[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] a special veterans to barbet assistance to the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. march 26, 2012. i a point the honorable jeff denham to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 17, 2012, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour. and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and minority whip limited to five minutes each. but in no event shall debate continue beyond 1:50 p.m. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. delauro, for five minutes. ms. delauro: mr. speaker, it is with the heaviest of hearts that i rise today to pay tribute to the life and legacy of one of our community's most outstanding entrepreneurs and my dear friend, mur which lender who we lost on march 21 at the age of 81. a bagel baker, food executive, and philanthropist who helped bring the bagel to kitsch across the nation.

murray was a close friend and i am deeply saddened to learn of his passing. murray, the son of immigrant parents, never forgot his roots and humble beginnings in new haven. while he worked to foster good wealth and humanitarianism. he was a special leader part of a special family that takes care of each other, bringing jobs to networks to friends and serving the larger community. from counting bagels in the family's backyard bakery before he was 11, murray rose to become a food marketing innovator who took what was formerly only an ethnic product and made it a national staple available to all. in more recent years, murray directed his focus toward if i lanthropic work. his energy and creative thinking had a major impact on anything he undertook. particularly in his hometown of new haven. active in both the local jewish

community, as well as his alma mater, murray's influence can be seen throughout the city which has recognized him with a school playground in his name, the a.d.l. torch of libertyy award, and honorary doctor of humane letters to name a few. murray lender was an extraordinary human being and i consider myself fortunate to have called him my friend. he leaves such a legacy that we celebrate even as we mourn his passing. i extend my deepest sympathies to his wife, his children, and his sons, grandchildren, olivia, adam, jesse, rachel, shiva, julian, diego and claudia, as well as his brother, marvin, and his wife. we can see the unfailing smile

in the face of adversity and all his work that carries on. murray lender lit up the world. we will miss him. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, for five minutes. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today the supreme court will begin hearing oral arguments on the constitutionality of the president's health care overhaul, the so-called affordable care act of 2010. with the court still months away from its decision, in many ways the verdict has already been cast by countless american families and small businesses impacted by the law. in 2010 then speaker nancy pelosi suggested, quote, we have to pass the bill so we can find out what's in it, end quotes. two years since passage,

american families have found out the hard way with increased taxes, regulations, and a slew of broken promises from fictitious cost controls to limitations on consumer choice. most recently the nonpartisan congressional budget office served a devastating blow to president obama as most frequently used tag line, if you like your present coverage you can keep it. the c.b.o. reports suggested there will be a net loss of employer-based insurance coverage of between three million and five million people per year from 2019 to 2022. this has the potential for 20 million americans to lose their insurance coverage over just a four-year span. when the first anniversary of the affordable care act, i joined the u.s. house energy and commerce committee for a congressional field hearing in harrisburg, pennsylvania, in order to review the law's impact throughout the commonwealth of pennsylvania. during the hearing, pennsylvania's acting insurance commissioner, testified the new

mandates in insurance coverage had resulted in premium increases of up to 9%. these figures mirror the national trend as outlined in a recent study by the keyser family foundation. keyser reports shows that the average annual premium for family coverage through an employer reached $15,073 in 2011. an increase of 9% over the previous year. this is a far cry from barack obama's 2008 proposition that his law would cut family premiums by $2,500 before the conclusion of his first term in office. president obama had also promised that he will not sign a health care plan that adds one dime to our deficit either now or in the future. however, an honest accounting of the health care law finds it will increase the deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars in the first 10 years alone. former budget office director has testified the law will

increase the deficit by at least $500 billion in its first 10 years and more than $1.5 trillion over the decade thereafter. at a time of severe budgetor constraints, there is only one place to turn to keep up with the spending, the wallets of americans in the form of tax increases. having spent almost 30 years in nonprofit health care field, i am acutely aware of the challenges many face when it comes to obtaining reasonably priced health care. while many of us agree there are portions of the law that are beneficial such as the ability of adult dependent children up to age 26 to stay on their parents' insurance, excluding those with pre-ex-ising conditions from the plan, and expansion of low cost clinics into underserved areas, the law places uncle sam between doctors and patients. where they should be the american people not washington bureaucrats determining the kind of health care coverage that best suits their needs. over the past two years as the

regulations have rolled out and the american people continue to learn what really is in the law, the broken promises have continued to pile up, weighing on the backs of small businesses and families. that's why we must repeal the law and toss out the negatives. move forward with reforms that actually lower costs without sacrificing quality and liberty. this week just blocks away from this chamber, the supreme court will hear arguments on the constitutionality of this law. while the court's decision is months away, the verdict has already been cast by the countless american families and small businesses in congressional districts across this great country that simply cannot afford the so-called the affordable care act. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until 2:00 p.m. toda

we will have live coverage here on c-span. in covering the supreme court threw out the weekend and today, the associated press reports the justices questioned briskly this morning in the health-care case of the first of three days of oral argument. there were pointed questions about a legal issue that could derail the case. eight of the nine justices

asked two questions i and the course of half an hour. the arguing of the case could be premature this based on an law that prevents tax payments from being made. that is from the associated press. we will have our -- we will have oral arguments on our companion network c-span3. a c-span poll finds that 95% of americans are interested in the supreme court decision and more than half of those plans to listen to this week's oral arguments. 86% say the nation's highest court should allow tv cameras into the hearing, and 64% support coverage of all supreme court hearings. right now, we are asking how interested are you in the supreme court oral arguments on

health care? you can find a link on c- span.org. >> in march of 1979, c-span began televising the house of representatives nationwide. today our coverage of politics, public affairs, nonfiction books, and history is available on tv, radio, and online. >> the debt by 02 others reinforces it might view that a certain humility should characterize our judicial role. justices are serving the law, not the other way around. justices are like umpires. they do not make the rules. they apply them. the role of an umpire and a judge is critical, but it is a limited role. no one goes to a ball came to see the umpire. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies as a public

service. >> washington, d.c. hosted the eighth 2012 conference in july. it will outline the current status of the hiv aids pandemic and the u.s. domestic response. this is about an hour and 15 minutes. >> good afternoon -- >> good afternoon. we're going to begin. thank you for being with us. we are thrilled to be able to host the director of the centers for disease control and prevention. he has been in that position since june 2009. i want to offer a special thanks before moving into -- for very brief opening remarks, a special

thanks to susan mcclure and for staff here at cis. there were a lot of people involved, carolyn, felicia, among others. togethernging you today to really look at hiv aids -- hiv/aids and the accomplishments up until now. is a bit of a look backwards -- it is a bit of a look backwards in the effort to bring it under control and change the ark of that into focus on where things stand today in united states, as well as globally, and we will hear more from dr. friedman -- how to attract the buzz we hear

today around the new signs of hiv/aids. it is remarkable we would find ourselves in this situation. secretary of state clinton's commented before a scientific audience here in united states last year to talk about an aids- free generation. shortly thereafter, the president of united states spoke in considerable detail on world aids day on the efforts to reduce populations in the united states, as well as the challenge of moving globally from 4 million to 6 million, a very ambitious goal, of persons on u.s.-supported treatment. we will be looking forward today, particularly with respect to aids 2012 international aids

conference to be here in washington july 22 to july 27. we will hear more about what is coming out of that unique event. it will be a dramatic and very promising event. cdc brings a unique set of assets. hise all familiar with exceptional leadership on in public health. his work in new york city from 1992 until 1996, returning to new york city where he led a remarkable time of innovation from 2002 until 2009, an anti-

smoking effort, various disclosures around caloric and other food content, a number of other distinguished accomplishments. and we know that cdc itself brings strength in its cost fertilization we will hear about today and the training efforts at home and abroad. it is a really remarkable looking back, it's the hiv/aids epidemic has changed cdc. just 10 years ago, when we started interacting closely with cdc, the international programs were really in their earliest stages, and it was a small and exceptional component part of what cdc did at that time as an institution. now it has become embedded as part of the institutional dna of

this organization. i think we will hear much of that reflected today. i want to draw your attention to the fact that next week we will be convening here on march 28 in the middle of the day. from then, all we passed out a flier from that that continues a series of activities looking forward to aids 2012. my colleague kathryn ellis -- bliss will be publishing a study she has been working on for two years now, and she will be joined by her colleagues, among them the president of the international aids society, our president and ceo of the aids foundation of chicago, and the co-chair will be moderating that

discussion. so, we will continue that conversation next week. i hope you can join us. that will be web cast light midday. we expect a strong turnout here as well. i want to thank everyone joining us online. we're fortunate that c-span3 has also joined us today. everyone, join me in welcoming dr. frieden. >> thank you. i asked for really excellent, cutting edge work you a done in global health, and i also want to thank all of the non- governmental organizations and the individual advocates who

helped us get to where we are today in hiv. we are all committed to making further progress. we will take a minute to look back at how far we have come. i will share with you my perceptions on the hiv epidemic, where it fits the global health, where it fits in policy, and also in the health-care system. is possible to forget just how bad the hiv epidemic has been. hiv and has already killed in this country as many people as have died in all wars since the civil war. hiv continues to be -- was a much worse light on countries struggling with public health issues.

