i'm very glad that you to join us today, trevor, and thank you for coming in we look forward to

your testimony. we're very appreciative of the incredible hard work you have put into these kinds of issues. madam chairman, let me say briefly that i appreciate the opportunity for this committee to take a closer look at the issue of disease clusters. we've heard quite a bit about them from books and movies such as "erin brockovich," and "the selection," and others, we have not had a detailed discussion of this in congress. but we should. thanks to the effort of people like trevor and charlie and aaron and our other witnesses, we will. we begin this discussion and i look forward to looking at the scientific research behind the causes of disease clusters, the coroneted response between federal, state, and local governments, in any other information that may be helpful to us. thank you madam chairman and that concludes my statement. >> i was remiss. i wanted to introduce another

californian who is sitting next to trevor's mom, charlie, the woman who brought this particular issue to my attention. she has worked with the family and as an advocate for the family. susan, when you stand up? i am so proud that you are here. we're proud of you in california. and now it is a pleasure to call on senator lautenberg. >> thank you, madam chairman. many of us in this room are parents and grandparents and we spend our lives trying protect our children and keep them safe. trevor, my hat is off to you for the work you have done. you are living example of what happens when one has courage and determination, and we thank you for which you have done. the parents should ever have to be afraid to send their child into the backyard, into a neighborhood park, or to school that might make them sick, get this is the reality facing parents who live in communities under assault from diseases such

as cancer. for example, in the 1990's, a cancer cluster was discovered in new jersey, where children we've been diagnosed with leukemia and brain cancer at alarmingly high rates. there were homes over two superfund sites. an investigation by the centers for disease control and prevention found an association between mothers who drank contaminated water and children who developed leukemia. science tells us that children are especially be vulnerable when they encountered dangerous substances. studies show as much as 5% of childhood cancers, 10% of nearer -- neurobehavioral disorders, are associated with hazardous chemicals. and make no mistake, you do not have to live near a superfund

site to be exposed to potentially harmful chemicals. they are all around us. one nonprofit working group found more than 285 industrial chemicals in newborn babies, and more than 400 in adults. additional testing by the cdc also found hundreds of industrial chemicals in adults, including six carcinogens. studies show that mothers at high levels of certain chemicals in their blood, they're more likely to have the haverhill and health problems. that is why we have to create stronger and more effective regulations. chemicals that could harm our children, an issue we ought to be tackling on several fronts. i will soon introduce an updated version of my chemical act which would require that chemical

manufacturers prove that their products are safe before the substances in the event our bodies. i received helpful feedback on the bill last year, and i will incorporate ideas to further improve the bill. i'm committed to working with both parties to modify the substances -- substance control act to make sure it works for businesses. the need is to urgent to wait while our children continue to be exposed to untested chemicals. i am one of the working with chairman boxer to markup of bill in the coming months. we must pay close attention to what is happening in communities where disease clusters are present and kid's face the greatest risk. i am proud to co-sponsored chairman boxer's legislation to make it easier for state and federal agencies to work together to investigate disease clusters, and educate communities about them. the bottom line is that we have

got to do more to protect our children and grandchildren from substances that could damage their help and shorten their lives. i look forward to hearing from today's witnesses. about how we can create a healthier environment for everyone, but particularly our children. i thank you very much, madam chairman. >> we are going to call on the two senators coming now in a moment. i wanted ask unanimous consent to place in their record the report for the boxer-carpeaux rapo bill. the national disease clusters alliance, and i want to make sure that we get that done. i also want to put into the record, the disease clusters in california that were identified by the cdc and another alliance,

a key to sites where they found these clusters. i will put those into the record. your up next. >> thank you for the opportunity, but i have been called to the floor and about 15 minutes to speak. so i'm going to pass, if i have anything, i will offer it in written form. thanks for the opportunity. >> senator white house. >> i will follow the good senator's examples of that we can get on to the witnesses. i wanted to welcome miss brockovich. they were together years ago on the children's health environmental coalition, a wonderful organization in the chairman's home state, and i am delighted to welcome here to washington. thank you, madam chair, and i appreciate will work together on this. >> think you so much. we would get right to our witnesses.

our first witness, trevor schaefer, youth ambassador for trevor's trek foundation, inspiring me personally and so many people. we are honored to have you. trevor, you have five minutes. if you go over a couple of minutes, that is fine. go ahead. >> thank you, at chair boxer. i would also like to think ranking member james inhofe, and my great center, mike crapo, for taking on the issue of touted cancer and cancer clusters and what they mean for public health. also like to thank all of the senators on the environment and public works committee for allowing me to address some of these issues today. i am so very proud to be able to state that i am here today as a

witness for both the majority and minority committee members. most of you do not know me other than i am associated with s. 76, also known as trevor slot. my hope is that by the end of my testimony, you not only know me but you will remember me as a voice of every child in this great nation. as you have been told, i was diagnosed with brain cancer at the age of 13. until that time, i was driving and mccall, a small town nestled on a glacial lake in the mountains of idaho. i had a fairy tale life in paradise. but the carefree days of my childhood changed abruptly and dramatically after my cancer diagnosis. like the snap of the fingers, i was robbed of my childhood and

my innocence. i was thrown at into antiseptic world of hospitals and eight- hour brain surgery, father -- followed by 14 grueling months of radiation and chemotherapy treatment. unfortunately, i was not the only kid in my town with his pernicious disease. in the same year i was diagnosed, there were four other cases of brain cancer diagnosed. over a 10-year period, there was an abnormally high number of cancer patients diagnosed before and after i became ill. what happened in my town continually repeats itself throughout our nation, year in and year out. according to the cdc, 46 children per day, two

