guest: you can see that discussion again in the video library and "washington journal" every morning. now some comments about the occupied wall street demonstration.

i have been here for 23 days. when i first heard about it, i realized since the country started it has been a war between the rich and poor which defines whether or not we have democracy. there is that democracy when there are causes and bald. this is a class war perpetrated against the war -- when there are classes and poor. this is the seat of power in the u.s., not washington, d.c. i think this is important. i want a revolution but i do not see it coming out of this specifically. the first task of a

revolutionary is to change public opinion. i am here to talk to come here to listen come here to learn, and hopefully teach a little, you know? that is basically it. >> were anything but the protests that have been happening around the world? -- what do you think about the protests? >> the middle class is becoming poor and the poor are jumping off bridges because they cannot meet and -- make ends meet. >> how has the economy affected you personally? >> i am 25 and have not found in the last 1.5 year a job. it's not like i've worekked good

jobs. i'm from a town next to allentown which used to produce a lot of steel for the country. ♪

>> i think this is my fourth week. it was after the pepper spray incident that happened. i was listening to it during the media blackout. i decided to come right away, check it out, and i have a lot of the same thought success like a lot of these people, "what they want? what they doing?" then i kind of pulled back the curtain and looked at what's going on in the meetings that were really well-organized. there's a process that is going on and it is not just about this from the inside out, but that is an important part of it.

i had a moment where i was like, well, i can either stand outside and judges, or i can just come in. that is what i decided to do and what i have been doing.

>> thank you so much. thank you. ♪ >> you can view this video again in the seas and video library on a c-span.org. ben bernanke may touch on this when he speaks from the federal reserve bank of boston in a few minutes along with comments on the most recent recession. we will have that live in just a few minutes on c-span. right now, your calls from today's "washington journal." republicans, independents, your

respective phone lines. according to his campaign, the plan would have raised $2.31 trillion in 2010 with a breakdown of $862.6 billion coming from the 9% tax on corporate income. some in his own plan say that it is a nonstarter and may not bring in as much revenue as the current tax code.

sa >> you can see "washington journal" live every morning at 7:00 a.m. ben bernanke is that the federal reserve bank of boston the talk about the great recession. live coverage on c-span. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> in a question earlier this morning, we spoke about the monetary policy response and how relevant it was. i would argue that monetary policy has been quite relevant and responsive to the concerns that are the topic of this conference. the federal reserve has been appropriately aggressive and unusually creative under the leadership of chairman bernanke. chairman tend to get one for the current crises.

he will probably always be known for breaking the back of inflation. chairman greenspan was known for his reaction to the wall street decline. chairman bernanke will be known for what the federal reserve has done in relation to the great recession. he is an ideal person to talk about how the institution of the central bank's has changed as a result of what we have been experiencing and whether they will be long or short term effects. chairman bernanke. [applause] >> that was a major disappointment about the baseball game. i am sorry to hear that. glad to be here and thank you for inviting me. the financial crisis - 2009 together with the deep

dissociative recession was a historic event in the sense that its severity and economic consequences were enormous but also in the sense, as the papers have documented, that the crisis seemed certain to have profound on ourg lasting effect economy, society, and our politics. more subtle but possibly greater importance to the long run wil be the effects of the crisis on our intellectual framework including the ways in which analyze financial phenomenon. in a particular, the crisis has influenced the theory and practice of modern central banking and no doubt will continue to do so. although it is too early w to the full implications of recent events for the doctrine and operations, i thought it would be worthwhile today to highlight and put into context some of the changes as well as the continuity is already evident. my remarks will focus onw recent banks respond to

to theges relating conduct of monetary policy and the notion that financial stability and how, as a result of that experience, the analysis and execution of thee two functions may well change. during the two decades precedg the crisis, central banking ad academics achieved consensus on the institutional framework for monetary policy. this consensus policy framewok was characterized by a strong commitment to medium term prie stability and a high degree of transparency about policy objectives and economic forecasts. the adoption of this approah helped settle banks to enter longer-term expectations which, in turn, but effective the scope of monetary policy to affect employment in the short run. the primer is often called flexible inflation targeting as it combines commitment to medium-run inflation objectives with the flexibility to respond

to economic shocks as needed to moderate deviations of output and employment from so-called full employment levels. the combination ofg policy flexibility within te discipline imposed by medium- term inflation objectives has been characterized as a free- market unconstrained discretion. many central banks in and emerging market economies consider themselves to be inflation target hours. there are including those in australia, brazil, canada, mexico, new zealand, norway, sweden, and others. although they differ in details, on their policy strategy, tools, practices, to virtually all inflation-targeting banks maintain flexibly. they treat the stabilization of output as an important policy objective even as they seek to hit targets over the medium term. several other major banks such

as the european central bank d the swiss national bank do not label themselves as inflation target years, however they have inc. and merkel definition f price stability, a central roe about economic outlook, and a willingness to accommodate short run economic stabilization objectives so long as they do not effect the primary goal of price stability. how does the federal reserva fit into this range of policy pre-market? the federal reserve is congress foro the two objectives, maximum employment and price stability on an equal footing. it does not have a formal merl inflation target. as a practical matter, the policy for a marked as many of the elements of flexible inflation targeting. in particular, on the federal open market committee, the fomc, is committed to stabilizing

inflation over the medium term are retaining flexibility to help offset cyclical fluctuations in economic activity and employment. also, like the formaln time theurs, over federal reserve has bech more transparent about its outlook, objectives, and poliy strategy. for example, center of the 2009, the federal reserve summary of economic projections has included the fomc's projections representing the committee assessments to the which economic growth, unemployment, and inflation will convert your time. these projections are conditioned on the assumptions of an appropriate monetary policy and no further shocks to the economy. consequently, the longer run projections for inflation can be interpreted as indicated as the rate of inflation that fomc participants judge us consistt over time with the federal reserve mandates.

>> these are analogous to targets although, importantly, there were representing the consistent inflation rate, not a formal inflation committee as a whole. to what extent, if at all,s the pre-crisis consensur for monetary policy been chand by recent events? in part because they recognize the benefits of continuity and familiarity during a time of upheaval in the central banks generally retain their established approaches to poly during the crisis, but in many cases, the existing framework proved effective. notably, well anchoredn monitored both inflation and deflation risks as price setters and market participants remained confident in the ability of central banks to keep inflatin your target. the medium term focus of flexible inflation targeting

offered central banks led to o push the effects of the financial shocks on output and employment in the face of transitory swings in inflation. in particular, they wereo avoid when sharp increases in commodity prices temporarily drove headline inflation above target levels. for central banks withy rates near 0 or lower, on influencing the public's expectations about future policy actions became a critical too, as i will discuss further shortly. the commitment to a policy primer that is transparent about objectives and forecast was helpful. in many instances in managing those expectations and in making monetary policy both more predictable and effective during past few years. however, the recent experiee did raise at least one important question about the taxable

inflation targeting from mark -- flexible inflation targeting r a mark. although it helps develop a lg time of macroeconomics stability, by itself was not sufficient to ensure financial stability. some observers have argued tht this failure should lead to modifications or a replacement of the inflation targeting approach. for example, since financial excesses tend to develop overa longer time frame, it could have significant effects on inflatn when they ultimately on wind. it has been suggested that monetary policy should be conducted with reference to a longer-term horizon to take proper account of financial stability concerns. my own guess is that the current framework for monetary policy, with the innovations to further improve the ability of central with theommunicate public, will remain the standd approach has its benefits in terms of this have been demonstrated.

however, central banks are heeding the broader lesson tht the maintenance of stability s in a plea critical responsibility. central banks did not ignore issues of financial stability in the decades before the recent crisis, but financial stabiliy crisis was viewed as a junior partner to monetary policy. one of the most important legacies of the crisis will be the restoration of the financial stability policy to coequal status with monetary policy. while central banks may have left their monetary policy remarks largely unchanged through the great recession, and they have widened the set of tools they use to implement the frameworks. following the crisis of the downturn in the global economy that started in 2008, central banks responded with a forcible application of their usual policy tools, most notably sharp reductions in short-term policy interest rate. then, as policy rat

approached zero, and it began employing an increasingly wider range of unconventional tools including policy guidance and operations to walter the scale and composition of their balae sheets. for guidance about thee policy rates were already used before the crisis and it took on greater importance as a policy rates became closer to zero. a prominent example is the bank of canada's commitment in the airport to thousand nine to keep policy rates unchanged at 0.25% until the end of 2010 depending on the outlook for inflation. this commitment was successful in clarifying for market participants that the bank vis on the likely path of policy rates and it appears to help reduce long-term interest rates and thus providing additional policy accommodation in canada. in 2010, the bank of japans

basing ongoing deflation e consumer prices and a also usd conditional for guidance sayi, "the banks will maintain the virtually zero interest rate policy until it judges on the basis of its understanding of media -- of a mediae stability is in sight. we will analyze risks including an balances theo very simple. -- and balances." so very simple. this practice has beend by the reserve bank of new zealand in 1997 and theh bank in 2007. each of the central banks ue those projections during the financial crisis to indicate there were likely to keep levels low for at least one year. in the united statec

introduced language in its mah 2009 statement indicating anticipated rates to stay below for an extended time and at is august 2011 meeting, they elaborated that anticipated rates would remain low to mid- 2013. of the fomc continues to exple ways to further increase transparency about its forecas and policy plans. in addition to for guidance about interest rates, and number central banks have used changs in monetary policy. the federal reserve as both really increased its holding of longer-term treasury securities and broadened its portfolio to include agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities. its goal in doing so is to provide additional monetary accommodation by putting downward pressure on agency yields while pushing investors

to push toward alternative assets such as corporate bonds and equities. these actions also serve to improve the functioning of stressed financial markets, especially in 2008-2009 through the provision of market liquidity. other central banks have also used their balance sheets are actively than before the criss consistent with motivations in part reflecting different financial structures against them. the bank of england has used large go purchases of medium d long-term government securities as a preferred tool for providing additional stimulus. expanded the size of its asset purchase program earlier this month out of concern about possible slowing of economic growth. the bank of japan has acquired a wide range of assets including bonds,t and corporate commercial paper, on exchange traded equity funds, and equity issued by real-estate investment

corporations. the ecb issued credito improve liquidity in key market segments and it recently announced plans to reduce -- resume such purchases. the ecb has also bought the sovereign bonds of vulnerable countries to ensure that inequities in in those sections which are dysfunctional. the monetary of these effects have been sterilized for offsetting operations. in most cases, the use of balance sheet policies has reflected the constraints on more conventional policies as short-term nominal interest rates have reached very low levels. in more normal times when sho- term positive return not constrained, i expect balance sheet policies will be rarely used. by contrast, for guidance and other forms of communication about policy can be valuable

even when the zero-lower boundary is not relevant and i expect to see the increasing use of tools in the future. even as central banks were innovative in policy, there were forced to be equally innovatie in restoring and maintaining financial stability. serving as a lender of last resort, standing ready in a crisis to lend to insolvent financial institutions with adequate capital is essential function. the need for an institutiono conserve this function was a primary motivation for the creation of the federal reserve in 1913. the federal reserve discount window is the example of a facility that operates to provide short-term liquidity o suppository -- depository institutions. during the crisis, and sh-

term market failed to function normally and central banks acd forcefully to channel liquidity to institutions and markets by lengthening the terms of their lending, increasing the ranf collateral except dense, and looking at which count parts they would accept. to help stabilize the financial system and facilitate the flow of credit, the federal reserve responded to this location and funding of securitization markets are radically increasing the amount of funding provided banks establishing new lending facilities for non-banks, and providing funding to support e operation of key markets. elsewhere, including canada,e euro zone come and the u.k. they boosted the provision of liquidity in their local currencies. the types of facilities have varied, commensurate with the

differences in financial systems. in the euro zone where the banking sector plays a large zone -- a large role, they focused on increasing liquidiy to banks. the bank of england sought o improve bank liquidity positions by allowing them to change mortgage-backed securities for u.k. treasury bills for up to three years. one of the lessons of the cris was the financial markets have become so globalize that it may not be sufficient for central banks to offer liquidity in in their own currency only. financial institutions may fae liquidity challenges as well. the federal reserved bilateral currency swaps 4 foreign central banks during the financial crisis. this has a loto borrow dollars from the federal reserve to land in thein jurisdictions which serve to ease conditions in dollar funding markets globally.

similarly, the ecb established bilateral swap lines with othr central banks in europe to exchange the euro for their respective currency. as a lender of last resort,a central bank works to contain episodes of financial instability, but recent events have shown the importance of anticipating threats to and adjustability before they can inflict damage on the financil system and economy. in particular, this demonstd important benefits of involvig central banks. among these benefits are the facilitation of close and effective information sharing between supervisors and the suppliers of backstop liquidi, especially during a crisis. the ability to not have overlapped in and the expertise of policy. and the usefulness of the information that supervisors n gather about economic and financial conditions in creatg economic policy.