i remember a woman i met in nigeria a couple years ago who was carrying twins and she said to me, i am hiv-positive, but i am on treatments, and i feel great. and my twins are hiv negative, and they are going to grow up without aids because of the american people. so, you go back and tell people how much we appreciate their support, because it is our life. so, we have come a long way, but in response to the epidemic, our response to the epidemic, 2012 is truly a tipping point. i would point to three key trends in this area. first, we are seeing increasing coverage and decrease in cost.

we are able to treat more people with the same amount of money. second, there is increasing recognition of global shared responsibility and accountability. this is an issue that the world have to take responsibility for. not only the u.s., not only the countries in which the epidemic is hitting harder, but countries throughout the world who can do more to address a check the. and third, new evidence that we can make a huge leap in treatment and prevention. for some years, we had a huge fight. treatment or prevention. now we know treatment is prevention and it is a critical combination. we know prevention of mother to child infection and involuntary circumcision has a population impact.

we note infection rates can be driven down. this is crucially important, and i think informs our response. i want to take a moment to describe to you the diverse work that cdc does all over the world. we have fantastic staff in atlanta and around the world. we have nearly 2000 people working for cdc around the world, and we have another 10,000 people-plus in atlanta that can be dispatched to any area that needs expertise. will recognize there are huge challenges. over the past year, i have met with our staff to look at the programs and a wide range of areas. we will be able to improve the ability of the government and local institutions to respond to a cholera epidemic, preventing

more than 9000 deaths from cholera. much more needs to be done, and we are lacking be resources to improve water and sanitation, but we have made tremendous progress there. i have just returned from nigeria where it is sobering to remember that there is an estimated 100 million cases of malaria each year, and 3000 deaths from malaria each year, where the prevention of maternity to child transmission is not been improved and polio continues to be a major problem. but we are optimistic we will see significant progress their. from kenya, where we see a terrific examples. more than two-thirds of all tb patients in kenya are being

tested for hiv and if being found positive are put on and cite retro -- on anti-retro viral treatment. so, showing there can be an effective scales. in russia, where we have worked on vaccination and immunization issues. in china, where we have had that country open up and look get influenza. they are posting on the internet every single week the strains of flu that they are finding, so that the whole world benefits from that information. in brazil, where we helped the country designer remarkable intervention that is going to scale up physical activity, in an effort that i think is unparalleled in the world. that are going to spend their own money to see whether it is

possible to get people moving on a mass basis. in vietnam, or we helped support the development of public infrastructure -- where we helped support the development of public infrastructure. helping them in areas like motorcycle helmets were they have seen a dramatic reduction in injuries or influenza where they remain high risk. or india where we have been able to work with the world health organization to make remarkable progress on polio. we have gone 14 months without a case of polio. it is the result of enormous social activism. enormous focus and accountability. and a $1 billion investment by the government of india for polio eradication. but hiv remains the leading

global cause -- the leading global challenge in terms of infectious diseases. we have global disease detection activities of round world. we have immunization of policies to help countries make sure they have effective policies and programs. we have influenza tracking so we have an early warning system to know what is happening and to know what could be a terrible pandemic. we have been -- we have the president's malaria tracking initiative to make sure our programs have high impact and documented. we have turned out to thousand 500 and highly trained epidemiologists in five years --

2005 hundred highly trained epidemiologists and five years to document and discovered disease, design programs, employment programs, and see that those programs are working. and we have been working with the department of defense in strategic areas, and of course with the global aids program. we are seeing now signs of progress. hiv remains the biggest infectious disease challenge of the world. there have been 65 million hiv infections and 30 million deaths since this epidemic started. in 2010 alone, there have been 1.8 million deaths. said the number people infected continues to grow from 34 million and up. but the graphic you see here shows a 20% reduction in hiv

incidence, and a 27% reduction .n sub-saharan africa learning lessons from around the world and applying them wherever they can be applied is crucially important. h.i.v.-related mortality is also declining. one of the things we have been taught is that public health is at its best when we see the faces and the lives behind the numbers. these numbers are coming down, but they are still shockingly high. at the peak of the aids epidemic in africa, hiv accounted for two-thirds of all adult deaths.

can you imagine what that would be like in our own village? our own community? there were communities in which the only business that was increasing was the funeral business. there were communities and in which the hope that could be progress was disappearing. the number of health-care workers was a declining because hiv was affecting their own ranks. and the possibilities for progress seemed remote. we now have the ability to make big change and significant progress. the u.s. government has called for an aids-free generation. meaning virtually no child will be born with hiv infection, that adults living with hiv do not progress to aids, that there is a rapid decline in hiv incidence, and that combination

prevention can turn the tide on the hiv epidemic justice combination antiviral treatment can turn the tide on infection in an individual. using the an anti-viral treatment as prevention, voluntary medical mayor -- medical male circumcision, and correct and consistent condom use. what we are seeing in this call for an aids-free generation is the translation of evidence into policy and policy into action. we are hoping for more progress to an hiv vaccine, but we do not have to wait. president obama has said on aids day "we will be this disease." this is an ambitious global

challenge to all of us. what we're seeing is a goal to reduce the transmission by 90%, but to meet the goals of strengthening systems, reducing maternal mortality by least half. and ambitious goals, three numbers that we need to keep front and center in everything that we do -- 6 million on treatment, 1.5 million women treated to prevent mother to child transmission, and 4.7 million voluntary mail circumcisions. -- male circumcisions. those numbers are ambitious. we have 21 months to achieve the. but i am confident we can. at home, we have for the first time in national hiv/aids strategy for this country with the purpose of reducing

infections, increasing assets -- access to care, reducing h.i.v.- related disparities in health care and quality, and achieving a more coordinated response to the hiv epidemic. and let's not mistake -- we have significant challenges in this country. 1.2 million people are living with hiv approximately. 1 in five do not know that they have hiv. another 120,000 or so know they have hiv but are not on effective treatment. we are seeing an increase in hiv incidence with young men who have sex with men in african- american communities. we see more than 60% of new infections occur among men who have sex with men. when we look at the accountability, only 28% of all

americans living with hiv have the viral dose of drugs. that means their own health is at risk and their partners are at risk. so, we have a long way to go, but we know that significant progress can be made. san francisco for example has scaled up prevention and are seeing significant reduction in incidence of hiv. at cdc, we're taking a new approach to our prevention work. we are saying let's make sure in this country for our prevention dollars that we are sending our resources to places that need it most, where the programs work the best and the population is at highest risk. that means we will ship their funding -- we will shift our funding and determine our funding base and the number of people living with hiv and

ensure that three-quarters of all resources we send out go for four key activities. scaling up testing and linkage to care, comprehensive -- , condom distribution, and initiatives to promote accountability, especially helping health-care workers in sure we are controlling it. will not be able to effectively manage the epidemic and help people be healthy unless we systematically track these numbers. in this country, we have seen progress. 11 million more americans know they have got it ended before. three-quarters of those were high risk. we've seen 90% decreases in mother to child transmission and transmission among drug users. and blood borne transmission, 90% or more.

those same levels of excellence can be seen globally. global prevention can reach that kind of impact on the sexual transmission of hiv. not only will it save lives, but it will save money as well. we know we can drive down health care costs. immunizations cost $3 for every $1 we spend for the health-care system alone and $10 for society. a single patient living with hiv and has a lifetime cost of living in this country of about $400,000. if we can drive down infections, we can improve the cost curve of caring for hiv. effective prevention intervention are creasing -- are

increasingly understood. we know pmtct is an effective, but we are at less than 50% coverage globally. we know treatment as prevention has been documented to decrease transmission by 96%. this is remarkable progress. if you were on treatment, not only will you live longer and healthier, but you will be 96% less likely to spread hiv to others. that is a team changer in terms of our understanding of how the epidemic works. but even with a modest level of 47%e're still in only coverage. male circumcision is 60%

effective in reducing transmission, but we have seen a can be scaled up. kenya, for example, scaled up remarkably. they will not -- they will have an enormous benefit from that effort in fewer transmissions, fewer businesses, more productivity in future years. the hiv vaccine -- we are still a long way from army to become a but we need to continue to work on that, because it will be -- we're still a long way from where we need to be, but we need to continue to work on that, because it will be important. and increased exposure to prophylactics. this is the data from the high uganda on the effectiveness of circumcision. as time went on, it did not go

down. actually went up. 73% of effectiveness over a longer time period. there is tremendous effectiveness in scaling up these interventions. what we were able to do is to increase partnering to ensure the efficacy increases, cost increases, and sustainability increases. we have seen systems established, and when systems are established, drug costs up fallen, but there have been economies of scale. we have a transfer services to local partners, and cdc is providing services to our industry partners and others. we have expanded team-based care, and teen-based care is an important initiative -- team- based care is an important initiative. and we can learn more about this

in this country as well, making sure every member of the health- care team is used to their fullest potential, to ensure we have people in the health-care system who are working in ways that can support communities. we are also seeing in africa and other countries take on a greater financial portion of treatment. this is a global shared responsibility. they have done in an enormous amount -- they have done an enormous amount. other countries, countries that are affected by the epidemic as well as other donor countries and lower income countries need to do more. this slide shows a model of different scenarios of what may happen in swaziland if we scale