classrooms full, are diagnosed with cancer unrelated to genetics or family history. cancer is the leading cause of death among children, exceeded only by accident. many of us young cancer survivors will forever phase chronic health challenges resulting from the heroic medical measures used to save our lives. children who have had cancer often experience confusion and embarrassment as they try to return to a so-called normal life and are dealing with the physical side effects related to their cancer and treatment. i can attest to that. several years ago when cancer struck me, i fought so hard for my life. i thought to the countless number of a needle pricks, the

blood transfusion, the vomiting, and physical therapy. so i could live to see the sunrise and the snowfall. i am so grateful to be alive still. the aftermath from the cancer treatment i haven't. have affected me in many disturbing ways. every day i wake up with a ringing in my ear that never stops. i have trouble with my memory, and i may never be able have children of my own. how ironic that i fought so hard to save my own life, yet now i may never be able to give life. and senator, i am considered a success story. although there has been a significant increase in the cure rate of childhood cancer, children still are getting sick

at an increasingly steady rate. the small towns throughout our country, possible cancer clusters exist. parents are trying to get a authority month to investigate these clusters and to discern what caused them. scientists and health activists say that the government's current response to disease clusters ranges from piecemeal to nonexistent. some people are told that their small population render them statistically insignificant. there is nothing in significant about even one child diagnosed with cancer. and then dying of that cancer without ever knowing why. 's law will rectify that

by allowing small kennedys to have their voices heard and their concerns validated about the environmental impact on their children's health. environmental toxin exposure is an insidious in all instances, yet it affects is our children in proportion and are dealt. children are more vulnerable than adults. they have faster metabolism is and must ensure immune systems. -- faster metabolisms and less mature immune systems. these cancers are rising rapidly and children do not drink, smoke, or have stressful jobs. we therefore cannot really evoke lifestyle explanations.

we are beginning to recognize that not only prenatal life, but atlas of life, it is a time of great boehner ability to cancer-causing chemicals. when the connection between health and the environment becomes even more important. toxins migrate through geographical boundaries and property lines. cancers bears no ethnic group, no socioeconomic group, nor any geographical area. in its wake, we are left with the burden of extreme personal and social loss. hollen also like to stress the cancer does not only attacked the victims. he greatly impacts every member of the family. siblings often experience concern, fear, jealousy, guilt,

resentment, and feelings of abandonment which can last long term. relationships between family members can become tense, they can be stress on a marriage, and often times of family breaks up. i vowed that if i survived i would dedicate my life to helping other children with cancer who otherwise would never be heard. i truly believe that i have been given a second chance at life to convey to you the urgency and importance of addressing the proliferation of childhood cancer clusters and the methods of reporting them. for the children, i strongly encourage your support for trevor's law. in closing, i would ask you to consider how much your child or grandchild's life and well-being

are worth to you, and what you're doing that, please close your eyes for a brief moment and imagine a world without children. thank you. >> thank you. erin brockovich, who is such a piker. bridget fi -- fighter for people who did nothing wrong and has suffered. i think it. -- i think you. >> chairman boxer and distinguished members of this committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. my name is erin brockovich. as an environmental advocate, i respond to requests for help in groundwater contamination complaints in all 50 states.

i currently work on investigations in california, texas, florida, michigan, new york, new jersey, alabama, louisiana, illinois, mississippi, and missouri. i am also a proud mother of three wonderful children, two of whom are presently serving their country as soldiers in the united states army, one currently deployed in afghanistan. each month i received over 40,000 visitors to my website. thousands of whom report issues ranging from environmental pollution, cancer and disease, worker injuries and illness, and more. these people make up whole communities that are witnessing first hand the harmful effects that exposure to chemicals such as hexavalent chromium have had on them. these communities both large and small and in every corner of the united states are sending out an sos.

from small farming towns like cameron, missouri, to a small desert towns like midland, texas, to the forgotten town where lead tales are so large, children think they are hills and they play on them. it is startling to see the palms of their hand grenade, soaked in lead dust. unfortunately yet again, in hinkley california, it is becoming all too common occurrence. he would appear the most of these communities are besieged by one form of pollution or another. protecting the health of our families and our children should be our top priority. if the system for investigating, responding, and reporting these concerns is inadequate. this is why i strongly support s. 76, "the strengthening protections for 10 projects for

children and communities from disease clusters act," also known as trevor's lock in honor of this brave young man trevor schaefer. it will bolster federal efforts to assist communities that are impacted by potential disease clusters, and will identify sources of environmental pollutants and toxic substances suspected of causing developmental, reproductive, neurotoxic, and numerous cancers and other adverse health effects. according this cdc in 2011, 1 in 3 people will develop cancer in his or her lifetime. one in three. past 20dvocate for the years, i've reached an undeniable conclusion -- there are simply too many cancers in this country and not enough answers. that is what these communities reaching out to me are trying to do -- get answers to the most basic questions. why is my child, perfectly

healthy, now sick with leukemia. why does my daughter had a brain tumor at the age of 10? why is the same thing happening to my neighbors kids? hundreds of mothers and fathers ask me these questions every week. today, allowed to share with you on that to my left, that i have put together over the past six months of communities that have come to meet with concerns of what they believe they are seeing to be excess of cancers in their neighborhoods and communities. there are five of the 34th thoughts on this map today. -- 534 dots on the map, and i have far more that i have not been able to put on the map. these are mothers reported to me, sick children on the same block with leukemia. mothers reporting to me, 15 children within blocks of one