it appreciation of these benefits is leading to larger roles for financial supervision. the bank of england received expanded powers and responsibilities for financial response ability with the establishment of a regulator as a subsidiary of the bank and e creation of a separate financl policy committee within the bank that will identify, monitor, and take action to reduce financial risk. the newly created european systemic risk board, chaired by the president of the ecb and includes the governors of all the euro central banks of draws heavily on expertise including analytical, statistical, and administrative support from the ecb. in the u.s., the federal ree has reoriented to include a broader systemic focus. it has been assigned new responsibilities for financial stability including a supervisory authority over no-

banking institutions designated as systemically important by e financial stability oversight council and systemically critical market utilities. as i noted earlier, in the decades prior to the crisis, monetary policy and was viewed as the central policy. their role in preserving that interest ability was not ignored but downplayed. the financial crisis has changed all of that. policies to enhance financial stability and monetary policy are now seen as a comical responsibilities of central banks. -- as coequal. how should these fit toge? at the institutional level, the two functions are highly complementary. monetary policy, financial supervision, and lender of lat resort policies all benefit from the sharing of animation and expertise. at the federal reserveo

a stress test will providing information about credit positions. threats to financialy and the potential implications for the economy are thoroughly of theed at meetings fomc. an important debate for the future concerns the extent to which the disease beauport central bank to make a clear distinction between monetary and financial stability responsibilities including designating a separate set a policy tools for each objective. throughout the crisis, the ecb has maintained its "separation principle" in achieving price stability and focuses its unconventional balance measures towards addressing the dysfunctional market. the idea that policy is more effective when separate tools are designated to separate objectives is consistent with

the principle that economists know. and the practice, the distinction between macroeconomic and financial stability objectives will alws be bullard given the attractions between financial and economic conditions. monetary policy actions that improve the outlook also wen improved markets. this can improve s and enhance monetary policy transmissions. nevertheless, the debate abt whether it is possible to dedicate specific policy tools to the macro economic and financial stability objectives is the is the one that raises important practical questions. a leading example is the about whether monetary policy should lean against movements in asset prices are aggregates in an effort to promote financial stability. in my view, the issue is not

whether or not they should ignore possible and balances. they should not. but rather what is "the right tool for the job to respond." the evolving consensus,s settled, is that monetary policy is not to be routinely used to redress imbalances. monetary policy should remain focused on macroeconomic objectives while more targeted macro-potential tool should be used. prudential tools can be structural or cyclical in nature. examples of a structural credential tools are measureso ensure adequate levels of capital and liquidity in the banking sector or to increase the resiliency of the infrastructure. examples of cyclical tools include varying tasks on loan to value ratios, as korea and hog

kong have done. dynamic provisioning as deplod in spain. time varying hair cut rules ad counter-cyclical requirements as set out in basel iii. this could dampen imbalances d resilience to the financial sector with a decline in asset prices by decreasing the ability to absorb losses. the burst tools of financial regulation supervision togethr with appropriate monitoring of the financial system should b, i believe, the first on a defense against the threat of financial instability. however, the effectiveness of such targeted policies is not proven yet in practice so the possibilities that monetary policy could be used to support goals shouldbility not be ruled out. the financial crisis-

2009 will leave a lasting imprint on the theory and practice of central banking. with respect to monetary policy, the basic principles of inflation targeting come on flexibility to address the deviations of bull and climate, and an emphasis on communication and transparenc, all being destined to survive. however, following a much or tradition of central banking, the crisis has forcefully reminded us that the responsibility of central banks to protect financial instability is at least as important as the responsibility to use monetary policy effectively and in the pursuit of macro economic objectives. an evolving consensus holds ty can use separate tooln these macroeconomics consen, but this is now provisional. the tool kits are much better

stocked today than before the crisis. monitoring policy tool that cn be brought to bear include the management of the central bank manage sheet -- balance sheet and communication about future policies. financial stability policy encompasses the first line of defense, at least, a range of micro- and macro-d provisions. it is supported by enhanced monitoring and analysis of potential risks to systemic ability. clearly, applying the lessof the crisis will take some time yet and both practitionersl have their work cut out for them. thank you very much. [applause] unfortunately ir session.noon of the morning session. economists are moving to social psychology now which is probay a good development.

i will be heading back to washington to miss this sessi, but it looks like a great program. i want to thank the boston fed president for inviting me and i wish to an interesting session. thank you very much. [applause]  >> tomorrow secretary -- the senate judiciary committee will hear from secretary janet pollitt, -- napolitano on c-span after "washington journal." ç9>> because i am a businessman, of which i am proud, the doctors of the opposition have attempted to picture me as an opponent of liberalism, but i was a liberal before many of them had ever heard the word and i fought for the reforms of

theodore roosevelt and woodrow wilson before another roosevelt adopted and distorted the word "liberal." >> here is a member of the democratic party for 20 years switching in 1940 when wendell willkie sought and won the nomination for president. although he lost the election, he left his mark speaking up for civil rights and becoming the foreign ambassador for his former opponent amount fdr. he is one of the 14 men featured in the new series, "the contenders" live from indiana at friday, 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> 6 republican presidential candidates traveled to iowa for the faith and freedom coalition candidate forum. watch our live coverage of herman cain, newt gingrich, wrecks santorum, rick perry, ron paul, and michele bachmann.

>> middle and high school students come a time to get those cameras rolling for the student cam video competition. make a five-eight minute video on the theme this year -- the constitution and you. you could win the grand prize of $5,000. for complete details, studentcam.org. >> a live picture of the u.s. capital where the house is in recess for one week. the senate is in session. steady hoyer held a town hall meeting today in waldorf, md. -- actually, yesterday. he discussed his make it in america plan. this is about one hour, 20 minutes. >> good evening. it is 7:02 p.m., so we're

getting started just about on time. i just want to say how pleased i am to be here at this wonderful school. first of all, i will yield-- the microphone is not working? no mumbling. got it. i want to say how pleased i am to be here and i want to yield to our hostess before i yield to our student leader. we are very pleased that we are here and we thank you for your hospitality. the '80s and gentleman, the principle of westlake high school. -- lades and gentleman, the princaple. >> i want to thank mr. hoyer for

selecting our high school for his venue this evening. i want to introduce two of our students, are student government association president who will give us are welcome and taylor, are student member to the charles county board of education. also a congressional page this summer for congressman hoyer. thank you to both of you. [applause] >> to congressman hoyer and his staff, other national and state elected officers, charles county commissioners and elected officials, school system officials and guests, good evening. my name is yaffet and i am the president of the student government association. on behalf of the student body,

staff, and west like, i would like to welcome you to westlake high school where students are learning today and leaders tomorrow. we would like to thank congressman hoyer or his staff dedication to education. again, we welcome your. [applause] >> in 1963, he graduated from high honors from the university of maryland. in 1966, he received his law degree from georgetown. when he was 27, he won a seat in the maryland senate. in 1975, elected president of the senate, the youngest ever. he served until 1978. he was a member of the state board of education from 1978-

1981. in 1981, he became a congressman. congressman hoyer has held various leadership positions including majority leader and currently the democratic whip. congressman hoyer currently serves on the st. mary's college board of trustees and is also a former member of the board of regents for the university system of maryland. he also served on the u.s. naval academy board of visitors. ladies and gentlemen, the hon. steady hoyer. -- steny hoyer. [applause] >> thank you very, very much. it seems to work a lot better now that the students have warmed this up for me. thank you very much for that introduction. thank you for your leadership. taylor is a member of the school board, so she is a very

important young lady indeed. you are her mom? all right. i know you are very proud of that young lady. proud parents sitting in front here, and rightfully so. we also have a number of leaders in this county that i want to introduce. the president of our board of county commissioners, thank you, candace for being here. ken robinson, a member of the board of county commissioners as also here. is reuben here yet? i have his name down. >> he just laughed. >> yeah, right. i have heard that story before. he said, "he is about to speak, so i am out of here." the shirt of charles county is here. -- the sherriff. he is there with some of his

finest. we thank h im for that. the chairman of the democratic central committee is here. al, thanks. virginia benedict, former chair of the democratic subcommittee and a full member. and if the chair of the republican committee is here, i would be glad to introduced him or her. that is the way it goes. please report that i gave equal time. i am pleased to be here with all of you and this town meeting. what we wanted to do today is discuss an agenda which are have been pushing very, very hard. america is facing great challenges, as all of us know. america is not producing the number of jobs that people need. you need to create 125,000 jobs

every month in america to stay even with those were coming in to the jobs sector. as you know, we have been averaging less than that, although we have created some 2 million jobs over the last 24 jobs. that is a very significant job creation, but when you have lost 8 million jobs in the previous eight years, obviously you still have a 75% deficit in jobs which is not counting the new people coming in. although we in this area and are relatively better off, not as well-off as we were when the recession started in december 2007, but we are better off than many other regions around the country. for that, we can be thankful. having said that, we are not trouble-free. we have too many foreclosures,

and to many people out of work at some 6.5% on average in southern maryland. that is about where we are, in that range. prince george's county is over 7%. the natural averages 9.1%, but it is clear that we need to get our economy moving. we have pursued what i call the make it in america agenda, which is why we are here tonight. i am hopeful that we will focus on the make it in america agenda over not only this year and the next, but in the coming congresses' as well because make it in america is all about us competing in the global marketplace. it is about making sure that we succeed in america in grasping

opportunities, grasping jobs for our people. making it means success. from time to time you win the ballgame and you make it, you face the test, you make it. you get the job. you can make it in america, but the other facet of making it in america is making it in america. that means you manufacture it in america, you grow it in america, you sell it here and around the world. that is what make it in america is all about. on one to talk to you a little about that tonight. we will show you a documentary after the funeral march that i make that will crystallize a little better for you, i think, the make it in america agenda. we have asked our members to show that video throughout the country to get people thinking

about a manufacturing strategy for america. why is a manufacturing strategy important for our country? it is important because over the last 20 years we have lost 9 million manufacturing jobs. we were 20 million, now down to 9 million. america still manufactures more goods than any other nation in the world, so it is not as an american has all of a sudden been eclipsed by other nations, but it is as if other nations are pressing us competitively. it is important in any kind of endeavor, if you are being challenged, to respond to that challenge with a plan. if you are playing a game, it is the plate, and game plan, how you make sure that this succeeds. the fact of the matter is, in the country in which we are contributing, not only with

individual corporations but also with the nation's who have a strategy to overcome our advantage. the problem with that, of course, is that manufacturing jobs are some of the best paying in america. manufacturing jobs also have a leveraged effect on the creation of other jobs, more so than any other endeavor. as a result, a number of books have been written. the president of dow chemical corp. rode a boat and -- wrote a book and called it, "make it in america." he took up the same thing i'm -- i do not know if that name means anything to you, but he was one of the few creating intel corp., creating tens of

thousands of jobs. the both have the proposition that we were the most innovative, inattentive developing nation of products in the world. we have been and we are today. we invent so much of the new technology in this country. i want to give you an example of what the andy's are concerned about. that is that we have invented products here, we have innovated those products, and we have developed those products, but unfortunately in too many cases, as andy says, they are taken to scale overseas. what does he mean by that? they are manufactured overseas and sold back here in the united states.

that means we are losing american jobs notwithstanding the fact that these are our products. an example -- the kindle. how many of you have one? i bought my grandson one. i bought him one the christmas before last and it cost about hundred $50. -- about $150. cheaper than that? luckily i have my advisor appear giving me the perfect figure. just came in, thanks. [applause] $160? ok. of that, about $35 is in u.s.- added value. that is over $125 of that added value being overseas.

we invented it, we developed it, and it is a u.s. product, but it is being made overseas. the couple of things are happening. one thing that is happening is that salaries are rising in other nations. they are rising in china, india, other countries around the world. what does that mean? that means the competitive disadvantage is not as great. in the make it in american agenda, i have met with the president of the national association of manufacturers. i have met with the president of the business roundtable and i have spoken to and met with the president of the u.s. chamber of commerce. all of whom believe that a make it in america agenda is important. the head of the national

association of manufacturers says that salaries are no longer the deciding factor in where to send. the traditional advice has been there going overseas to get cheaper labor. that of course was the case, but that is no longer the case. a second thing is happening which will give america a better competitive advantage. if you take something to scale overseas and the united states remains the biggest market, although obviously our consumer spending is significantly off causing our country to be stagnant in our growth, but if we are the largest market, what do you have to do when you make of overseas? you have to send it back to the united states where consumers buy it. what has happened to transportation throughout the

world? you learn that lesson every week. some of you have to drive back and forth to washington and you learned at least two times per week when you fill up your tank. what you learn is that energy, transportation is a lot more expensive today than it was two years ago, four years ago, or 10 years ago. that is true of taking a product to scale overseas and shipping it back here. shipping costs back to the u.s. have become more expensive. the competitive disadvantage we had for that time is disappearing. make it in america is about adopting policies that will insure that manufacturers, businesses, small, medium, large, are all represented here. four or five weeks ago we just visited trenton ellis who just

got a huge contract during extraordinary work, a small manufacturing plant with 100 employees. in the scheme of dings, relatively small, but it is businesses like this creating jobs in america, small businesses creating jobs. we need to make sure they can do is of. if we want to make things in america, what do we have to make sure? that people can make it in america and do so properly. people are not going to make things in america if they cannot make it profitably. if there is no return to their investors who put their money in brisk in order to grow jobs. -- put their money at risk. this will ship our country looks like 10, 20, 30 years from now as well as how much prosperity we bring back to america and how we stabilize the middle class.