up access. you see the number of new infections per 100 person years. the most available model is about 2.54 every person years. if we do nothing, it will increase. if we expand medical circumcision, that will fall. if we do not do either, it will increase. but if we look at expanding treatment and circumcision, we can see substantial reductions from 2.5 to 1.5. you see those levels going down, going up, all the way below to 1 per 100 person years. we think it is possible to drive down incidence of hiv but

prevention. time will tell how effectively they can be done in the field and what the epidemiological impact will be. all the estimates and models tell us -- and it interesting suggested evidence indicates -- that we have tremendous potential for significant progress. at cdc, we're delighted to be part of the efforts to make that progress. at cdc, we do a lot to develop capacity locally, and there are parallels between what we do in this country to support public health, and what we do globally to support public health. would provide technical guidance, technical assistance, as well as direct funding. we have technical experts in more than 75 countries working on hiv and the number of other issues. we have close partnerships with ministries of health and other

local organizations. applied epidemiology is critically important, helping countries look at and act on their own information. they have postulated ministries of health as well as non- governmental organizations devoted to promoting progress in other countries around the world. they are to set up systems, monitor systems, ensure the systems' can continue for many years to come. we also use a large number of host countries whose builds we rely on to interact effectively with local organizations. we have cooperative agreements with 63 ministries of health, developed carefully over many years with careful safeguards and technical assistance so we can gradually and steadily improved the ability of these

countries to detect and respond to hiv and other health threats. we worked to establish the african society for medical accreditation. we improved laboratory networks and quality. improved health security for helping to build institutions like cdc that can work as it settles for it -- sentinels for help. countries around the world are building programs like cds same, and -- like cdc, and countries in africa are doing the same. the risk anywhere is potentially a risk everywhere.

to spread it is something that only takes days or weeks to spread from one country to another and can be very costly. we are all looking forward to the international aids conference in july in this city. it is a welcome return to the u.s. cc is proud to play a key role in that change. -- cdc is proud to play a key role in that change. what a world of difference two decades makes. i trained as an internist in infectious disease in the mid- 1980's. my training and experience was

fuelled by caring for hundreds of people dying from aids for whom i could do virtually nothing. when i left the u.s. to go to india for five years in october of 1996, it was just at the point when combination and died- retrovirus treatment was coming into widespread acceptance. ipad two friends or dying from aids, and i figured -- i had two friends who were dying from aids, and i figured i would never see them again. both of them are working full time today. two decades makes an enormous difference. we can expect progress at the international aids conference, and we also need to recognize that if it were not for the advocacy in hiv, we would not be where we are today. not just in a chevy, but in other diseases. -- not just in a tidy, but in

other diseases. -- not just in hiv. we celebrate the progress. we celebrate the ability to respond to the needs of the community with an entire partnership of commitment. we have the national hiv/aids strategy in the u.s., and the rolling out of that strategy, despite the enormous fiscal constraints the u.s. government is under, we have increased our budget every year. we will be looking at the scale of effective treatment. we will be looking forward to the reauthorization of the -- program, and we will be focusing on the translation of science to policy and policy to action.

we'll be looking at new technologies. we will be looking at new ways to do circumcision at a global level. will be looking at pre exposure prophylaxis and the impact of treatment on access and death rates. i think those are very exciting possibilities. we know that treatment works on prevention between one individual and another. we are going to focus on treatment and prevention on a population basis and document the impact of that and optimize it so we can do it as effectively as possible. we are also looking at the impact of hiv programs on systems. not only have they achieved its targets, not only hasn't done that with a decline in cost, but at the same time -- not only has

it done that with a decline in cost, but we have done that at the same time as we have increased community efforts to improve health. that is something to be celebrated going forward. combination prevention is something that would have been virtually unimaginable 10 years ago. no one entity can do this alone, but i think working together we can achieve a society in which infant infections are breyer -- are rare, treatment is effective and accountable, helping people live long, healthy, productive lives, and the incidence of hiv is falling rapidly. and that is the world we all need to continue fighting for. thank you for everything you do and all your time to make that reality. thank you very much.

[applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. that was really powerful. let's talk for a few minutes, and then we will open it to our audience. let's talk a little bit about budgets. obviously, that is a great unknown. many of the most difficult decisions are being postponed. division that has been laid out is a very powerful -- the vision that has been laid out is a very powerful vision. we will since certainly sustain and skilled resources. it also depends on the costain, and many of those -- cost gain,

and many of those demands have been captured going forward. they have steered us towards redirecting those dollars to the most effective use of them. to we're going to need address a very difficult budgetary environment, and perhaps you can see a few words about that? much of what you have laid out is the case, but looking beyond that in a very polarized context, and one in which some really hard decisions have been made for us as a country around our budget, how is your thinking right now? >> i have three points to make about this. first, we are not done decreasing unit costs. we think there is still their ability. we think we can transfer across services by increasing accountability, by using

optimization. i do not think we're done with reducing unit cost. i am confident that within the budget envelope we're going to see of the next two years, we will be able to reach the target of 6 million, up 4.7 million. the challenge will be as much programmatic as fiscal. the second point -- we need to see more countries get in the game. we need to see more commitment. no one wants to see hard-earned hiv or other assistance dollars used to basically supplant existing government and that -- investments. secretary clinton has been very forceful on that issue. i am confident that in an increasing number of countries, they will increase their

domestic commitment. more have and more will. i think we will see more response from a multilateral organizations, ensuring there is effective accountability. the third point i would make is i am encouraged by the bipartisan, bicameral administration and congress, medical community, and advocates, their commitment to global help and hiv, and that is something that is strong -- global health and hiv, and that is something that is strong. we have to make sure that we make use of all the funds that are entrusted to west. -- entrusted to us. >> thank you. we are hearing about different interests on the hill and elsewhere who are puzzling over

the budgetary realities. those are part of this coalition. what we are hearing is, yes, indeed, there needs to be more skin in the game. there are the multilateral institutions that have been very fragile themselves. but they will return and be stronger. but there is also an increased discussion around how you present to an american public what the endgame looks like -- in game maybe the wrong term, because that implies an exit. but the vision looking now four or five or 10 years that tells a narrative to the american people, different than what was seen a few years ago in the emergency phase, a somewhat

open-ended narrative looking forward. can you see a few words about that? but there are several things that are going to affect that. -- >> there are several things that are going to affect that. within a few years, we can really been the cost curve and reduce expenditures down -- been that the cost curve and reduce expenditures down the road. -- bend because kurt. the option is, you let people die from aids or you scale up treatments. we have decided as a world we're not going to do that. said, we have a major impact -- so, we have a major impact to drive down costs going forward. @ think we need to seek increased commitment from countries, host countries, but other donor countries. i think it is important that we

see this as a platform for other critically-important health interventions. reducing health disparities or establishing a healthy work force. we need still on one hand always keep that accountability. we have those three numbers to focus on. but also use that, use all the precious resources that we have to build systems that will be more resilient and able to address a wide variety of health issues. >> let's talk a little bit more about what lies ahead for the aids conference, its 2012. this is coming after a 22-year gap, which is an interesting proposition. what will we be seeing and what will the environment be like and will this ignite a new interest and enthusiasm, or will this be

tapped into some of our other more polarized and politically- charged debates that may attach themselves to this and ignite tensions rather than bring about greater unity? when you think back historically to the relationship that the united states has had with these conferences, it has often been somewhat contested and combated. in san francisco in 1990's, it was quite a turbulent event. the u.s. government has found itself at different points in a fairly confrontational position. there's a little bit of anxiety. what will happen? i very much enjoyed the fact that you position this in saying we must acknowledge and

celebrate the dimension of social mobilization in driving forward our own leadership. perhaps you could say a bit more about how you think about getting the best outcomes, getting the best set of messages to the american public? trying to get the public to understand what the opportunities are. we have the opportunity at the mmiff to work and through -- we have the opportunity to work for word and through. >> there are aspects of beat be aids epidemic that have been controversial and will remain controversial. i think the u.s. has made great progress. this is the largest global health program taken by any country for any disease.

in this administration, we have built on that, and in this administration we have done more nationally. there is still plenty of unfinished business. we focus on it and say honestly, we're going to do whatever we can achieve to save lives and stop the epidemic. i think what i hope this -- what i hope is we can focus on the areas where we need to do more. i think there is an 80/20 rule here. we agree about 80%, but we spend 80% of our time arguing about the other 20%. one of the other things we can do is look at ways we can use the conference as a catalyst to move forward in those areas where we know we can make

progress. i think also a generation of americans have grown up not realizing what a terrible scourged aids is. a generation of men who have sex with men have grown up not seeing their friends die of the epidemic -- thankfully. seeing aneans we're increase in sexually risky behavior. across a wide variety of demographics among men who have sex with men. the one thing we need to do is increase awareness of how bad hiv is. it remains an incurable disease. one of the things we can do for our general understanding is to emphasize this is still in the merchants, and for general understanding, you could emphasize that this is a bipartisan commitment.