average working americans making good wages by investing in dedication and infrastructure, we can boost our economy across the board helping businesses to create new job opportunities and in turn leading to higher incomes and a higher quality of life for our people. as a part of that initiative, the make it in america initiative, i am committed to building industries and jobs right here in the maryland. what have i visited probably tends mom manufacturing enterprises in maryland over the last 60 days? because i want them to know that we are on their side in creating jobs here in maryland making things and selling them here and around the world. chem design manufactures and tests products. de r a real extraordinary little

company -- they are a real, extraordinary company that has an extraordinary opportunity not only to sell their antennas here but across the world as well because of their uniqueness of their product. i am incredibly proud of some of the most innovative firms that we have here. jim makes cutting edge products right here in our state. agj sheet metal, which i am sure you have visited, a small little company here in charles county, fabricating steel, doing an extraordinary job. make it is america, if we are successful, will provide incentives for manufacturing investment, create a level playing fields for u.s. manufacturers, improve our infrastructure. brad is not here tonight, but

earlier today with candice and ken and ruben, who was there -- do we have -- and debra davis, we went through a project that is going on at the community college of southern maryland which is teaching skill sets to young people that are the central if we are going to make it in america. carpentry, plumbing, electricians, welding. i do not know how many manufacturers who, small manufacturers i have visited that have told me that they need welders. ms. benson, we need to tell young people -- welders are making $22 and our. that is not bad money for

anybody. it is the kind of money that you can support yourself and your family on. not a lot of young people are looking at being welders. one of the young people who is 36 years of age, a young man -- i talked to about 20 of them in the room. there were some people 25, 26, some people 30, and one young man, 36. clearly, he had decided -- he went out in the workplace and needed a scale. the college of southern maryland is going to give him that skill and an ability to earn a living. we want to coordinate federal, state, and local resources to support manufacturing. reform corporate taxes. we cannot have a tax level for

corporations that is not competitive with the rest of the world. if we want people to make things in america, they are going to need to do so profitably. the example i use of regulations is that if you take the referee off the football field, the game gets pretty ugly. if there is no referee on the field, the little guy is going to get trampled by the big guys. now debra davis comes in. the county commissioner, thank you for being here. [applause] the little guys gets trampled when you take the referee off the field. a lot of little people got trampled. a lot of little people with the guys playing games and maybe gals were playing games, and

very frankly, a lot of people lost their jobs, homes, they lost their sense of security. the referee was not on the field. people took risks that were inappropriate. we need to put the referee's back on the field, and we did it. when you put the referee back on the field, you have a wide receiver. the wide receivers are the people sacco out for the passes. you want to put the referee right here, and make sure is that wide receiver does not leave two seconds before the ball is hike or they will get an unfair advantage on the defensive person. what you do not want to do however is put the referee in front of the wide receiver so

the wide receiver can not run out. now, in some cases, that is what we have done with our regulations. we have to make sure that our regulations are smart. the president also talked about that in his state of the union. try to make sure they are consistent with a growing jobs and growing our economy. i support him in that effort. we need to facilitate investment as well and infrastructure. we are benefiting from decisions made in the 1950's on infrastructure. that was of course the federal highway system under the late president eisenhower. investments in infrastructure have an extraordinary payoff and a long-term payoff. we need to make sure our infrastructure is up to the job,

whatever that infrastructure. we had a major failure of the infrastructure in the last storm after irene. candice, ken, and i -- it was the results of lee. we had a 50-foot hole right on the side of 301. we have to restore that infrastructure. we have to out-build, educate, and innovated our competitors to make sure we are competitive. america has the best inventors, innovators, and developers of products in the world. demonstrably. that is not a statement that cannot be proved on paper. we want to expand to be permanent. we want a simpler and more efficient tax code for

businesses and individuals. we are also working on currency reform. we passed some trade bills. the argument was that would generate maybe 100,000 jobs. and economists tell us that the fact that china is manipulating its currency so that its goods are cheaper here and our goods are expensive there is costing us 1 million jobs. 10 times as much consequence as the trade legislation is the manipulation of our currency by the chinese. the senate has passed a bill that is now in the house, and i am hopeful that the house leadership will bring it to the floor. remote job training links between manufacturers and community colleges here in maryland. we call it the jobs bill. what is much more catchy is the

actual implementation of that partnership between advanced manufacturers and community colleges and work investment boards. they are doing extraordinary work, matching up people with jobs. president obama signed six make it in america jobs bills last year. i want to get to the film. but you get the gist of what "make it in america" is about. one thing i want to say before we go to the film is that they make it in america is not a quick fix. remember i told you we lost 9 million jobs over 20 years. frankly, i was for our

investment to make sure our automobile manufacturers stayed a viable and put out a better product at a competitive price. have we lost our manufacturing capacity, it would have been a threat to our national security. not just for jobs or the psyche of america being a great car manufacturer, but to have lost the capacity in the u.s. would of been in national security threat. we invested in that, and now the car companies are making profits and paying us back that which we loaned them. we saved hundreds of thousands of jobs in that process. so, we need to do more in planning for the long term. but in the short-term, make it and america will not produce the jobs for the short term. president obama has offered a bill called the jobs.

i believe that a will and almost every economist that has endeared it including republican, conservative, liberal, moderate, no-party of economists have all said that they believe it will grow the economy and will create jobs. now, one of john mccain's economic advisers said it will grow the economy by about a point or two and might add 1.5 million jobs. another estimate was 1.9 million jobs. all of the estimates have been that it will be well over 1 million jobs that will be added. and it will create infrastructure. and it will keep 240,000 teachers on the job. it will keep law enforcement officials on the job. we gained 137,000 jobs last month.

why was that? we lost 33,000 public sector jobs in america, and many of them were teachers. so our class sizes are larger. ladies and gentlemen, i now want to show you a film, and then we will go to questions and answers. steve, are you ready with the film? "make it in america." thank you. ♪ >> america was the dominant industrial leader in the world, and we still are, but we have 9%

unemployment, lost 8 million jobs in the last decade. the middle-class has been stuck in the mud. we are not as dominant as we once were. >> it has had a tremendous impact. we lost purchasing power. many people were thrown out of the middle-class. many of those jobs went overseas. it has had a negative impact on the prosperity of our country. >> they are relocated. a lot of people having to relocate because of jobs. >> i cannot give these young

people the opportunities that we used to. it is impossible. >> --into a country of low wage jobs, the american dream goes with that in come. >> literally thousands of americans through the course of this deep recession that we are just experiencing, so how can we reinvigorate our economy and grow manufacturing jobs? how can we make sure that working families have the kind of future that they want? as a result, we have pursued the "make it an america" agenda. succeed, win, and it also means "make it" in america, creating

an environment for it the working men and women of this country. >> corporations and industries are not going to locate in a community unless there is sufficient infrastructure. a good water system, a good sewer system, waste water system, recreational opportunities, a good school system. the american people are talking about it, and now we need to do something about it with public policy. >> we are seeing a crumbling of our infrastructure. building high-speed rail, fixing our mass transit system, fixing our water and sewer systems that are crumbling. people are ready to do that. we have the greatest workers and the world right here in the u.s. they are ready to go to work

every day and rebuild our country to make it the america that we want it to become a need it to be in order to compete globally. >> the plan for the work force of the future, we need to modernize our schools. we need to make sure that apprenticeship programs come back and kids can go to community colleges and learn the kinds of skills that they need. we attracted and hispanic window manufacturer to pennsylvania. we made sure those workers got the training. they were doing that in pennsylvania. >> you need math-science backgrounds and people that are in these industries. >> i think we need to make more investments to recreate that base.

those jobs in some instances pay better than those that require a four-year or advanced degrees. >> you differentiate yourself with technology and the global arena. i think the applied science approach to a college education so that people have some hands on experience as well as theory is critical for a company like ours. i think that is not unusual for the manufacturing base. china built 100 signs universities in the last five years. when we are talking about cutting back on the aspirations of young people. in neighboring high school built a car that competes with one of the leading manufacturers and the world. our young people have a great ability, and what we need to do

is invest in their education in science, technology, engineering, and mass. these are critical skill areas. >> american competitiveness depends upon the world perceiving that we continue to lead in innovation and quality of products that we manufacture here. we cannot stop leading the world in innovation just because we are facing challenging economic times. we need to invest in education, research and development, and continue to provide incentives to companies to do great things. >> the investments in the agenda are in innovation, research and development, particularly along the lines of energy and definitely having a solid education base. >> one thing when we talk about

manufacturing going abroad is the expertise that goes with it. wind those skills leave the u.s., what happens is -- when those skills leave the u.s., what happens is we lose that expertise for manufacturing in the future. is not just the industry leaving but the technical expertise that takes an impact. >> if we let manufacturing go, the innovation will follow it. if you look at how companies and corporations are behaving, if they relocate their manufacturing operations, slowly over time, there innovation will go with it. there is a feedback loop that happens when companies make things that feed back into their ability to innovate. >> the ability to control every bit of the process from its inception all the way to design and manufacturing.

>> we are not just making it here or here in maryland, we are buying steel from ohio that is getting machined in connecticut, circuit boards from pennsylvania. we are providing revenue opportunities for other companies as well. that is a great thing to be a part of. >> it is a focus on restoring pride in america, pride in the things that we build, and pride in the workers that build these products. >> we were involved in the chilean mine rescue. our customers by our equipment. >> they were saying it would be three or four months before getting these men out of the earth. in 33 days, we dug a hole to bring those miners out of the ground. we built this. we made this bankwow.

wow, , something that is impacting the world and making history. >> we are not helpless in this economic crisis. these are concrete, proven-type of proposals that can put america back to work if we have the political will to really make it happen. >> manufacturing jobs explain the economy. working men and women in this country have a better quality of life, better opportunities, and a greater sense that their country is headed in the right direction and their lives will be better in the future. that is what this means for the average working family in america. together, we can make it an america. not only that, we believe we will make it an america. ♪

[applause] >> the reason we are showing that around the country -- i am not running president. but it is so we can convey the message that america is not helpless. america is the greatest land on the face of the earth, but we have somehow lost our competitive edge and we need to get it back. i was at a dinner meetings which i want to talk about quickly with the president of pepsico. a woman, born in india who lives here, the president of pepsico. she says america needs to get its swagger back. we need to restore our confidence, our sense of purpose it-ness.doi-

we need to believe in ourselves again, and we need to make it in america. we have to focus on however the immediate crisis. i want to close on this before we go to questions. we have 12 people called the select committee on deficit reduction. i guess affectionately known as the super committee. they have some extraordinary authorities. they can present their recommendations, and those recommendations must be considered. they can be passed by the u.s. senate with 51% of votes and through the house. it must be passed. everyone h has their votes. ladies and gentlemen, there are a lot of young people. your sister is even younger.

that is your sister to your left. even younger. a lot of young people in this auditorium. my generation owes it to them to confront this deficit and debt that is the biggest crisis confronting our country according to mik;e mullen, the chairman, the of the joint chiefs of staff. the richest country on the face of the earth has fallen deeply into debt. for a lot of reasons. and there is a lot of blame for that. my purpose is not to assess blame tonight. my purpose is to energize all of us and focus on the fact that all of us need to be a part of that solution. i am urging this committee to come to grips with hard

decisions, to come up with a proposal that will balance us over at least 10 or 12 years at $4 trillion. that will reduce very substantially the debt to gdp ratio. every major committee has said you need $4 trillion. that is what i am for. it will make tough decisions and political courage to get there. all of us need to do it to get there. if we do not, these young people, anybody under 50, are going to be confronting their crisis in their time. to the crisis may be tourism or some other international crisis, an international health crisis like aids or something else, or it may be a natural disaster. they will be challenged, and they will need resources.

my father's generation was called the greatest generation by tom brokaw. they fought a war to keep us free and to allow democracy to flourish here and around the world. then they came home and they created the greatest economy the world has ever seen. if my generation, those of you close to my generation, if we leave our kids deeply in debt, we will be known as the greediest generation. not the greatest generation. so i will be working very hard on your behalf to make sure this committee comes up with a solution that will be tough medicine but absolutely essential if we are going to be able to continue to invest. with all due respect to some of my friends in washington who do not like any spending, there are

at least two types of spending. one is that you do not get a return on. the other is spending that you get a return on. spending on infrastructure is an investment, and you get a return. spending on innovation and research and the ability of people to make it in america is an investment. so, i am going to be working very hard on your behalf on the make it in america agenda and make sure that america's finances are balanced in the process. america can do both. your turn. [applause] >> people signed up to ask questions. we have seven people. i will be announcing your names.

the microphone is over there. there is one person in the audience, and she is a leader in the state for education and the coordinator of the judy centers. makes sure young people get educated in the state. [applause] >> i should have introduced cheryl myself. she is a wonderful, wonderful person. she headed up the judy center efforts here in charles county. she is now running the state program. my wife judy was an early childhood educator. she started some full-service enterprises 43 and 4-year-old it. they were full service in the extent that not only did they deal with child care services but they also dealt with families and adults. they are full-service.

24 out of 25 of them are associated with elementary schools in our state. only one is not co-located within an elementary school. i am so proud of those centers and the work that might wife judy did it to create those. i want to thank you. only are former superintendent has been more responsible making sure this effort succeeds for young children which in my opinion are the key to education success. you need to get young children very early. if you do not, you are going to have a tough job in junior high and high school levels. thank you very much. >> our first question. he will be followed by chris lloyd. >> good to see you, congressman.

let me introduce you to the referees that you took off the field. his name is glass-steagall. in other meetings, you stated for the record that it should not have been repealed. i have a list of all of the co- signers. what is going to take to have you add your name to that list of co-sponsors? because that will restore of the debt, the deficit. you know all about it. maybe the audience does, too. we should scrap anything else -- that is not going to work. what is going to take to add your name to it. we have the president following the pathway of dick cheney's unity executive.

and function has a strong man or a leader in the congress to check the president because the executive could lead to a banker-style dictatorship. the president has been praised by dick cheney. those are my two questions. what is going to take you to add your name to the list of co- sponsors? and the other is the pathway to a bank dictatorship. >> first of all, glass-steagall -- i will explain it to you. it was adopted to separate banking from investment banking, essentially, so the tape deck below would not be coming gold. i voted to repeal that along with the overwhelming majority of both parties some years ago. the gentleman is correct. that may well have been a

mistake as we see the two together destabilizing the fiscal financial community. now, why did we do that? why was the recommendation of the administration to do that? why did both parties support that pretty significantly? we did it because we are in competition around the world and we saw that happening around the world. having said that, you may be right. now as to why my name is not on the bill, as a leader, as the majority leader and now as the number two leader, you can imagine everyone wants me to sponsor of the bill. i do not sponsored many bills. i do get involved in those bills. that bill is pending in committee. that is the reason. even if that were not the case, i would want to look at this carefully to make sure we could continue to remain competitive

while putting the referee back on the field. glass-steagall was a part of that referee construct. so i am looking at 8. >> [inaudible] >> the second question you asked dealt with the unilateral presidency, a cheney-like presidency. on fact, we do not agree. i believe this president has been collegial and has made his proposals. i believe this president has tried to work in a collegial way for a long period of time with the republicans in the congress. so i do not agree with you on the fact that he has been a unilateralist president. i find him to be a leader who states where he thinks we ought

to go but has the flexibility to sit down and talk with people on alternative suggestions. he has been criticized by his own party as being too flexible and trying to work with the opposition to much. i hear that all the time around the country, that he needs to get tough, but he is trying to lead the country, not democrats or republicans. he is trying to lead the country in a positive way. i will tell you this. i probably not all to mention this but i will do it anyway. one of the most unpopular bills that was voted on was the troubled asset relief program, tarp. a lot of that money has been paid back. we made money on that so far. $700 billion would put on the table. we spent about $450 billion.

much of that has been paid back. a very unpopular vote. president bush came to the congress of the u.s. led by democratic speaker at a democratic majority leader, and he and secretary paulson of the treasury and ben bernanke appointed by republicans but not a partisan politician came to us, all three of them, and said if we do not do this, the country is going to go into a recession. not that it may go into a depression, but will go into a depression. ben bernanke, a student of the depression. there are people who thought we should not have passed it. it was very controversial. but our president, albeit a republican president asking a

democratic congress, to do something to keep the country from going into a depression. what happened? a democratic congress responded with both majorities supported president bush because we believed that the country was in crisis. very frankly, in retrospect, we were absolutely right. our experience has shown that. now, a few months later, barack obama was elected president of the united states. let me go back and finish the story. the republicans in the congress gave their president -- about 190 votes in the congress at that time, 65 of their votes. when george bush was saying the country was going to go into a depression, 65 of their votes. and the bill failed. we gave 142 votes.

a lot of our local business people said this is a real problem. these guys are going to tank and it is us that her going to pay the bill. it is going to be main street that takes a dive. we came back, and 172 democrats came back on a friday. we picked up 30 additional republicans. still not a majority of republicans responded. fast forward. we are in a recession. obviously going down. 786,000 jobs. remember i talked about 8 million jobs? 786,000 jobs were lost in january 2009, one month. the president of the united states barack obama offered a recovery act, which has created 2 million jobs during its

sustenance. no republican voted for 8. 0. in the house or the senate. when the country was in crisis. that bill, while not perfect in my view, staunched a deep recession. so i believe the president is not acting in a unilateral fashion, but i think we need to look at glass-steagall. 0.500% is not bad. >> chris lloyd. >> i want to know what the difference is between this bill and the first one that you all past and it was supposed to create a lot of jobs and they were supposed to be a shovel- ready, but nothing ever materialized. >> i would not agree with nothing ever materialized. we got 2 million jobs back. in maryland, it kept us from

producing our teachers and expanding class size. it did a very substantial effect for the two years that it was in effect. i see the board of county commissioner shaking her head. infrastructure investment in roads and bridges that we needed to have. now, it ended. it ended about six months ago. guess what happened when it ended? we started to go back. what is different is the president wants to put more money in people's pockets. he wants to cut the social security tax in half for workers which means for the average worker about $1,500 to $1,900 in their pockets over a

year. he wants to cut it for small businesses to put more money in their pockets. he wants to invest in keeping teachers and other employees on the job. we are losing teachers and domestic defenders -- firefighters and police. and he said we are going to pay for it. the senate introduced a bill that will pay for it was a half percent additional tax on a net taxable income of over $1 million because he thinks that will help our economy. i agree with that. i think it is not necessarily different, but the first one succeeded but not as well. the reason it did not succeed as well -- i lost the microphone. i did not lose this microphone. [laughter] did i? boy, oh, boy, i tell you what. the fact is, we need to do a

number of things -- pardon? you are having a tough time here in may? can you hear me now? i do not know what happened to the microphone. in any event, i am for the jobs bill that the president has offered. the senate has a way of paying for it that i think works. we all have to bring this deficit under control. we will of two -- we will all have to have a fair share in this effort, but if we do not do anything or create jobs, we are going to have a spiral-down effect. >> john followed by shirely. >> we would like to offer our services to work this problem. we have been growing 25% per year for the last four years.

we know how to make this happen at the small business level. if small-business is are not healthy, the community will not grow. >> john, if you give a card to me or betsy, we will get in touch with you. i would like to take a look at your shop. >> we are national. we are working large defense contractors, but we are using a lot of the small businesses in unique town, and that is where we have to grow, in regional areas. in north carolina and new jersey -- i was talking to my son de. move your company to new jersey. he has been a part of three-star companies. it sold for $600 million.

1 for $65 million. they started another startup company. there are models out there that are not being used affectively. i think the federal level is -- i would really like to see more at the state level and local level. >> i think that ties right in with the make it in america because we need to have a strategy of what you are saying. thank you. thank you for what you are doing to create jobs. >> hi, there. my question is actually related to job retention and security because i actually have one of those good-paying middle-class jobs that you mentioned. id is in a sector that used to be one of the security employers in america, but now its employees are suffering from image issues, and their salaries

and pensions are under attack. i actually am a federal government employee, so my question is what your efforts with regard to the super committee in insuring they are not using federal government employees as targets and the scapegoats to help balance this budget? keep in mind that we all agree that government needs to be streamlined. >> thank you for your question and the work that you do. we have an extraordinary group of federal employees who do extraordinary work for all of us as a nation. you will be very, very impressed if you deal with the people in indianhead, pax river, st. indigo's, or nih. you will find extraordinary people. a lot of other extraordinary

facilities as well. everybody needs to put things on the table. federal employees, over the last two years, have had a 0% -- they have a job, but that will mean that over 10 years, we will save $60 billion. so, federal employees have taken a hit. and very frankly, i want to tell you honestly as a federal employee advocate, i did not oppose that. the president talk to me about it. we all have to stanch our belts a little bit. we are going to cinch that blet. -- th at belt. chris van hollen is a member of the super committee from montgomery county. he and i have talked. i spent an hour and a half

talking to joe biden when the biden talks were going on. that does not mean that the federal employees are not going to take some additional contribution in some different ways. but is to say that i am going to work very hard to measure federal employees that pay comparability -- they should not be paid more than their private- sector counterparts nor less. to recruit and retain good people in the federal service for our national security interests, national health interests, for our air traffic safety interests, for our law enforcement interests, for all those interests, we need good people. if we want to keep them, we need to have pay and benefits that are comparable. so i am going to continue to fight for that.

>> my colleague brought that up. although i think that perhaps the second part of his question was misunderstood. because the question of the president acting, not unilaterally, but according to the principle of the unitary executive, it is not a question of working in a bipartisan fashion. he works with the republicans to create an unconstitutional super congress that would cut the budget that is not answerable to the american population. he worked with the republicans to put on the table massive cuts to social security and medicare and other programs that should not be touched. he has been willing to work in a bipartisan fashion in that way. >> i think you are accurate on the first 1. i do not agree with your

characterization of the committee. congress has to vote on aid and the president has to sign it. it is a committee. it does have a provision which means that -- >> if congress rejects it, you have automatic cuts in post. they are imposed one way or the other. >> i agree with you but he did join with the republicans. >> on social security, you yourself just mentioned the cuts to the fica tax which is how social security is funded which is bankrupt in social security. >> he did not suggest -- i want to make a clear. the president did not suggest cutting benefits. >> no, cutting the funding to social security. >> unlike the other side who always wants to cut the taxes on

the wealthiest of americans, he wants to cut the taxes on the working guys and america. >> i think president roosevelt was very wise in sequestering the funds for social security to prevent the republicans from attacking. cutting the independent funding for it makes it liable to be attacked. >> that would not be my first choice e there. >> but the question of the president acting unilaterally from the congress on waging war in violation of the war powers act in libya, in ordering assassinations using predator drone of american citizens in violation of the fifth amendment, this is exactly what dick cheney was praising him for as well as the expanded use of the patriot act in a fashion which to democratic senators have said would horrify and

terrify the american population if they knew how this president were making use of the provisions of the patriot act. the question is not whether he is acting against the republicans' rights, bought the rights of the american population, and the fact that the house of representatives has abrogated its responsibility to act as a watchdog as a separate and coequal branch of government. >> ok. let me answer that question then. first of all, as it relates to the president's use of our armed forces to confront terrorism and terrorists, this is obviously a very difficult challenge that confronts our country. quite obviously, it is a very eminent danger as we have just seen recently. we just had somebody plead guilty to wanting to take down a

plane over one of our major cities, killing not only all of the people on the plane but probably tens of thousands on the ground. so this is not an intellectual, hypothetical threat that confronts us. we know of people in the world that want to us great harm and killed 3000 of first citizens ago.ne day a decade so the president has an enormous responsibility to protect us and our country. he has some tough decisions to make. i think he has made wise decisions. the congress of the united states -- i think you are correct -- has not acted to prevent that. and to that extent, is accomplice it -- is the

t.plcomplici congress has not stopped it because that would be that the congress largely agrees that this challenge that confronts america is unique, very dangerous, very lethal, and we need to make sure that those who were acting, not talking, acting to cause us further harm knows that they are going to oppose the government, a country, and a people that is not frozen into doing action. i think everybody or most people applauded the fact that we took out osama bin laden. i think that was the appropriate

thing to do. unfortunately, pakistan knew more than it is telling us, and we acted because pakistan did not. i think pakistan had to know that osama bin laden was there. drone attacks have thwarted al-qaeda's attacks. i think the president has acted in a manner consistent with the defense of this nation. the present has stopped torture. >> [inaudible] >> no, he wanted to prosecute them. >> [inaudible] >> we have had some military tribunals, but we have had a political difference in the congress where those folks would

be tried. i think the president is acting in the best interest of our country. >> claire followed by lynette, who will be our last question of the evening. >> good evening, congressman hoyer. my question to you is has the making it an american initiative considered the cosmopolitan the industry and the tools and products that we utilize? >> i think the answer to that is the cosmetology industry is largely, if you are talking about the service part of the cosmetology industry, make it in america hopes to enhance of that

industry by enhancing those who utilize those services. its focus is probably more on the tools that you used then the service that you provide. to that extent, for cosmetology, the manufacturing sector of the tools used successfully is no different than any other industry. we are trying to promote the making of those in america as well as other manufactured goods. >> that being said, do you know that is the industry that is focused mainly with women and small businesses? would there be any moneys available for women that may be interested in going into that field? because that is a fast-tracked to a career for women with limited education opportunities. >> the answer to that is yes.