>> i want to invite our audience members to offer comments and questions. we of microphones in the back. what we will do is take three or four at the time and come back to dr. frieden. please be patient. we will do a couple of cycles. yes? please stand up and identify yourself. >> >> ray martin from christian connections for international health. thank you for being here. considering what we faced not too many years ago, all of this talk about prevention and the tools that we can bring. i have a comment about combination prevention. the four components that you mentioned in your slide were driven as prevention, voluntary

male circumcision, and correct and consistent use of condoms. a different kind of for the global aids coordinator talk about the importance -- at different times i have heard the global aids coordinator talk about the importance of prevention. by that i think he meant the various aspects of sexual behavior. i am wondering if the difference in perspectives and priorities between the global aids coordinator and the cdc, or why behavior change did not appear on your list of priority components of combination prevention. >> thank you. from the rear. >> donna very from partners in health. this is world tb week. ines the beginning, so i

apologize if you commented on this. but it is clear that we need to build up tv programs. -- tb programs. we are incredibly disappointed in what the administration has asked for this year in bilateral tb funding. we would love to hear more about that. >> ok, sir. >> carlson is with the aids institute. thank you for what your doing. you mentioned that you are focusing the money and programs on the community's most impacted. i want to say thank you for that. my question is the affordable care act. it is in the news lately. how is that going to impact hiv prevention in the united states? >> kershaw we take one more? -- >> shala we take one more?

>> thank you. i'm david jameson from [unintelligible] i wanted to thank you very much for a very clear and encouraging presentation. i want to come back to your comments on the unique cost of care. we have been very involved in driving down the unique cost of care. among those is the drugs. we work very well in the field and successfully in the laboratory area. we found it much harder to drive down unit costs of equipment and diagnostic test in that area. what is being done on harmonization and have -- and standardization that reduces the overall cost? i wonder if you have any

thoughts on the overall cost of the commodities themselves in laboratory work. how would one set about driving those costs down? >> these are all wonderful questions, and all critically important issues. in terms of behavior change, this is and remains and will remain an important part of the epidemic response. the latest central review has been documented in various countries and has a very important role. we would see those programs continuing. similarly, the effort to reduce the number of partners, which has not been as well documented, but if effective, would continue. in terms of tuberculosis, it remains a major killer and a

major challenge. and some of you know, i spent many years working on tuberculosis. i have to be careful to keep my comments short on this topic. we need to be sure with tuberculosis that we never lose sight of the basics. i did review yesterday's a country program where they are treating tb and they ran out of first-line drugs. that should never ever happened. and yet, that is the case in different parts of the world. we have to keep the core programs functioning, and functioning effectively. we also ought to make sure that the patient always remains the vip of the program. and there are programs which have been attempting to do that, more or less affectively. but that is a true -- crucial concept.

and the third point i would make is, tb is a disease that takes a long time to treat. it is curable, but it takes a long time to treat. we do not know for certain yet, but my read of the data in current -- with current technology in many countries we can make huge progress. we can drive down daetz from t.a.r.p. -- deaths from tuberculosis and a new infections from tuberculosis is inevitably. but the number of cases that arrives from those who contracted months or years ago is likely to continue for some time. we need patience and continued assistance to continue long

time and effective treatment. that is something we need to do, and in short infection control is something we need to do a much better job at. we know about infections in health care facilities can account for a significant proportion of new tuberculosis cases, especially with those living with hiv. there are some simple low-cost ways to separate people with profs. getting them out of a hospital, or not hospitalizing them in the first place. we have seen a lot of progress in tuberculosis. other programs have a lot to learn from tuberculosis, in terms of accountability outcomes of individual patients, but we need to keep at it for a long time. the affordable care act will bring health coverage to millions of americans who do not have it today. the results of that may be

somewhat reduced pressures on some of the treatment programs, such as brian wade. but that is years from now. until then, we continue to have a challenge to make sure that people living with the disease have access to care. it will generally give access to a form of care for hiv- positive people, but it will not limit the age of rape programs. that is something we need to continue to do from the public health field. the issue of inefficiencies in laboratory networks and commodities is important. we're looking at it in this country. in the united states we have seen tremendous fiscal pressure on public health departments throughout the u.s.. compared to three years ago, there are about 50,000 fewer people working in health

departments in the u.s. than there were just three years ago. one of the things we're doing at the cdc is a laboratory efficiency to try to identify shared resources to drive costs down. we have seen it from a variety of transport issues that it is harder to drive costs down. we need to work in that area. we also need to look at new technologies. for example, a cdc scientists have developed in another field a rapid blood test to my point of care test for plague. it is highly accurate. and new technologies have the potential to drive costs down -- to drive costs up because they're complicated, or drive costs down because they are simple and accurate.

>> i will follow-up on the tuberculosis question. while acknowledging there is a lot more that can be done better for existing programs and treatments, what is your perspective on new tools, new diagnostics, new drugs to invest in tuberculosis for the long haul? >> [unintelligible] >> one other thing added to that. will we see focus on hiv infection at the aids conference, considering there is a high infection rate between tuberculosis and hiv/aids? >> my question was about the

domestic response. you said of the four priorities , 75% of the dollars will be prioritized, the fourth one will be around viral load. i do not know if that is community or medical. do those programs toward the medical community or the medical provider? if you could tell me about what that looks like. >> thank you for your presentation. it is really wonderful to be seeing a attention to cost and cost effectiveness. we have not always have those numbers, and being able to show these improvements and increments. but with an eye to aid its 2012 coming in, and realizing we actually talked to ourselves, this committed group of people who are well versed in public health and development and

hiv/aids, and realizing this great opportunity we have a word the american public and people in congress who has -- who have not been following either hiv/aids or the elements in public health are going to be potentially exposed to what we hope could be reaffirming and exciting and new ideas. sometimes when we limit the discussions to cost and cost effectiveness, we forget to make the next jump to value, and sometimes surprising value. and the difference in difficult budgetary times, what is the value in funding or increased funding. and that can be different from person actually -- but from the perception of the incremental cost of doing more and the cost of transmission verses the value of eliminating hiv/aids.

those are very different argument and very different justifications for budgetary improvements even. i hired are, maybe. -- a higher bar, maybe. when i came back from overseas and from there was academic and i found a range of people. there were those who thought you could do nothing about hiv/aids and every dollar you spend was utile current -- was futile. similarly, i think we get caught right now with of money going to foreign assistance for an international response to more money being spent here at home. a lot of these creative solutions and value-added leaves can come from the space in between those extremes.

it seems to me when i came to work in d.c., a lot of the improvements where were able to make with scaling up provider testing and our efforts here within the city, they came from what we're doing abroad. cdc is uniquely paste to tell some of these value added stories because of these -- your role not just with pepfar, but with the state health department. what are some of the value out of stories that people are unaware of and are the difference between driving incidences occurredown a little. >> i am from nih. thank you for the presentation i worked -- for the presentation.

i work in both africa and asia. when we work with hiv/aids, and you mentioned before the walkers, the one who provides the services. we're looking for the increasing quantity, quality, and retention of health workers in their own countries. we have been working in different areas. you mention that cdc cannot do it alone. as a u.s. agency, how is your plan to work together with other agencies so we can provide prevention and treatment and care services to the people and expanded in a sustainable way? >> first on tuberculosis, we have seen significant progress on new diagnostics in terms of development in the laboratory --

laboratory development in the laboratory. we now have to define the role of those new diagnostics. for example, we have rapid tests for tb and present this and resistance. that could be done in a high- volume to rapidly get people out of the hospital to reduce spread. i do not know if that is the best place to do it, but it is something to figure out. one technology that i'm quite excited about is led fluorescent at my prosperity -- led fluorescence microscopy. one area of concern was where it was available in small supply. many companies -- countries have

very little of electrical supply and maybe one-third have poured quality. we tried everything and solar does not quite work. batteries may not last long. but led is a great technology. you do not need a big battery to last a long time. and fluorescent increases your throughput. i do not know if this is an area that will be highly effective or scalable, but let's figure it out. if we have new technologies and we need to use them. we have some inklings of accommodations in drug treatment that may get to arguses down from six months to four months. -- get tuberculosis down from six months to four months. i predicted a significant reduction in the length of treatment. i do not know if it will be another decade before we do, but

it grows slowly and it is tough to treat. but it is important that we produce a wide regiment selection. a vaccine would undoubtedly be a nobel prize. we have made progress in some of the science there. the very long way away from what we need to make it happen. but it is a very important thing to happen. you will see a lot more on this in the international aids conference. i will mention in passing critical meningitis. is it terrible virus. it is a fungal disease and often fatal. and it is preventable hot with in expensive medications -- preventable with inexpensive medications.

cdc scientists have developed a rapid test for it. and just as we give medicine to tocpc, we may be able -- to prevent cpc, we may be able to develop the same for this meningitis. and then figuring out what the role for those treatments are, how best and most efficiently they can be used. the question about how we will prioritize prevention funds in this country, 75% aren't core prevention's and scaling them up to population impact. i think we are still figuring out how to use viral load. we would like to see a convergence of the use of viral load to hold the entire

community accountable for how we are doing at stopping the hiv. some of the virus that is not surprised is experiencing a ravaging of their immune system and other parts of their body by the hiv virus. the same time, they are increasing the risk to partners. we hope to see a convergence of accountability. already, about half of the states get viral load. we are still figuring out what the best way is to monitor it. and the volume of viral load testing is high. in ensuring that we are able to get the information through laboratory systems to duplicate it, not simple.