we have expanded the loan of 44 small businesses -- the loan for small businesses because they create most of the new jobs in our country. so the answer is yes. betsy who you see here will be glad to try to assist if you'd like. >> thank you. >> you are welcome. >> lynette. >> my question is as far as make it in america, for small businesses, we also have a lot of growth in home-based businesses. is there a part for us to be included in on that? there are a lot of school-aged

kids who have a lot of creative ideas. >> a lot of what? >> creative ideas. are there any programs going to be set up for them? i know it is important to go to college, but some kids may not be college-material, but their minds are so far out there and being the innovators that they are. will there be programs to cultivate them to create businesses and stuff like that? my main thing is home-based businesses, because everybody is doing it. we need to know if we are going to be a part of making it in america. >> what is with these microphones? let me get it out of here. the issue is not whether it is home-based or office-front of based. the issue is what do you do and how can we help you do it to

expand your business? home-based is not perceived in any way lesser than a business. for instance, bill gates and his body -- they were in a garage at their home. they were a home-based business. they have done pretty well. that example ought to be instructive to us that wherever it is based, if the ideas are good and the consumer is advantaged and wants to buy those products or even that service, a home-based business -- yes, we want to help. what was the second? school kids. i am glad you asked that question. i indicated that i had been at csm with all of the county commissioners here tonight. what they are doing is a program that, by the way, i got a million dollars in an earmark.

i am for earmarks. my republican friends have made a big deal about earmarks. the constitution of the united states says that the congress of the united states, not the president, shall appropriate money. the congress of the united states shall apply that money to the priorities that the congress of the united states deems to be necessary. many years ago, three, four, five years ago -- let's say three or four years ago. i got $1 million for a program for the community college of southern maryland designed to do exactly what you are talking about. make sure that an awful lot of young people -- college is not what they want to do -- but they have extraordinary skills. they are very good with their hands and heads and can do a lot of things.

as this gentleman will tell you, triton needs welders. it is hard to find welders in america today. i counted 25 guys in that room who are there to be welder's. $22 an hour. private-sector. 22 bucks an hour. that is not starting out. starting out was $12 or $14 an hour. so, you are absolutely right. we need programs like that throughout our country because the businesses throughout this country need those kinds of skills. yes, they need scientists and engineers and technology-trained people. clearly. but when they go and make something, the engineer may have

designed it, but he is not going to put it together or to the carpentry and plumbing. we think of plumbing at home to make sure it works, but if you -- but you are putting a lot of pipes together when you build a rocket ship. you need a lot of skills. yes, we are investing in programs to do what you suggested. if we do not, if we do not do it, we are not going to be able to make it in america. we are wrapping up? that is it. i want to thank all of you for being here tonight. [applause] i want to thank the local elected officials who are here. i want to thank all of the elected officials. i want to thank the sheriff. and a sheriff, i want to thank

all of the men and women in your department to everyday put on a badge or in plain clothes or a new form of go out -- or uniform who go out and take care of this place so that democracy can operate. i want to think the teachers could i hope you will think everyone of your teachers. i was married to a teacher. judy died 14 years ago. but i think the most important people in our society are our teachers. parents are our first teachers, understand. but our teachers are our most important people. if they succeed, our society will succeed. if our teachers fail, our society will not succeed. i want to thank all of you for being here. i am honored to serve you in the congress of the united states. and i will keep doing so to the best of my ability for as long

as you want me to. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> tomorrow, the senate judiciary will hear from janet napolitano could to will talk about several -- janet napolitano. live coverage will get under way at 10:00 a.m. right after "washington journal." >> because i am a businessmanç9, of which i am incidentally very proud, and i am connected with a large company, the doctrinaires of the opposition have attempted to picture me as the pilot of liberalism. but i was a little before many of those men approached the

word. and i spoke of the reforms o before any of the liberal's. >> he was a member of the democratic for 20 years, switching in 1940. although he lost the election, he left his mark in political history, speaking up for civil rights and becoming a foreign ambassador for his former opponent franklin roosevelt. he is one of the 14 men featured in c-span is new series "the conditionercontenders." >> this weekend, six republican presidential candidates 1 traveled to des moines. starting at 7:00 p.m. eastern on

saturday, on c-span 6 "road to the white house." flood prepared as was the topic of the hearing today on capitol hill. witnesses included officials from the army corps of engineers. this hearing is chaired by barbara boxer. it is just under three hours. [gavel] >> the committee should come to order. i am pleased to have a number of colleagues from off the committee today. it shows how important our work is dealing with preventing floods. i apologize that the ranking member and i doing some work on an important issue on public works, so if there is a little bit of diversion, please

understand. what we decided was that we would make a very brief opening statements, just three minutes each. then we would start with the members in order of seniority, . very quickly, today's hearing will examine how our nation's foot control system responded to the flooding events of 2011. we need to take a hard look at that response. we need to see where we can improve our response. i welcome all of the distinguished witnesses here today will help give our committee a picture of what happened, what worked, what did not work. i appreciate the assistance secretary of the army joellyn darcy who is joining us, along with the commanders of the three core divisions.

michael general -- brigadier- general john man from northwest division, and colonel chris a full larsson -- christopher larsen could i welcome all of the witnesses who came to d.c. for a very important perspective for us. of course, i welcome our senate colleagues. it is really unprecedented in how many colleagues are here today. that will move us forward as we look at how to write a new water resources development bill. as you know, because of the year more controversy, we have to change the way we do this bill. -- because of the earmark controversy, we have to change the way we do this bill. we are figuring out how to move forward and we will work with all of these senators so that you feel comfortable that we can meet the needs of your state and still managed to avoid the dreaded wordthe frui

"earmarks." i believe we know best for our states. i believe we should continue doing those legislative priorities that have been given the name "earmarke." but we will like it in that today. we will look at meeting the requirements of the senate. we will look at the continued assessment and improvement of our water control systems. we will understand how to better prepare for future flights evens. again, i want to thank all the witnesses. this is a bipartisan moment for this committee as is the highway bill. so i know we can work together and no one makes that happen better, frankly, than my very good friend. >> i do agree with that. although oklahoma has not

experienced the same footing impact that some of our colleagues have. the ripple effects of the mississippi river flood event did affect my constituents back home. one of the best kept secrets is that oklahoma is inevitable. people do not know that. we have navigation ways -- my father-in-law, a strong democrat in the state legislature, was an author of that. we have always been involved in that could anything that involves the navigation system affects us. the corps has been preparing assessment of some of the damages and which would cost to repair flood control. madam chairman, i do have a lengthy statement which i want to have as part of the record. but i want to say that we're both anxious to tackle two major events bear.

i was the only conservative who voted against the earmark ban recognizing that when you do not do your appropriation authorization -- which our constitution tells us to do -- then automatically the president does that. but the president does not know what our needs are in oklahoma. i am not sure he has ever been to oklahoma. with that, thank you for coming to this hearing. >> i will let that one go. [laughter] if we can have our witnesses have three-minute openings. >> i have a guest here. >> senator, you're next. at some point, i will have to give you my gavel. >> thank you very much for

calling this hearing. i think it is very important. i want to hear from our colleagues who have experienced firsthand the incredible challenge we have had on flooding this year. i'm interested to hearing from our panel. i have always said i have my entire statement be part of the record. i want to bring of the effectiveness of the flood control erosion issues in the coast of maryland that worked very well during these two storms. we invested a lot of resources into protecting the oceanfront in ocean city, maryland. we have invested money, but it has paid off big time. we saw that the during these past two storms. we had record levels of rainfall risk. we had to evacuate ocean city. but the amount of damages to a minimum because of the investments that we made on the

sand replenishment and on the dunes. i might also say that this has to hanover was also in danger of -- that the susquehanna river was also in danger of flooding. i have put mine statement to the record. we have testimony on the valley received on a precautionary work we have done to protect ocean city -- on the value received on the precautionary work we have done to protect russian city. >> thank you. >> thank you for holding this very important hearing today. this is the day for bipartisanship. in fact, it started back in july when 14 senators, all 14 senators along the missouri river central requested this

hearing. i think the chair and the ranking member for honoring the request. i probably will not soon forget the shock i felt this spring when it became clear to me that nebraskan is would soon be dealg with floods of historic proportions. we saw record snowpack on the rocky mountains and the planes. but several states in the missouri river basin experience rainfall like two hundred to 300 -- even 400% above average. runoff is expected to be two hundred 30% normal level. this presented serious damages

for the army corps personnel to deal with this situation. i want to express my gratitude to the many federal and state employees to spend countless hours combating the flooding waters. but it seems clear to me that river management system did not work. that is why we're here today. granted, the snowpack and rainfall that caused this year's flood was no doubt about it exceptional. but we must now figure out what changes should be made to protect people's arms, their livelihood, their homes. it was only within the last few weeks, as a matter of fact, the some people even got back to their homes because they have been under water. we could not have expected the court to completely mitigate the effects of these floods. it was not humanly possible. but it is a program to ask what data was available that could have been used to alleviate the pressure on the flood control

systems earlier this year. to the extent it is feasible, which also consider if there is a need for updates to the master manuals procedures in the annual operating plan. i will wrap up my comments today by expressing my concern that, notwithstanding the enormous problems we have had over the last year, it looks like we're headed into another very difficult situation in the year ahead with no changes being made. so i appreciate the hearing, madam chair. i look forward to the witness' testimony. >> thank you, senator. senator alexander. >> i also appreciate the hearing. i will, our colleagues and those were testifying. my top priority is to make -- is to do all i can to help the federal government participate in repairing the island near

memphis and the other damage near lake county, which is the beginning of for the mississippi river comes down along tennessee. the longer we wait to do that, along we endanger the creation of jobs in our region at a time when unemployment is more than 9%. that is my major goal. like the other states represented here, we have had some huge floods in the last two years. the reason why so many senators are here is because the mississippi river and the tributary flood control project is the largest flood control project in the world. we have had these two phenomenally events in 2010 and 2011. in tennessee, it was a two thousand-year flood. the mayor is here from memphis to talk about what happened there.

but i want to compliment mayor horton and the leadership of shelby county and memphis for their preparedness. i have not seen a more effective organization in a long time that worked hard to avoid damage rather than just cleanups after it. we hope to focus in the sharing of what we can do to avoid future damage. i would like to say to the corps of engineers that the work they did was a very good job in tennessee. after 2010, my emphasis to the corps of engineers, particularly for the flooding around nashville, was to see if we could find a way to get the federal agencies and make warnings about floods as effective as our warnings about tornadoes. you can turn on the television and see the tornadoes coming down your road in 13 minutes.

we cannot quite do that with rising water. but the tornado warnings were greatly improved by the cooperation with agencies of the last 12 years. i think we should work with the weather service and the army corps and other agencies to seek if we can let citizens and towns of people up and down the mississippi triver know when the waters are coming. i look forward to this hearing. >> ok, we're ready to hear your voices and your perspective. we will start with senator grassley. each of you will have three minutes. >> thank you. i will put a long statement in the record and summarize very quickly.

if you know the history of the sloan projects -- of pixloan flood projects, they were for several decades. in 2006, a new manual was trying to manage the river for several reasons beyond flood control, for recreation, irrigation, municipal water, environmental reasons, and for commerce. it to about 10 years to 15 years to develop that manual that manages the river. and the control structures. it seems to me that, from the devastation that has happened this year, you have to have a revision of the manual to put more emphasis upon flood control, the original purposes of the structures in the first place. since it took a decade or more

to thedevelop the benny all that now governs, we should take a few months to do a revision of that manual that emphasizes flood control. it is easy to blame the corps for what went wrong when they have so much to take into consideration. flood control is now a minority of the considerations. with all the damage that has been done to farming, to homes, to small businesses and everything, it seems to me that we have to start putting people first on consideration in this manual and that putting people first would be trying to mitigate the damage that was done by flooding and not have as much concern about recreation, irrigation, municipal water, environment, -- environmental species, commerce.

when you see all of the damage that was done by this flood, more consideration has to be given to flood control then has been done in this manual that now governs. rewrite the menu and do it very quickly. thank you. >> senator, thank you. we know all of you have to speak and leave. we thank you so much for being here. senator conrad. >> thank you. we very much appreciate this hearing. thank you for your opening statements. i think there reflected the concern that all of us share. i think it is important to my constituents and certainly to me that we fully review the events of this last year. something went terribly wrong. the flooding was a bit. there's no doubt about that. in my state of north dakota, we

were hit by record floods, records that are so far exceed -- records the sow for it exceed anything in recorded history that you have to wonder what happened. on to say to those were listening -- two major river systems in our state were affected. this headline releases it all -- "swamped." this is our fourth largest town. in 48 hours, the level of the flood was increased by 10 feet of the projection. there is no way you can respond in 48 hours to an increase in the projection of 10 feet. that is in human -- that is humanly not possible to defend the town. a wall of water was headed our way. more than 11,000 residents were

evacuated. this is 3.5 feet higher in terms of flood level than the record recorded flood of 1881. we are dealing with something that is so far outside our experience that is hard to even talk about. the damage to this town was dramatic. more than 4000 homes were inundated for weeks and many of them is completely destroyed. rebuilding this city will take years. and bismarck, our capital city, and mandan, our sister city, both travel the missouri. they were both affected by historic numbers. for those along the missouri river, one of the most frustrating problems of the problem was the ever changing forecast.