but this is a critical area and to look at, ensuring that we have complete confidentiality for individuals, and of course, by saying we want to get viral load suppression and a community level, we say at note -- at all times that no one is suggesting mandatory treatment for hiv. but we are suggesting the treatment facilities' use that information to hold themselves accountable for what they are reaching out effectively to ensure that people aren't being given every up -- are being given every opportunity to come in for treatment. in terms of the bayou proposition i would make a few comments. -- the value proposition i would make a few comments. first, it is important we do not of report -- overpromise. hiv will be with us and it will be until we have a vaccine. but it can be in a much less burdensome way.

if we can drive down incidences'. we can prevent maternal transmission to invent. we can make sure it is not the crisis that it is today. -- we can prevent maternal- infant transmission. and we can make sure it is not a crisis that it is today. ultimately, one of the wonderful thinkers in public health is jeffrey rose, whose book "preventive medicine" says basically, the best case for prevention is that it is better to be healthy and sick and it is better to be alive than dead. that is the real proposition for public health. but there is a lot of value not only to the hiv care that we are doing, but also the strengthening of the systems, whether that is for accountability or clinical care, or systems for linkage or

advocacy and critical providers. there is no one best way to communicate this to audiences. there is no one does message. but to different audiences there are effective messages, and i think we need to continue to show the reality. because that is the best case for our preventive efforts. in terms of health care workers, we have done an enormous amount in training and development of health care workers in nursing and medical schools and residencies in public health. we need to continue to build on that. we need to support health care workers in developing countries, and in this country, where we are seeing shortages in the areas where there is the greatest need. that is another strong case for team based care, giving people in communities who are trained and empowered and able to provide lifesaving

interventions. they will be critically .mportant going forward mahdav >> where going to close with leadership. we have talked about having the value proposition put forward, consistent messaging, and making it clear in science and evidence based ways. clearly, leadership remains very fundamental. we have seen this with the impact that president bush has had, president obama, secretary clinton, yourself, mayor bloomberg. the polio case in india in this last phase was very much at the level of indian leadership. maybe you can say a few words about what we should expect going into july, and what we

should expect, we should be calling for with respect to the role that the leadership will play. sometimes in these conferences in the past there has been dramatic expressions of leadership. other times, there has been less than adequate or optimal. >> week have seen -- we have seen u.s. edition in this global it for much of the past decade, starting with president bush and with the current administration. we have seen tremendous leadership from secretary clinton and president obama: koran 83 generation with ambitious targets that are achievable -- calling for an aids-free generation with ambitious targets that are achievable. how to be blunt, -- to be blunt, look at south africa. what a dramatic turnaround from

the nile to acceptance and leadership -- from denial to the acceptance and leadership. we need to hold countries accountable for continuing and achieving the kind of leadership. and the u.s., we need to make sure that there is not only the leadership that we have at the federal level, but also the state and local level, where we are seeing states not treat people with hiv. we are seeing localities' step back from commitments that they have had before. leadership at every level is the strongest predictor of success or failure of hiv and other public health programs. >> thank you so much for spending this time with us. please join me in thanking him. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> the supreme court finished the first of three days of arguments on the fate of the obama administration's overhaul of the nation's health-care system. according to a report by the associated press, they appear unlikely to allow an obscure tax law to derail the case. no justice appeared to embrace the view that the case had been brought prematurely. according to a law that bars tax disputes from being heard in the courts before the taxes have been paid. again, that reporting from the associated press. you can listen to arguments on c-span3. it is under way right now. or you can listen on the radio at c-span.org.

and you can also find our c-span facebook page where we are asking how interested you are in the supreme court arguments on health care. you can find a link below -- a link to that c-span.org. at 3:00 p.m., debate on five suspension bills, one dealing with a 90-day the surface transportation bill, and a special assistant to oversee the veterans' housing. one of those bills have to do with the consumer financial protection bureau, and we will hear now more on the cfpb. >> we're joined by richard cordray.

if i could just begin with two sentences, tell us what is the consumer financial protection bureau for those who do not know. >> we are a new government agency and our role is to protect consumers in the financial marketplace. all of the ways you access credit for your personal purposes, whether a mortgage or a credit card order banking accounts or student lending, and a variety of other products, we are standing by your side to protect against fraud and make sure you are treated fairly in the marketplace. >> as you know, your appointment by president obama was very controversial and there is a likelihood of legal action down the line regard now. given that, i'm wondering -- regarding given that time wondering how the agency -- has

that led you not to take on the big banks accepat this point? >> i do not think it is affecting what we're doing in any way, except in a positive way. you know at the point that the appointment was made, and it was over duet that point, we were not able to fulfil all of the authority that congress had given us. we could not actually to fill a law that we were supposed to carry out. since i was appointed on january 4, we have launched our non- banks supervision program. we're going into these financial institutions and looking carefully at all the information. they are entitled to have all the information to assess compliance with the law, to see happen. -- how consumers are being treated. historically we have looked at

it from how and it affects the institution. we are looking at how the consumer is affected first. they have investigations are ongoing. are not permitted to talk about ongoing -- i am not permitted to talk about on going on for some activity. but we have been in that area as well. and we have been engaging in our will making processes, which are compulsory requirement for all institutions, bank and non-bank. if we issue our role on -- we issued our role on transfers. i think we are active on all fronts. it is just that we are new. we are only a few months old, especially in terms of our full of stories, so some of the things take time to ripen. >> i know you cannot say anything about ongoing investigations, but can you say if you are -- if those involved, the big banks as opposed to

other areas of the financial industry. as you know, a large portion of the banking industry remains opposed to this agency's existence. are you shying away from going after them in any way? >> we are not. i get different signals 19 ... -- " signals when i talk to ceos and executives at the larger banks. many of them recognize that something is needed here, that we are needing to rebuild trust in the marketplace. that means people have to have confidence that there is an oversight. we are dealing with all institutions top to bottom and we have open matters we are looking at in -- involving arrangements between institutions, large banks, small banks, and non-banks. >> you mentioned your supervision program, and you have already been looking at some of the books of the largest banks can you share a little bit

about what you are finding? what might be different from what the other bank regulators are finding? have you start -- started looking at non-banks? >> we have. if we have examiners on the ground at banks and non-banks as we speak. even our non-bank program was hampered by not having a director until january, and then got under way. both are under way at this point. what is interesting about our role in examining and supervising these different institutions is at two things. one is, we can address both banks and non-banks. and you had markets where before, only banks were covered by the principles and standards and examined it to comply with those. non-banks were competing in the market, taking growing market -- market share and not held to an oversight whatsoever. many of the bad practices are originated and/or a celebrated

in that area. you cannot have a market where you regulate part of it and leave part of it untouched. it is illogical and obviously, came to grief. we're looking at institutions from the standpoint of not what the impact of complying is on these institutions themselves. that is the agency's focus. that is what the law tells them to do. our focus is different. it is looking at the consumer. how do they go about marketing products and how does that affect individuals? are they being treated fairly and in accordance with the law? let me give you a specific example of how this differs. when financial institutions contracted with vendors and to offer certain products, marketing of products and the like, for bank examiners there was a comfortable with that in the sense that if the

contractor, they have legal remedies if the vendor made mistakes or treated people about the. they could seek redress from them, and there was less reputation all and legal risk for the institution because they have remedies against the entity. for us, there's really no difference. a vendor is dealing with the consumer. the consumer often does not know the difference. they're doing it on behalf of someone. i think we are likely to look at vendors and a little differently from the way the banking agencies do. they involve more for the consumers. the institutions will need to adjust their compliance regimes accordingly. >> can you give us an example -- for those of us out of washington. banks and vendors and nonbanks. and >> -- >> i have a mortgage.

i get a loan from someone. i buy that house. what happens in this marketplace, which has gotten more complicated in the last 20 years, is that the person or firm that is actually dealing with my mortgage on an ongoing basis, taking the payments, making sure they are applied correctly, dealing with situations that may come up where i fall behind, working with me to make sure that the mortgages still working, that i'm still making payments, that is a whole industry itself. mortgage service. those rights are often bought and sold in the secondary market. i might get a loan from you, my mortgage lender. by the time i may have a problem three or four years down the road, the entity dealing with meat could be quite different. i have no choice in that. they can be bought and sold without my approval. if i come to you end -- you can say sorry, i'm not dealing with

this anymore. everybody who has looked at this has shown this. the way in which some of the vendors performed poorly matters a lot to consumers. it also matters to the institutions, because many of ily capitalize. >> which nonbanks are you looking have? are you looking at the biggest payday lenders first, or where are your examiners now? >> there are two ways in which we set priorities in the non- bank area. if congress specified certain party that they want us to pursue. all of ordaz -- congress specified certain priorities that they wanted us to pursue. , or specify the mortgage market, which includes mortgage -- congress specified the mortgage market, which includes mortgage origination.