10 times what is normal. this is the highest releases ever in recorded history. flooding of this magnitude has not been seen since the garrison dam became operational. hundreds of families were forced from their homes, including two of my own employees. one of whom will lobby back into her home until sometime next year. she and her family have been living in my apartment because their house is absolutely so badly damaged that they cannot get back. here is just one example of the havoc that this flood caused. as you can see, this family, like many others, had built a sandbag dikes around their home. the volume of the water was so powerful and moved with such speed that it cut a new channel and created a scare hole to claim this home.

focus in the near term must be clearly on repairing the damage to flood control systems. we also need additional federal support for families and businesses so they have some chance to recover. many of my constituents are concerned that they will face another flood next year because we have record amounts of water in the system. and the forecast is for more record rainfall. i believe that requires us to review the operations of the master menu. just sticking with what has been done is not good enough. finally, i want to thank very sincerely both general walsh and general mcmahon for their service and the service of their entire team. they did wage truly heroic efforts to defend these cities and towns and we will never forget those efforts. at the same time, i think we would be derelict in our duty

not to recognize that just following the existing manual operating instructions will not cut it in the extraordinary weather conditions we confront. i think the committee. >> thank you so much, senator conrad. senator robert, we welcome you. >> thank you, madam chairman. thank you for the effort to hold this hearing. 79% of kansas is experiencing drought conditions. i do not know what we did to mother nature, but she has not acted in a very welcome way. starting in may and last into september, kansans living along the missouri river were encased

in protecting their homes. one serious rain falling from catastrophe. as was explained to me, gavins point acts as a spigot and it was wide open. the corps had no management control once it was released. many kansans disappearance major property damage. the experience everything from local agricultural business to homes to agricultural fields. never mind the cost that was incurred to sandbag and the national guard troops to watch for sand boils and water over toppings. back in july, i joined my friend and former colleague gov. sam brownback. we visited the first responders.

time and time again, we heard that the river had been mismanaged. now, in my view, the 432-page missouri river master manual needs emphasis placed on the top priority and that priority is flood control. i have heard from more than one upset farmer who had his fields flooded more than once in the past decade. the tail is wagging the dog. too much emphasis has been put on recreation, fish, and wildlife. these purposes are congressionally approved. there should not hinder the primary purpose of flood control. the dog should not what it's still. congress should put in flood control above all else. that is why this summer, we put together a bill taking into account all of the hunter logic data -- the hydrologic data.

be able to forecast this winter's weather. but this latest data is inc. to be used in a timely fashion in any and all -- is incorporated to be used in a timely fashion in any and all matters. the chair.e chaithank you >> thank you for holding this hearing on our flood control infrastructure. i appreciate the opportunity to provide some brief remarks. flooding is our nation's most common form of natural disaster

and it is also the most costly. although we can never fully eliminate the foot -- the risk of flooding, it is crucial that we will lay the conditions of our flood control infrastructure and the effectiveness of our management practices. in south dakota, we are no stranger to natural disasters. but this year's missouri river flooding has been unprecedented in scope and duration. people have been displaced from their homes and businesses for months. they are facing long months of clean up ahead. roads, utilities, and drinking water infrastructure have suffered significant damage in communities and in these reservations along the preserve. academic and emotional impact of the flooding has been tremendous.

they are living among some of the largest and most complex flood control infrastructure in the united states. south dakota is home to four of the six mainstream dams and reservoirs instructed by the corps of engineers. these dams and reservoirs were not sufficient to accommodate the record runoff of 2011. management of this system has always created tension in the basin. but in light of this year's flooding, management is harder than ever. we need to consider mitigation and planning options that can limit damages when flooding occurs. as the chairman of the banking committee, i have been working

with my cause to reauthorized and national flood insurance program which is the premier means for individuals and businesses to mitigate their in thef financial loss abbott event of flooding. there are no easy solutions. i look forward to working with you to better understand the risks and improve flood control in the missouri river basin. again, chairman boxer and off, forember pen ofin offering this hearing. >> thank you. senator ben nelson, will come. >> thank you. i am particularly grateful that the committee has given up the opportunity to talk about the

states' experiences. i encourage the committee to closely examine what led to such unprecedented flooding and help develop the necessary procedures so that future events will be less destructive. in nebraska, we're still working to get a full handle on the total devastation. fema has calculated $180 million in public assistance. along with small business administration, they have provided 3.8 $6 million to the state for individual assistance. -- $3.86 million to the state for individual assistance. $13 million has been paid out for flooding insurance this year. flooding in the north and richardson counties in southeast have been submerged for many

months. not only did it cost producers for crops they planted this year. the damage to the land to continue -- to potentially keep them planting for years to come and perhaps never. you can rebuild structures, but thousands of acres of land are now silted and destroyed and may never return to productivity. i ask the department of nebraska natural resources to discuss unique challenges facing our state. given our immense long-term and costly damage that this flood has caused, it is necessary for congress to get answers as to what went wrong and what steps we must take to avoid such destruction. i hope the committee takes the opportunity to ask the corps important questions as to what they learn from this tragedy and how to respond to record proportions.

i am deeply concerned with the 2011-2012 operating plan. doing the same thing this year and hoping for a different result is not acceptable. if more capacity would cost less than remediation, then perhaps we ought to be talking about what adjustments we make to the structures themselves. i also hope the committee learns post-about the corps's assessment process under way. i hope the committee and staff will explore this process in this time line. finally, i would like to stress the need for extraditing the work that is already under way along the missouri river levees. i think the chair and ranking member for commitment to listen to local individuals about what is required in each state. it is crucial that the core

gives us a complete assessment of the damages, the estimated costs, and the timeline for repairs to be completed. i do not want to start the whole discussion again about climate change. but what we need to consider is, if there are patterns of whether that is changing that we need to be prepared for those changes in the future not expecting just to wait for another 1000 years for another epic flood. thank you, madam chair. thank you, senator inhoff. >> thank you. now we will call our second panel of colleagues. we have some lead changing the name plates? all right. here we go.

>> senators and congressman, thank you all. we know you have busy days. benson is your complete, feel free to go to your next obligation. we will start with senator john thune. >> thank you, madam chair and senator for holding this important hearing. this issue has impacted so many

people in my state and across the country. unlike a normal disaster like hurricane irene that occurs in a brief amount of time as waters rise and then recede in victims are able to recover and move on with their lives, the flooding in south dakota placid over 90 days. this displaced individuals and families from their homes and had tremendous economic impact on businesses and communities along the missouri river. the flood started on a more of a. it lasted until labor day. many who had homes damaged never does -- never bought flood insurance because they were told by the army corps of engineers that their homes were not at risk. the flooding of 2011 was something of a hybrid. it was something between a natural disaster and a man-made disaster. we need to understand what human errors and existing management practices on the missouri river occurred so we can learn from these mistakes and make adjustments where necessary to ensure that similar disasters cannot occur in the future. march 1 is a significant date. that is when the system needs to

have a record amount of storage or in the space to be able to accumulate the average runoff from the winter snow pack. however, they had not fulfilled the required amount of empty space on march 1. by march 31, the storage space was raised. the reservoir was nearly 7 feet higher than expected at the end of march. despite the rapid increase and info in the month of march, the army corps did not accommodate for additional water by increased discharges. in april, each of the reservoirs were well above expected elevation, but the army corps did not accommodate. this allowed the system to be near maximum capacity on may 1 and were unable to store any runoff. the meeting on what this committee to take away from the testimony is that the army corps of engineers completely failed in understanding the amount of risk the snowpacked contain, which opened a cascading series

of events. the fundamental question that the members of this committee need to ask the court today is why they did not release more water along the missouri river dam system in march, it will, and early may when they knew they were losing start capacity -- losing store capacity. they would have needed perfect foresight to predict a massive amount of rain in montana during the month of may. but a lot of experts, even informed of observers, they saw early on but the footing was coming likely in the spring and summer. everybody saw it was coming and urged action except for the army corps of engineers who is charged with managing the river. is true that some degree of play would have been in south dakota this summer regardless of what the corridor did not do. but they basically thought they could fill up the entire amount that the space in the system by the beginning of may, beginning that the snowpack was gone and there would be no significant precipitation in may.

because the completely miscalculated on the amount of snowpack, they never fully communicated with preparations and to what level it would be needed until it was too late. i would say that, going forward, flood control is to be the top priority for the corps. it needs to be modified in the master plan for the management of the missouri river. in mind standing, they are planning to have the same amount of storage space in the system next year as they did this year. i think that is a risky proposition. we seem to be any what cycle. i hope they will not simply repeat the mistakes next year. keep in mind that the reservoir system along the missouri river is not as capable for the 2012 season as it was this year. the corps of engineers need to be held to account for the management of the missouri river

system this year and i hope this hearing marks and accountability moment for the corps. i have my own statement that i want to submit entirely for the record. i also want to submit written statement provided by the mayor , broke shriver, and by the manager of the code of dunes improvement district. i would ask that those statements also appear in the record. i would make for one final observation. one to include a statement by brad lawrence whose the public- works structure for the city of fort pierre who ought, on to your one, predicted a flood of the local good portions based on research she had done at that time. -- a flood of biblical proportions based on research he had done at that time. it is hard to feature why we ended up where we are. >> thank you very much.

>> thank you for holding this hearing. yesterday, october 16, the corps announced that the missouri river flood was officially over. we have had lots of flooding in arrested over the years. usually, it is a few days or a few weeks in april or may. october 16, the corps announced that the flood was officially over. this is a flood the started over five months ago. five months of flooding. in missouri, we had significant amounts of the state that were under water for three months to four months. while nova's it -- on the disaster response is perfect, it is important to learn from the past. as senator thune just mentioned, failing to account for disaster events or mistakes and is missing disasters as unlikely -- and dismissing disasters as unlikely not to occur again is

not good enough. of the past year, missouri and the entire country have experienced several disasters that have devastated the livelihoods of many people in our communities. as we rebuild, there's a lot to be done. the kansas city corps commander said again yesterday as he called an official end to the flood that the corps has $27.7 million set aside for repairs. at a hearing last year, the corps said they needed $1 billion to bring the river management system back to where it was at the beginning of this year. so we have $27 million set aside. we need $1 billion not to get the system better than it was in january, but just to get the system back to where it was in january. of course, as we look at that, we see counties like cold

county, missouri where 165,000 acres was underwater for most of the summer. bird's point, water went in when that flood was open and went back up. it was 130,000 acres. it was not nearly as impacted as the 165,000 acres in holt county. i was there recently. they were able to get a crop in miraculously, even though there was lots of burley crop loss. overall, we had over 400,000 acres under water at some time this year. that is about half the size of the entire state of rhode island. a lot of that 400,000 acres was under water for three months to four months. we have not ever seen anything like that before. as one county commissioner will said about the impact of these floods which took out interstate highways, county roads, state roads, and five bridges over the

missouri river, where on one side of the bridge were close -- as the company commissioner talk about all of the jobs impacted, he said that if the factory does not get back to work until the roads are rebuilt and the road is not revealed until the flood prediction is restored but the flood protection is not restored until congress holds them accountable. thank you for holding this hearing. i have a statement for the record and i will submit it. >> thank you for that cycle of virtue that you laid out. we are the key to the whole thing here. thank you very much. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning and also to ranking member inhoff. we had record flooding in north dakota. we had the red river, the cheyenne river, the missouri river, and on the surface river. souros river, we had 4000

homes that are completely destroyed or partly destroyed. according to fema, is one of the largest housing efforts just in the community of minot just to get people into housing before winter comes. it is the third largest housing effort after katrina and ike. that is just one example. that is what we're facing. clearly, we're working with corps and other agencies to not only rebuild the defenses, but we need to see specifically from the corps what their plan will be. on a floodng protection plan for next year so we do not have a repeat in that city of this year.

in bismarck-man then, the same thing. as others have already commented, we are in a wet cycle. how the corps manages the missouri river in a wet cycle has to be different from how they manage the river in a drought cycle. they are going back to an average year every year. every year is average. and we go from there. but that is not the case. when we were in the drought cycle, at which time i was governor in north dakota, every year they would say that this would be an average year and they would let out the same amount of water. but we were in a drought. they needed to conserve water. they were not conserving enough water. now we're in a wet cycle. for the last five years, it has gotten wetter in our area that

many putts -- any other part of the country. but they considered an average year. they need to base it on the facts on the ground. the specifically this year, the water commission is recommending that late son scott cahuilla be brought down another 2.5 feet. i have specific questions in that testimony. we are asking the corps to reduce the reservoir another 2.5 feet to create more storage capacity. that can be done now without downstream impacts. who makes that decision? when do they make it? we need this type of accountability. and if they do not let up that additional water now, we need to have them show was specifically how they will provide protection next spring with the kind of precipitation we are

having now throughout the river basin. thank you. >> thank you so much for your testimony. it was very compelling. on this panel, our last speaker is congressman carnahan. as soon as he finishes, i will ask senator baucus to make his opening statement and then we will have the hon. joellyn darcy, assistant secretary of the army for civil works, but her generals. we look forward to that. congressman, please proceed. >> thank you, chairwoman boxer and ranking member inhof. it is great to be here with your colleagues on this critical issue for the folks that we represent and missouri. i appreciate this being bipartisan. i am certainly glad to be here with my senator this morning. this is to really show the bipartisan support in this work in missouri.

we're familiar with the majesty and the might of our great rivers in missouri. but mississippi and river floods in april and may of this year were among the largest and most damaging this year. during the last half of may, the upper missouri river basin received a year's worth of rain fall. on may 3, the army corps of engineers made the extraordinary an excruciating decision to blow up a section of a levee in southeast missouri, submerging about 130,000 acres of farmland east, flooding river towns in kentucky. they are estimated to be at $2 billion thus far, not counting the millions of dollars of lost crops, homes, and lives. many of the agricultural field are still in the process of drying out. the people of missouri are still in the process of rebuilding their lives. and still they need the help of local, state, and federal

resources. unfortunately, our house transportation infrastructure committee has yet to hold a hearing like this. we have organized a briefing for our colleagues back in july to review the status of these issues. we heard from many experts. but perhaps the most illuminating was the expensive richard oswald from atchison county, missouri. his parents' home was flooded for the third time in his life because of the failure of the levee and reservoir system. he could not return to his home for months. his crop was ruined. the economy of his 1200-person town was devastated. history was rick -- this story was recounted dozens of towns across the state. construction projects have been delayed, commerce altered, property damage, marines and riverfront ruins, and water systems compromise. these floods are some of the largest hydro logic event since the great flood of 1927 and we should take the opportunity to

learn from it and rethink our priories along the river and how we manage our reservoirs and levees. we need to recheck your local officials and members affected in their communities. we should help the when and where the flooding will occur, providing relief support and work possible help may be for preventative measures. we need to look at the master manual and see if it needs revision based on these lessons learned. in my extended remarks, i.d. tell the framework for that review. we also need -- i expressed a framework for that review. we also need to meet our nation's water resources needs by asking the tough questions we can learn from these events. how will the country and corps they for the repairs? how will we prioritize our infrastructure for pre-flood conditions?

and we have to rethink our infrastructure and and changed our weather conditions. i think that these can be done without expense to other projects. i look for to working with you on these issues in the months ahead. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you, congressman. you have a longer statement? >> yes. >> it will be included without objection. we welcome you. heav >> thank you very much. i would also like to thank buzz who will be on the second panel. he is exactly the kind of person we will need. he has been around for a lot of

years, several generations. is a prize of the absence lows of the rivers in montana. -- he is apprised of the eds and flows of the rivers in montana. >> for years, i have tried very hard to convince the army corps of engineers that they should change their master manual in the other direction. the army corps of engineers studies have shown for a long time that the economic value of the upstream states, montana especially, is that 10 times the economic value of the economic river downstream. downstream strays, especially missouri, pushed to keep -- to

get more water out of the reservoirs upstream for them downstream. you have no idea how hard they poor's. you have no idea how hard it was for upstream states to save the water. i have a photograph that shows a dock on fort peck reservoir be a mile short because there is no water. it has hurt irrigation because there is no water. i always give up -- i almost gave up the ghost appeared to have been tried for 20 years or 30 years, along with others to try to get the corps of engineers to not force us upstream to let so much water

out. that has been going on for years. now we have a flood. it is terrible. the flood downstream is terrible. i mean point here is let's be careful. the army corps of engineers studies all the stuff and what the proper balance should be and how much water should be kept and how much water should not be kept. i find it a little strange that sidley -- i know that the flooding is devastating -- but now they come with the opposite message. first they want water and water. this year, no water, no water, no water. i mean it is just the opposite. they do not tell you that. they have not to do with the last three-year history has been when they wanted more water. frankly, this is a difficult subject. to the degree that one believes in climate change, and i do, scientists will say that, with

increased from a change in this world, there's greater volatility in whether and the cycles are shorter. 20 years ago, dr. hansen was predicting that at a hearing over in the interior committee. it was very compelling testimony. that is what i think is happening now. sometimes you get wet years. i believe there will be increased volatility in thunder cycles. i believe the compression is going to be shorter. we will have years where its rains a lot. you cannot turn off the dance -- dams, and turn them on, just to try to control it.

there are missouri floods, no doubt. it gives one a sense of what the floods were back in that era. the corps of engineers has told my office this reoccurrence of a flood of this magnitude is about 0.2%. this is a 500-year flood. they have told us privately, and maybe it is impressed, i do not know, there is a 0.2% chance of recurrence. it is in their it jurisdiction. -- is in their jurisdiction. in the master manual, it has

been listed as a priority, as it is environmental protection and. -- and for my mental protection. -- environmental protection. you have to look at the fisheries, you have the endangered species act, there are so many factors. i encourage the court to be very careful. not react to the whims -- that is not the right word. this stuff changes. >> center, thank you. that was a sobering testimony -- senator, thank you. that was a sobering testimony. i thought you summed it up very

well. thank you for being here. would you like to make an opening statement before we call the assistant secretary? >> if it is appropriate. i promise i will be brief. i do appreciate holding the hearing today. throughout our history, the mighty mississippi has brought commerce to arkansas. but sometimes the river brings great challenges to our delta as well. this year's flood provides a great test. i want to thank the people in arkansas and throughout the mississippi river valley who worked night and day to fight the floods. they showed tremendous dedication and professionalism under challenging circumstances. the conditions that led to this year's event were similar to the major mississippi floods and the

20th century, including the great flood of 1927. our country should be great -- should be their problem that did lead to a far different outcome. we should be proud of the progress that has been made. for years, we have been building and maintaining the mississippi river and tributaries project. this project is made up of levees, channel improvements, stabilization of other structures. this year alone, the project helped to protect more than 10 million acres and nearly 1 million structures, while preventing $110 billion in damages. our country has invested $13.9 billion and the project has directly prevented $350 billion in flood damages the return on the investment is tremendous. hearingize that today's is broad.

witnesses from the mississippi river valley. this is an opportunity to hear about what went right and what went wrong. >> thank you so much. we will call our next panel. the assistant secretary of the army for civil works, brigadier general mcmahon, colonel larsen, and while you were getting seed in -- seated -- i have urged senator baucus to stay here if you want to have some back and forth on this. >> thank you. i note it is difficult for people to resist the temptation to try to draw up events to the global warming argument. what i have is three short

statements from three alarmists. did currie, the chair of georgia institute of technology's school of earth and atmospheric sciences. "i have been completely unconvinced by any of the arguments that i have seen, a cluster of extreme weather events or statistics of extreme weather events." second is miles alan. that was the one that got a lot of publicity back during the climate. "when al gore said scientists have proved that the climate change is responsible for the extreme and devastating floods,

storms that displaced millions of people, my heart sank. " lastly, "to suggest that particular extreme weather events are evidence of climate change is not just wrong, but wrongheaded." i want to cement the rest of his statement. thank you, madam chairman. >> i want to respond in this way. we have worked closely together on infrastructure and we do not work closely together on climate change. for the record, let me say, i do not know anyone who is planning what happened on climate change. i do know this. that is exactly what the climate scientist warned us about. we do have all eyes, we do see what we see. of course we do not know whether this is climate change. it takes a decade.

it is not about the weather, it is not about a day today. one day, we will see it's a very born in the winter and we will see it very cold. the last time it was cold, it was cold some time here. in the meantime, we were supposed to have the winter olympics. it was so hot, they had to import snow. we do not know now. we will only no looking back on the decade. i do agree with what they are saying. i do agree with what you are saying. i do not think that on our side, we are alarmists. keep an eye on this, this is what it looks like is happening. but you cannot really tell until you get a decade out i hope we will not ask any of our panelists to respond to the issue of climate change. this was my colleague giving his

opinion. max baucus does not say things about a lot of thought. so be it, we are divided on the panel. speechesf al gore's were canceled because of snow storms. >> extreme weather is what was predicted. we will now turn to art noncontroversial panel. we are very happy to see -- she is the assistant secretary of the army for civil works and she has some very excellent team with her. would you proceed? >> thank you, a senator boxer. i am pleased to be here today to testify on the 2011 flood event and to discuss the conditions of the nation's flood control system.

i'm joined today by major- general mike walsh. 2011 has been extremely challenging for the nation in terms of natural disasters across multistate areas. i testimony today will cover three events in which the corps of engineers was greatly involved. the flooding on the mississippi river, the missouri river, and the flooding followed by hurricane irene. these are not the only event in which we responded and assisted. others include tornadoes in alabama and missouri, and flooding. this year, we supplemented efforts with over 37 million sandbags, at 342 pumps, 5500 rolls of pauley shading, 275 linear feet, and 1280 lennar

feet of rapid deployment flood walls. -- linear feet of rapid deployment flood walls. during the 1927 flood, the mississippi valley region had a haphazard system of private and public levies. the result was 72% of the lower valley was under water. more than 26,000 square miles were flooded, 500 people were dead, and another 700,000 were left homeless. after the 1927 flood, the nation of the rise and funded the mississippi river system that included levies. during this year's 2011 flood event, flood flows were greater than those experienced during the 1927 flood. because of the project, only 38% of the area that flooded in 1927

flooded in 2011. not a single life was lost. for the first time, three of the systems floodways were placed on simultaneous operation to leave the enormous stress on a levee system and reduce the danger to people, their homes, and businesses. over 800 personnel were engaged with more than $76 million of funds allocated and over $59 million in fema money. bowater said approach was used to keep the system intact and the watershed approach will be needed to repair and restore it gets well. -- a watershed approach was used to keep the system intact.

altera responsibility and the recovery efforts and by pooling their resources, our talent and expertise, we will focus on key elements that protect the lives of millions of americans. the flooding along the missouri river this year -- the historic record before water flows. the combined may through july run out of -- may 2011 and historic year of record for water storage along the missouri river. flood response efforts engaged over 400 personnel and cost $83 million. actions by the omaha and kansas city districts this summer were extremely effective in reducing damage. the fortified levees, built temporary levees, monitored safety and other activities, such as providing supplies to state emergency offices. in south dakota, we constructed

4 miles of temporary levies and 1.5 miles of temporary levees and the community. now that the river has receded, the northwest is initiating post -- post-flood action. in late august and early september, extreme weather conditions continued. hurricane irene traveled along the atlantic coast impacting the entire area from coastal north carolina to maine. a week later, the remnants of tropical storm lee severely flooded pennsylvania and new york state.

in many areas, their operations effectively reduced an additional estimated $6 billion of damage. the corps of engineers continues to assess the damage of projects eligible for assistance. the first used $46 million of our available funds for immediate flood fighting and response to the spring flooding. as the flood of guns continues, there were unable to respond to the work -- as the flooding continued, they were unable to respond with the fund. i have exercised my emergency authority to transfer funds from other appropriations accounts to after the month of january

through the middle of april, there is ice on the river. the ice on the river restricts the amount of water we can release.

there is some provision for emergency. however, revisions need to go through a public process. as you may recall, the last time we reserve -- revised master manual --

>> i recall that. it was very frustrating. tenfold, something like that. been working on this for years and years and years. 14 years sounds like a long time to change a master manual, but i do agree with the implication in your response, namely that the master manual cannot be changed willy-nilly. that it takes time and thought to look at lots of different

factors and decide what the proper balance should be. >> i think that is correct. like i said, public process needs to be involved in any changes to it. i said early that the extra panel is looking at how the operations were done during this flood and then an whatever recommendations they have we will consider. >> i appreciate that. thank you very much. >> let me just thank all of you for being here today. if i might in my questions, let me focus on the kind of what we are anticipating as we think about this winter and going into next spring. correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems to me that the conditions or the capacity in the system is about where it was a year ago. second, it appears to me that

throughout this whole stretch of the system, we have had some unusually wet weather. the the third thing that occurs to me is that it is anticipated currently that the releases will not significantly increase. in fact, they will be held liable for the foreseeable future, at least in to next year. all of this leads me to believe -- and there's probably some things that i am not mentioning, but all of this leads me to believe that we are kind of working our way right back to where we were a year ago, and any circumstance -- heavier snow melt, heavy rain -- will put us right back to where we were.