payday lending was an area they specified. and private certain lending. those are the four bekaa were specified. and there is another area where congress that we can supervise. and of course, enforce the law regardless. but when we supervise, we need to designate the larger purpose of pins and focus on them. we have proposed now to extend our reach overs -- over debt collection and credit reporting. also, two areas where people often have no choice as to who they are dealing with, you do not typically choose your debt collector. those rights can be bought and sold and they often are. people often do not understand credit reporting. it is not something right in front of their face, and yet it has a tremendous impact on their ability to get loans. sometimes now has to apply for jobs, increasingly that could be

something checked by your employer and you could be rejected on that basis. you may not realize it. our prioritizing within these ranges depends on consumer impact. where we see more direct potential for harm to consumers, that makes more reporting. larger institutions are more or prairie because they deal with a broader range of customers. -- are more of a priority because they deal with a broader range of customers. >> what kind of exams are you carrying out? >> we are undertaking a variety of exams. some places we are on the ground. some places we are getting ready to go to work with them. >> how does the consumer benefit from a different way your examiners are looking at vendors, say, compared to

regulatory agencies in the past. can you bring it down to the consumer level of how that might benefit them? >> if an institution contracts with the vendor to sell you a product, said kamal -- to sell your product, let's say, they may be more inclined to be more aggressive because they are paid specifically on selling the product. as opposed to a larger bank, it may be one of many product lines and the incentives may be more diffused. there may also be fewer controls in place. even though the entity wanted people to comply with a lot and do things right, they don't own us. there could be scrips that are written how -- britain out, and when you listen to calls, it couldn't have gone -- that are

written out, and when you listen to calls, it could have gone very differently. we are not going to be content with the notion that there is a vendor contract and that provides protection for the institution. from the consumer side, it does not matter. whoever is dealing with them is the person potentially creating harm to them, and that is our focus. >> you would be looking to see if the vendors are being overly aggressive and trying to sell their products to consumers, were being misleading, things that the banking agencies might not have delved into because there were content with the liability issues that were set up with the vendors. >> yes, and the banking industry did delve into those issues to a degree, but there was a certain level of insulation for the institution because they had a credit -- a contractual relationship. there were not necessarily liable. but the bottom line is the

direct contact with the consumer. we will be quite aggressive job we are doing. >> we know that you are on the ground. do you see things changing? have you seen examples of companies changing to what they think the bureau might be doing? >> we have. it has been interesting. if you can signal more clearly to the market the direction you are going, there is a certain amount of interest among some of the businesses in trying to get out ahead and understand what is expected of them. getting out there and thinking about treating cancer risk fairly, you have to look at

whether they are. -- consumers fairly, you have to look at whether they are. you have to understand the comments that are being used. we are pushing for that in the credit card rahm and the mortgage realm. we have institutions that have signed up to work with us as a kind of pilot projects. we have others bringing things to as on their on their represent shorter, clear, simple readings that are much more understandable for consumers. there are also some areas where as we have been interested in practices, and i do not want to get into the details on this, but we have had institutions come to us and talk about changing their practices. i do not and that would have occurred if we had not paid attention to the practices. if there -- there are a lot of

ways we can move forward with cooperative agreements. some of them may not be entirely satisfactory, but they are in the right direction. >> give me an example of something coming down the road that consumers out there are going to say, oh, good, i'm glad that agency is here and doing the work that is doing? >> i think there are a number of them. the one that we just recently finalized was britain's transfers. there are many people in the united states who send money back to other countries, or they send it abroad for a variety of reasons. maybe somebody is traveling or going to school overseas, whatever it may be. there have never been any consumer protections around those transactions. which is kind of offensive when you think about it. when i was testifying in front of the senate banking committee, everybody in that room when they use a credit card or write a check or go to get a mortgage or

borrow money, they expect to receive significant protections about what can or cannot be done in that transaction. but for people who very often are at the port and of the spectrum, many of them are new end of the- the poor an spectrum, many of them are new rivals and sending money back to their families. there are often no protections and often did not know when they sent money how much would be received on the other end. these are things that have changed by us finalizing a rulemaking that now provides protections for people. >> this is a smaller part of our population. can you tell me something that the masses will appreciate coming down the line? >> in the mortgage area, anybody who has bought a house knows that when -- first there is the

application process, and then when they come to the closing there is massive amounts of paperwork. much of it is duplicative and confusing. in part because of different statutes were created by different agencies. all of that has been integrated within our agency and we have been directed to simplify and clarify that and boil it down, so people can know what choices they are making and the key terms are more salient to them. that is a project we have had under way for over a year already. and by january, we will have in place a new regime on that. people will see that as they go to buy and sell new houses. credit-card agreements -- the card act was enacted by congress significant protections. we are overseen that those protections are being delivered by the institutions. we are working to simplify things there too. there has been a lot of work

toward similar agreements as a result of that. people shop for credit cards frequently. and whether they intend to shop, they are shocked. you get them in the mail. i do as well. the fact that some of that is going to be broken down and made simpler so you can understand exactly what the interest is going to be, what the payment terms are, the late fees associated, and then you can make comparisons. that is a good thing. it will also help if people have trouble making comparisons. i think a lot of consumers do. it will help third parties to better compare products, kind of like a consumer reports does in the automotive realm. here are the relative merits of these products and you can make your choices accordingly. we might advise you, given your situation and your spending, what might be a preferable product for you. if that is done in the private

sector and the nonprofit sector, no problem with that to consumers. >> you have a lot of oversight to the financial industry. i wanted to ask about the oversight to your agency. a number of republicans in congress want to change the oversight. you have as the director a lot of authority. if you were not the director, or if you're the chairman of a 5% commission, how would that have impacted you so far? how would that impact the way you do your job? >> it is hard to say exactly how it would impact us. we have different commissions and boards and organizations in washington that are organized differently. some have a single head. all of the cabinet agencies, for the most part, have a single head. some of the agencies have a board of three or five or seven.

some of them have a single director, like the comptroller of the currency. it has been around for 100 years and no one has been actively trying to change it. in each organization, i think is pretty common that there is some group that is a group leadership. at the bureau, if i am the director, but we have a very talented committee. some came from different agencies with a breadth of experience and we run the place together. we have a board typically with a chair or an acting director the has to run the agency and share with the board. what i was asked about this by congress, i said, what are the lot is a a, is what we will carry out. -- wherever the lot is, is what we will carry out. some people have been very resistant. they have called us up to justify many times because they want to have oversight over us. i think that is a good thing.

i welcome it. i will be going up there for my fourth time in three months next week. to me, that is a good thing. they are entitled to look closely at us and for us to have the opportunity to explain what we are doing, we should be comfortable with that. the more oversight there is of us, the harder it is to make the case that we are somehow insulated from oversight. it is just not true. >> what do you plan to tell congress next week? and this is kind of president obama's batie. he pushed along with elizabeth warren for this. how you set up the agency in the midst of all the politics? >> in the house, in and agencies are clearly marked opportunity to federal trade commission, the securities and exchange commission, the cftc.

there are a number of them. the fact of the matter is, we are distinct from the administration. they may be interested in a lot of the things that we are doing, and may be supportive of all lot of them. we met are happy to work with anybody who wants to -- we are happy to work with anybody who wants to stand with us in protecting consumers. the president is an important champion to have on your side if you do. members of congress and members of the senate, we want them to have the opportunity to understand and appreciate what we're doing. we will work with members of both parties across the country. they respond to the same constituents that we hear from with the very same kinds of problems. from potentially losing their houses or drowning in credit- card debt, or dealing with student loans. if we make progress on these issues, that is helpful in terms of building support from elected officials. and we also work with officials at the state and local level,

including financial empowerment efforts that are under way there. we are getting out across the country quite a bit since i became the director -- alabama to texas to new york to tennessee. to indiana. we have our folks go across the country all the time. we have skip humphrey. i think that as we work, we have a mission. it is a mission set by congress. we want support and partnership with all the elected and appointed officials and agencies to do our work. and it will make us more successful. >> we have time for maybe one more question.

do you want to take it? -- bob >> just to give back to the oversight question a little bit, and the question of possible legal action. is that in keeping the agency adderall, the thought that the first aggressive action you take, rulemaking or enforcement action is likely to end up in court and be challenged because of the recess appointment? for thatpreparing contingency, and is that holding you back in doing anything you are doing? >> it is not affecting our decision making. i do not see how it legitimately could. now that i am appointed as the director, people may have their own questions about that, but now that i am appointed as the director, this bureau is under obligation by law to do certain things. and there are certain things that not only are we required to do, but they are really important and it will matter to the lives of consumers. cleaning up the mortgage market, leveling the playing field between the banks and non-

bank competitors, seen that the laws are enforced and people are have -- held accountable. i took an oath when i was sworn in as a director to carry out those laws. we're going to do it. i do not think there is any real alternative for us. i think it also dovetails nicely with the fact that as we protect consumers, they will see the benefits of this agency and it will justify the work we are doing. >> one final question. the hearing next week, what is the topic? >> it is the house financial services committee having me to discuss our six-month report on what we have done. i have already testified on the same report at the senate banking committee. it is a new set of people inquiring. i always find that very stimulating. >> thank you very much for being our new speaker. >> my pleasure. >> and we are back with our two reporters.

let me ask you about this agency. where they get their money and oversight mcvet ketsana ordaz -- and the oversight of it. it does create questions amongst some in congress about how much oversight they do have. they cannot, for example, when he goes to this hearing this week, they cannot say, if you do not do what we want, we will cut off your funding and we will not give you the finding that in need. there is a lot of concern, particularly amongst republicans that the agency is on its own and can do what it wants. and as you heard, he is trying to stick to what the law has put forward. but that is an ongoing question.

that is where this legal challenge of the recess appointment is going to come in, because that is another area where congress was not able to say -- to have a say on his appointment. >> and who is pushing the challenges to this agency? >> some republicans in congress have talked about it. people in the industry have talked about it. if his appointment is not valid, there are a lot of the authorities that the agency has that they only got when there -- when they got a full-time director appointed. therefore, you could argue that any rule making or enforcement action that the agency takes under his supervision would be invalid. and that is the expectation that somebody at some point is going to file a legal challenge along those lines. >> what did richard cordray tell us that this agency is doing -- what could be controversial? >> i think is interesting that there is a lot of concern, but he made it clear they are moving ahead regardless. one of the things they are

moving on that is new is dispatching examiners to non- banking companies. if that includes pay lenders. they may look at check catchers and others that provide loans that are not necessarily banks. he said today that they're looking at a lenders, some of the biggest in the country, all just like they're looking at banks. that is something that the bankers have won a two-seat as far as leveling the playing field. looking at -- have wanted it to see as far as leveling the playing field. the fact that he is sending examiners to some of these nonbanks is pretty interesting. >> and there is a movement out .here, occupy wall street' people want to see action against a bank's record --

against big banks. >> i think he made it clear that he will not shy away because of political concerns and the controversy about his appointment. they have a charge to look at all kinds of financial firms, and that is what they're doing. >> how will consumers benefit from this agency? >> i think the overriding idea is to take these consumer protection responsibilities that were spread amongst the three agencies, and often not the highest priority at these other agencies, and put them in one place where that is the focus. as you saw, he is very focused on what the consumer experience is. from that standpoint, from disclosures and things that the banks do that might be confusing, and other financial service providers, i think consumers can benefit the question is kamal dugay -- can benefit. the question is, do they take things so far to benefit the consumers that the agency's

cosco upon. that is the -- costs go up. that is the double-edged sword. >> this agency came out and said they have the authority to write thousands of rules. who will stop them? what indication is there that this is what they're doing, or could do? >> they have done a lot already, but a lot of it has been setting up the agency. they have not gone into the substantive rules that they need to do right now. a big issue this year will be mortgages. everyone is waiting to see what it will do with these mortgage roles. but what they have done so far in setting up their supervision program, setting up the way they handle the complete system, which they launched yesterday to give answers to common financial questions. they're still in set up mode. it is hard to point to a lot of things that have already added a lot of red tape and high cost in

the industry. credit will be a wait and see. >> he has appeared at -- >> it will be a wait and see. >> yes. it will be things that the industry does not necessarily opposed. it will be interesting when they come up with rules that there is opposition to or that could have opposition to them, it will be interesting to chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray, dear lord, we give you thanks for giving us another day. we use this moment to be reminded of your presence and to tap the resources needed by the men and women of this

assembly to do their work as well as it can be done. may they be led by your spirit in the decisions they make. may they possess your power as they steady themselves amid the pressures of persistent problems. the issues facing our nation this week are monumental to us, but a part of the long history of political and policy debate that have created a grave narrative of paragraph tisspaive democracy -- participative democratcy. send your spirit and wisdom to the justices of the supreme court as well as the members who serve in this people's house that the rulings and bills that lead forward might prove to be beneficial to our nation and its people. and may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings

and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from northern mariana islands rise, mr. sablan? mr. sablan: pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 i demand a vote on the speaker's approval the journal. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the approval of the speaker's -- the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval. journal. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and make a point of order a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 , further proceedings on this question are postponed. the plemming pledge will be led by the gentleman from -- the

pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from northern mariana islands, mr. sablan. mr. sablan: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. sop the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, messages of the president of the united states. the secretary: i am directed by the president of the united states to deliver to the house of representatives messages in writing. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. pitts: to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, today the supreme court began its deliberations on the patient protection affordable care act.

clearly with three days of deliberations, this is the most important case the court has considered in decades. i had the pleasure of being able to attend this morning's deliberations considering whether the court should rule immediately or wait until the penalties are assessed a few years from now. tomorrow they will consider the heart of the matter, whether the constitution allows the government to compel individuals to purchase health insurance, so-called individual mandate. at this time it is critical to remember that the supreme court is not the only body charged with protecting and defending the united states constitution. this congress, we have been working to restore rights to the american people. we passed legislation to fully repeal this law, to eliminate many of its harmful provisions, and to defund irresponsible spending. no matter how the court rules, we must continue the fight to restore our constitutional liberties. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from northern mariana islands seek recognition? mr. sablan: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, 40 years ago on march 16, 1972, a young couple in the northern mariana islands, wrote, edited, printed, and distributed the very first issue of the mare wrana variety and news. now the oldest newspaper in our islands. it provided read rds extensive local news and views. it also carries reports of the region, the united states, and the world, as well as interesting and in-depth feature stories and a thought-provoking opinion section. this day the community served by the variety expanded beyond the shores of the northern marianas, the paper is

published and circulated locally, regionally, and internationally and online. it is the winner of numerous awards. the variety's also strong community partner contributed to numerous nonprofit organizations, events, and activities, and encouraging those interested in the business and craft of journalism and publishing. please join me in congratulating them, their family, and all of their past and current employees and colleagues at the marianas variety news and views for the newspaper's 40 years of service to our community. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend 3450eu remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, today marks an extremely important day in our nation's history. the supreme court is scheduled to begin hearing oral arguments on the constitutionality of the president's government health care takeover legislation.

there was -- that was forced upon the american people by the president and his liberal allies and liberal controlled congress by deals and kickbacks. several weeks ago the congressional budget office released a report that obamacare will destroy almost one million jobs from our current work force. according to a recent gallup poll, 85% of small business owners are not hiring due to the government regulations and rising health care costs imposed by the big government mandates restricting freedom. america's largest association of small business, the national federation of independent business, estimates 1.6 million jobs will be eliminated. house republicans have voted to repeal obamacare 26 times with the record unemployment rate of over 8% to the last three years, it is necessary for the president and congress to enact laws providing for job creation through private sector growth rather than supporting legislation that destroys jobs. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget

september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? mr. cohen: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. filmmaker james cameron is known for captivating us with his great films like "alien" and "the abyss," "titanic" yesterday he should have fascinated and captivated the world. he went down 36,000 feet under the sea to the lowest, deepest part of the world. in a ship that he designed over the last seven years privately, a 24-foot capsule, that took him down to visit and learn about the deep recesses of the sea. 80% of the world's biosphere is under the sea. we know less about that than the moon's surface. james cameron with the help of national geographic and rolex and a sponsor, and his friend,

mr. allen, took that voyage and showed what man can do when he has curiosity and bravery. his activities that took a six-hour trip to the bottom of the sea remind me of charles lindburgh. an individual that conquered new territories and opened up new vistas. before that nobody had been that deep since 1960, and they were there for 20 minutes. they didn't see much. he was there for six hours. he's going to bring back a lot of information about the sea and about sea life. i thank you for -- him for his work. i congratulate him in the fulfillment of his dreams sparks the imagineation of the the world and inspires us to explore our own creativity and ingenuity. thank you, mr. speaker. i thank mr. cameron for his courage, imagination, and daring. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from the american samoa seek recognition? mr. faleomavaega: unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. faleomavaega: mr. speaker,

three years ago the american auto industry was on the verge of collapse. millions of american jobs were in jeopardy. when president obama decided to rescue the american auto industry, many critics opposed him. but today the auto industry's resurging thanks to the tough decisions our president made in time of economic crisis. president obama stood by the american business community and our auto industry. as a result of his firm commitment and demonstration of leadership, jobs were saved. some 1.4 million jobs were going to be lost up and down the supply chain of the auto industry if president obama had not taken action to provide for the needs of millions of american families at a time of such great economic insecurity in our nation. now it's paying off, the auto industry has added more than 200,000 jobs in the last 2 1/2 years. last but not least, general motors company is once again the world's top auto manufacturer. 2011 profit was $7.6 billion,

its largest ever. mr. speaker, i commend president obama for the bold decisions he made to rescue our nation's auto industry, and i thank him for standing with our country's workers and for leading our nation out of the most serious economic recession since the great depression of 1929. i yield back. soin the chair lays before the house -- the speaker pro tempore: the chair leis before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress. united states, in accordance with section 502-f-2 of the trade act of 1974 as amended, the 1974 act, i am providing notification of my intent to suspend education of argentina as a beneficiary developing country under the generalized system of preferences, g.s.p. program. section 502-b-2-e of the 1974 act provides that the president shall not designate any country

and beneficiary developing country under the g.s.p. if such country fails to act in good faith in enforcing arbitrary awards in favor of u.s.-owned companies. section 502-d-2 of the 1974 act provides that after complying with the requirements of section 502-f-2 of the 1974 act the president shall withdraw or suspend a designation of any country as a beneficiary developing country if, after such designation, the president determines that as the result of changed circumstances such country would be barred from designation as a beneficiary developing country under section 502-b-2 of the 1974 act. pursuant to section 502-d of the 1974 act having considered the factors set forth in section 502-b-2-e i have determined that it is appropriate to suspend arbegin tina's designation as a

beneficiary country under the g.s.p. program because it has not acted in good faith in enforcing awards in favor of u.s.-owned companies. signed, bravepl, the white house. -- barack obama, the white house. referred to the committee on ways and means and ordered printed. the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states, in accordance with section 502-f-1-a of the trade act of 19674 as amended the 1974 act, i am notifying the congress of my intent to add the republic of south sudan to the list of beneficiary developing countries under the generalized system of preferences program. it became an independent nation on july 9, 2011. after considering the criteria set forth in section 502-c of the 1974 act, i have determined that south sudan should be

designated as a g.s.p. beneficiary developing country. in addition, in accordance with section 502-f-1-b of the 1974 act, i am providing notification of my intent to add south sudan to the list of least developed beneficiary countries under the g.s.p. program. after considering the criteria set forth in section 502-c of the 1974 act, i have determined that it is appropriate to extend least developed beneficiary developing country benefits to south sudan. signed, barack obama, the white house. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the committee on ways and means and ordered printed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 3:00 p.m. to

we will have live coverage here on c-span. justices are ready to move to the heart of the case on health- care quality of. it will move onto its second day of oral arguments tomorrow. the court will not consider the case premature to to add tax allayed debbie of.