general, i start with you. where am i wrong about this? >> thank you for the questions. it is packed full of information -- background information that is relevant here to understand it as you are alluding to. first of all, looking at the way ahead, the system is more vulnerable next year now than it was last year. we have got to be very careful in so far as how we take advantage of the time between now and when they run off season begins on the first of march, 2012. we made a conscious decision at the end of july, and i made the rounds on the hill here to touch base with you and many of your colleagues on this very critical decision point, which was we decided we needed to evacuate

the 16.3 million-acre feet of water because to do more to evacuate more water would take away the time we needed to get the water out of the flood plain, our farms, homes, businesses for people to get back in and begin the repair and reconstitution, if you will, as well as for the court, for federal highway, for states, counties, cities to do the very same thing, to get into their infrastructure and inspect and begin the repair process. if we were to evacuate more water and create more space in the reservoir this year, we would not have given ourselves even that opportunity for the water to drain and for the inspection and repair process to begin. that was a very hard decision, a delicate decision that had to be made because of the huge volumes of water that needed to be

evacuated and only evacuated because of the release rate and the time available. we are now passed that point. we have seen finally the declaration of the end of what has occurred just yesterday that was mentioned. now we are at the point where inspections are beginning in the earnest and the repairs can begin, all contingent on the funding. as has been alluded, we have moved money inside the court to get that repair process dealt started and the inspection process drug started. that is going well. but we are going to quickly come to a point where the funding is going to be the big constraint, in addition to the time available. but given the vulnerabilities we have in the system, that was the trade-off we made because we decided we need to evacuate back to the amount of water that we normally have. with respect to other evidence of why that is a prudent

decision, we look at the climatological prediction center, the national oceanographic administration's center of expertise for predicting weather, both near and long term. they tell us that this next -- the remainder of 2011 and 2012, there are equal chances of normal, above, and below normal weather patterns. we had a la nina effect, for the missouri river basin mean schooler temperatures, but it is difficult to correlate temperatures. all the evidence points to and the fact that this is approximately a one in 500-year event, very low likelihood of occurring again. again, it is not an in probability, but it is a low probability. that is the world we are in. nobody can see the future. given all that evidence, it made sense to us to evacuate the

water did 16.3 million acre feet of space and take advantage of the time available pending funding to get on with the repairs and reduce the vulnerabilities that exist in the system as much as we can between now and the first of march. >> thank you. >> thank you, chairman. ms. darcy, you were last here in march, and after you came, i ask questions for the record, and we never got an answer to them. i do not know why. it has been quite a while, and they were quite simple questions. one was how much funding is currently available for section 205 projects. i assume someone in the core actually knows that number. it is a question of sending an e-mail over to us. the other is whether the funding level will allow for any new projects to be initiated or whether fully subscribed. again, i assume someone actually knows that information.

i do not think i am asking for an exhaustive research or complicated analysis to be done. i just need to have my questions answered. the third is whether the army corps is planning for any increase in the section 205 projected request, and what are you doing to prepare for that? can i have your firm pledge right now as to what i will get answers to those questions from april? >> yes, senator. >> when? >> we will have them before the week is out. >> perfect. that is a big help. i appreciate it. let me add a new one. that is the transfers that you referred to in your testimony and that the brigadier-general just alluded to. do they affect the section 205 account? >> the transfers that we are looking at -- we are looking at all available funding because we have to look at everything nationwide across all of our business lines, but in the 205

programs specifically, i do not know if you had taken any from there, but i will provide that for the record as well. one thing i do know is that i was here last march, but after that, we had our continuing resolution and work plan was after that. part of the instruction from the congress was to take $100 million of our carryover from our continuing authorities program, and that was rescinded. >> it is interesting to me as a senator from a small new england state to hear some of the discussion from my western colleagues where it is clear the army corps has a very large footprint and controls an enormous amount of what goes on in terms of flooding and flood control. we have dams that probably predates the army corps of engineers, and we are packed

with little municipalities that are hundreds of years old and it is a complex situation to work your way through that. some of the dams, i do not think it is clear who owns the controls, and how long they had been there. my question is -- we just had flooding march a year ago in rhode island. it was pretty extreme. 500-year flood conditions reached in some years -- some regions. we do not seem to have a plan for how the different upstream dams can work with one another to perform the kind of rain collection function, particularly if rain is anticipated, so that we can minimize the flooding, that they can become catchment areas for a particular flight. what authorities do you have or do you need -- i mean, you will end up with the mess. texaco got filled with it

because of the funding. you had to go and clean it out, to clear the waterways. you will all this problem at the back end. what can you be doing to help the department of management, the various interested agencies work together so that we are doing our dam released control in an integrated way that helps with flood control protection? that you used the word that i was going to use. it is clear that these dams were built years ago and not in a way that is a system design. a great of water resources management is what needs to take place in order for those dams not only to perform a flood control purpose but also what other impacts that will have on navigation downstream. if they can integrate a water management plan for that river you are referring to for the stands is probably what is

needed. the corps of engineers has some technical expertise in that area. i think working with our state and local sponsor, we could provide some technical assistance. >> we look forward to working with you. the clock is saying i am more than five minutes over. >> time just expired. >> good. thank you for your cooperation. >> senator alexander? >> the mississippi river literally tried to cut a new channel across presidents island, and memphis did the same in lee county. this is the type of damage that threatens navigation along the entire mississippi river. it can shut down our waterways if we do not repair it. i am of this, the damage, the board of memphis, home to a power plant, the state's only refinery and industries that support 3500 jobs, is extensive. repair of the shoreline is

expected to cost $35 million, and that is just the top. millions more for other repairs, including dredging, to keep the harbor opened for business. in lake county north of there, the court estimates $32 million will be needed to repair the top bank, keep the mississippi from trying to change course during the next flood. my question is -- what would happen if the mississippi river did cut a new channel through presidents island at memphis? how would that affect navigation on the mississippi river? and what is the priority that the core hast for completing those repairs? >> the impacts -- thank you for the question, senator. the impact would be very significant to the mississippi river. the top -- this is not the only top bank erosion that we have on

the mississippi. if we lose redirection and flow of the mississippi because of it, it goes into this over bank erosion. that is about $60 million worth of infrastructure around the river that would be bypassed. so this is a very significant problem that we need to work on. it is a priority two items. priority 1 items are life safety. right below that is priority two. i believe this project is the second one in the priority two efforts that we need to get accomplished. >> thank you, general. secretary, going back a year to the thousand-year flood we had in tennessee that affected everything from aubrey land -- opryland still up to memphis, i urge the court to work with the national weather service to create a warning system for

floods that was as good as our tornado warning system. i know that it is harder to -- that predicting rising water is not the same as predicting the arrival of a tornado. but the fact is that over the last 10 years or so, the weather service corps and others have taken the tornado warning system and really made a miraculous improvements. people can actually turn on their television sets and see that within 13.5 minutes, a tornado is coming down the street. that is pretty precise. we had some problems in 2010, which the court admitted. in dealing with adequate communication about rising waters of businesses and individuals in nashville all the way down to memphis. many tennessean is -- tennessee ands -- tennesseans fe that

hadlt better information, they could have done more. i have worked with the core of engineering services to create warning system for floods. what has been the progress on that? what successes have you had with it? >> senator, i know that we are working on it. i do not know exactly what i can report to you today, but i will most definitely get back to you. i just do not know in enough detail. >> can i ask for a reasonable date when you might get back to me? you can do his first and my next week. how would that be? i am quite serious. it is building on the success that the corps has. even as a result of those discussions that we had, when we have the next rising water circumstance in national, there was a lot better communication

because the core and the national mayor and others put themselves in the same room basically and communicated with one another. i am now more interested not just in that, but how you take that same information and get it out to businesses and people who might be in the way of the rising water. i hope we can have the same kind of success with flood warnings. a larger part of our damage than any other kind of disaster. more success with that, just as you did with the tornado warnings. thank you, mr. chairman. >> secretary, in response to senator boxer, you indicated the court does not need new authority to respond to the 2011 flood repairs, although you do not need no authority for repairs, does the corps need a water reauthorization to deal with other issues? >> senator, there are emerging issues all the time.

there are some things i think we will need to deal with in the future. not particularly the subject of this hearing, but the way we finance a lot of our projects is going to have to be looked at. we currently do not have enough money in some of our trust funds, so we will have to look at new ways to recapitalize. >> i think our committee support for the bill, obviously we work closely with you as to how these emerging issues require congressional participation. >> the core manages the water levels by using the down through nafta -- down through natural river systems by using the terrain, etc. on the atlantic coast, the core successful use natural beach and dune systems to protect the town of ocean city. the replenishment work that was

done there saved significant property damage from irene and lee. it has been estimated at $250 million has been saved. my question to you is -- should the court be investing greater investment in protecting floodplains, retain readers minute speech systems and other systems to manage risks in the future? >> i think your examples are good ones because they show that yes, indeed, those between richmond projects have been effective in replenishing the beach as well as being a storm reduction way of preventing some future damage. >> i will just point out that budgeting here becomes

challenging. i know you are really being stretched as far as your budget is concerned. on the screen infrastructures, it is demonstrated the it saves money, saves property damage for the people in the region. i think the more we could use some of these natural areas, the better of it is going to be for saving the loss of life and property. i know it is challenging, but we urge you to find creative ways to do this. let me ask you a final question -- the core has multiple responsibilities -- saving life, property, supporting the commercial waterway traffic. do these missions conflict, and do we need to reflect again as to how you can carry out your mission simultaneously? >> senator, i would say they do not conflict, but they do compete for resources. as pointed out in the instance of the floods, we need to prioritize our resources in this

instance. as i say, they compete for resources and limited resources. >> seems like money seems to be your problem right now. but clearly, we have challenges in trying to manage the demand for commerce as well as to protect life and property. i was listening to senator baucus, and'is not only about the river diversion but about the priorities. seems to me we may need to reflect what our priorities are and to allocate resources consistent with that. there are going to be limited resources for the foreseeable future. with that, let me turn it over. >> thank you. i would like to follow up on this essentially talking about resources. i understand that you have

exercised your emergency authority to transfer funds from other appropriations accounts to respond to the flood and begin doing the repairs. i guess what i would like to know is some examples of the kind of project that may suffer as a result of the transfers and then also really some specifics about what resources we actually ps repairhat the cor the damage and be ready for the next flood season so we do not have you here then after that is all over, complaining bitterly that it did not work. if you would respond. and before you do, i want to thank all of you. i know you worked very hard and this has really been a great

trial, and the system held up very well. again, those things do not just happen. it is a lot of hard work. >> we are currently assessing was the ultimate damages have been from the floods in mississippi and missouri as well as the damages from tropical storm lee and hurricane ire. wen our looke zynga $2 billion we need to restore the system to pre-flood conditions. your question about the transfers -- so far, we have transferred to hundred $12 million from other accounts into the flood control and coastal emergencies account. we will continue to look at other ways to transfer money. we have monthly requirement that we have to fulfill because it is the emergency response. we are looking to all programs within the corps, but we are

evaluating those dollars individually so that we did not create a situation where we are taking it away from another life safety project. we're looking in out years toward the end of 2012 to take money that will not be spent until then, moving back up into transferring it now. >> thank you very much for the question. while we were working through the flood, we had already put together our damage survey assessment team. as the water was going down, we were able to look at those parts that need repair. from that, we put together a list of 93 prioritize portions of the mississippi river tributaries portion that needs repair, and that comes to about $800 million just in those repairs, and i put another team

together to look at the system's performance, and the systems performance team is also looking at the funds needed to bring that together, as well as putting together an interagency recovery task force with seven states and 14 federal agencies gathering together to see what resources we have to put the system back together and make sure everybody understands where we are going to work with the. to date, there are $73 million came to the mississippi river tributaries project or my division out of the 800 required. there is a concern of a flood of a lesser magnitude having a significant impact for next year. thank you. >> again, that type of work is so important as you go forward. i think you have heard a lot of interest in really trying to get that information so we can be of

help through a water bill or whatever. i do think that the communication back and forth will be so important so that we can move forward and get this stuff accomplished. thank you very much. we yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thanks to all of you for your work and service, particularly in this extraordinary flood event and this disaster. just want to step back and make sure we have the big picture. madam secretary, what is the total estimate of damage from this year's flooding events, from the core perspective in terms of all repair work that is necessary? what would that total dollar figure be? >> that is $2 billion, and it

could impact from dredging as well. >> ok, and what amount of money is the administration asking in terms of extraordinary appropriations in light of that? >> at the moment, there is no request for a supplemental appropriation. >> i thought some core funding -- corp funding was alls build- to the tune of about $800 billion. >> i do not believe so, but i will check. >> ok. what is the administration's plan in terms of any extraordinary funding request? >> at this time, there is not a plan for one, but hopefully, it will still be under consideration. >> as of now, $2 billion has to come out of your hide in terms of ongoing projects, ongoing operations? >> that is correct. >> is that sustainable?

>> we have to do these repairs, so we have to find the money somewhere. we are going to have to have -- everything has to be on the table. as i said, we are looking for the out your project, things that are not scheduled to be funded until later next year, but we are running out of those kinds of projects. it is going to come from some other existing balances that we have. we are trying to be creative in looking at that. we are also looking at -- we currently are operating and the continuing resolution to see if there is any money in that from now until november that we can use. >> no supplement i requestf is made, what would be the top priority items -- is no supplemental request is made, what would be the top priority items that would be stolen from? >> they would be project that -- as i said, funding is not

scheduled until the end of next year, so we would take that money and use it now. all projects are under consideration, but the ones that we will probably look to last are those that are life safety. ok, in your >> testimony, madam secretary, you also refer to a document that would serve as a reference guide for future flood risk management -- >> ok, in your testimony, you also refer to a document that would serve as a reference guide. >> i hope -- that is the document but we hope to have by the end of december, but i would need to confirm that. >> with that document incorporate this past years' experience -- obviously, you have a wealth of brand neta