-- to add tax law. a decision on the case is expected by late jane. that update from the associated press. the supreme court is hearing oral argument on the health-care law, prompting questions. today, whether the case is premature. and tomorrow, whether the individual mandate to purchase health care coverage is it constitutional. we will have live coverage on c- span3. starting april 1, s.c. the winners in this year's student cam competition as middle and high school students from across the country show out which part of the constitution was important to them and y. we will showed the videos at

6:00 a.m. on c-span. and meet the students each day on "washington journal." congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's competition. now, white house national economic director gene sperling. from the park hotel in d.c., this is about 59 cents. >> john got most of that right. is true i went to college in minnesota. i am actually from ann arbor, mich.. that is my home. i am a huge michigan fan. i am might -- i am in my third day of mourning. nevertheless, i will pull myself up for these remarks today. i do want to thank john for his

enormous commitment and what he has done to civic enterprise as part of the white house counsel for community solutions. he is an example that there are people in this town that are committed to getting things done as opposed to worrying about what party is in power and who will get the credit. and obviously, general powell of fort sharing the americas non-- profit alliance. i am inspired today. it is still a force in public policy. obviously, you just got to see our commitment in action with arne duncan and all he has done. i thank them. i think all of you. let me -- you are going to hear

from a lot of people. i am going to make five points and let you move on. one, focus on how education and the challenge of preventing drop out -- but beyond preventing dropouts, having higher aspirations, higher graduation rates, higher accomplishment is absolutely critical to our economy and economic growth. there is a degree, and with that is just common sense. the basketball playoffs. if you look at any team, any team is stronger. everybody is stronger. of course, if you have an economy where women are not contributing as much or are not allowed to contribute as much.

when you have an economy where to many people are dropping out of a high school without the skills to compete, that is not just about the interest of those individuals, though that is crucial. it is about whether you have an economy that is at full strength. you have seen the studies. i will not go into all of them. you know them. you know someone who has graduated from high school will make twice as much as someone who dropped out. you know the unemployment rate for someone without a high- school degree is a about a 11% today, but with a high-school degree 4%. when know what it means to the cost of our society. the people have significant education make more, contribute more, pay higher taxes, cost

other taxpayers less funds. these are all the things for which the academic evidence is overwhelming and undeniable. what is incredibly important to remember is it benefits all of us. the need give you one example. the president's conference on in sourcing the other day, and any in sourcing conference, a woman talked about what she advised when she was telling people where to locate their companies. she says one of the number one indicators was what was the high school completion rate in the area where you would locate that particular service business? it was a key indicator in where they would recommend someone relocate. it is not just those individuals

to benefit. in that community, that economy benefits. there will be more jobs for everyone. need to make it very clear -- we need to make it very clear. we are inspiring people of higher aspirations, higher academic progress. it is not just about those individuals. it is about our economy as a whole. my second point is one i think all of you would feel deeply. even if that was not the case, my guess is everybody who is here today would still be here to dead. because we are fundamentally the people who believe fundamentally that the accident of your birth should not be overly determinative of the outcome of your life. [applause] we would not tolerate an law that says if you are born in a

poor area to single parents only seven out of 100 of you can go to college, we would not tolerate an law like that. we would think that law was kroll. but how much better are we if we sit by and do nothing when that reality -- and that is the reality we live in. we have an obligation to move ourselves closer to that. when we know too many children, particularly to many children of color in poor rural areas are denied or have there? -- or have the? overwhelmingly stacked against

them. that is something where we have to have a commitment and a commitment has to be from the earliest ages through what arne duncan calls the bermuda triangle of education and the commitment has to be deep and strong and through that whole process that gives someone the opportunity that others of us are too likely born with. the third point i want to make is i think one of the most critical things is that we establish, and this is what i believe you are trying to do here, is this commitment is where we have an overwhelming

consensus in our society to achieving. i will be very honest in saying the following thing. i think there is a deep double standard when it comes to evaluating programs -- for the poorest children. we do not find out that a particular intervention to cure cancer has failed and therefore decide, well, i guess that is an argument for not investing in research to cure cancer. [applause] we do not decide that if a certain military weapon is not as effective as others that we give up on the basic security of our country where the basic goal of preventing terrorism. we find another way that is more effective. yet, when it comes to programs for helping our poorest children, if it is not 100% effective, people use that as an argument to give up on the

endeavor, instead of going back at and trying again. how many times have i heard "here is an early intervention strategy." but you know why? some of the benefits and fade out. i hear that and i think, ok, what can lead to to make sure that those benefits do not fade out? what can we make sure that those benefits accelerate instead of fadeout? other people will say, that is the reason why we should not do the thing that is working even for several years. that makes no sense to me. he is afraid it has a negative impact on public policy, because when people feel that the admission of any error or failure to get the performance desired is going to be used as the reason to defund the

endeavor, people pull back. they are more afraid of evaluation, accountability. but if we are all committed to the idea is not right, it is not consistent with our values to let large numbers of our children have the? -- have the deck stacked against them -- stacked against them by the accident of their birth, then we will all be in this together. we will analyze and innovate. if something is not working well enough, we will double down on our commitment, not use it as an excuse to pull back. [applause] franklin roosevelt says "it is common sense to try a method. but above all, try something."

that must be our motto. when we engage to make sure our children have higher aspirations in our economy. the fourth point i will make is we are in a tough budget time. this is the time of priorities. where are the priorities of the country going to pay? i am so proud to work for president obama. user is so proud because every time we get to the toughest situations, the toughest budget fights, and the top priorities have to come into play, what the president puts first or at least at the top of his priority list is making sure we are staying with that commitment to invest and innovate in ways to help children who do not come from the best circumstances, have the same opportunities are greater opportunities to succeed.

[applause] that is why even in this tough budget, over $1 billion more for headstart, and every budget, we fight and fight and will continue to fight to not let that it cut back so that tens of thousands of children, three, up four years old lose the chance they have to enter school ready to learn. that is why when we can afford relatively few new programs, one of them is the early learning race to the top, so as we are funding what works, we're looking at what can work better, how we can innovate, what we can learn so we can do better and invest more in children. that is why amongst all the difficult budget challenges the president has stayed with his historic commitment to pell grants and has fought not only to have the largest increase, but to protect that increase budget after budget, in the

toughest times among the toughest choices. those are priorities that should transcend political party and political position. that should be about our national commitment to being a people where every child as a chance to move up. not just in theory, but in fact and reality. last point i would just make -- we really, really as a country have to continue to focus and innovates and rededicate ourselves to ensuring we reach young people early enough to make sure they have the aspirations to seek to achieve as much as they can. college education, high school education. i think one of the things you realize as you get older is that you are born with many gets. one thing many of us who are fortunate enough -- as

fortunate of us realize later -- just by our upbringing, by the accident of our birth, we have to get. and that it is a very high expectation that we will go to college. i have watched friends and relatives. i have seen how children have gone off, look in the wrong path, going off. but that high expectation they are almost born with is like a magnet that pulls them back on the bright track. so many of them, so many children of upper-middle-class families, whatever their problems, come back because of that expectation, because of the opportunity. so many other children are born without that get to. that is a gift we all can play a role with. that is a gift you can aspire and achieve.

would have to keep looking. we have to protect and invest in programs like trio and career academies, things that reach people as early as possible at middle school, to provide that aspiration, that expectation that so many of us are blessed with. that is not an expectation that will be there in a family were no one has ever gone to college, but we have that problem, we have that problem for the excellent teachers who inspire, the excellent after- school programs -- not just a particular moment or a particular course or particular score card, but what they can be. colleges can influence early in the neighborhoods where they exist.

helping the children come to their campus. see what is possible. have a mentor. have someone who believes in them. change not just their test score or their great, but their expectations for what they can and should achieve. all of us, all of us have an obligation to make sure every child has that gift. we play a role. we have a responsibility. i think that is what's brings -- i think that is what brings everybody else together. i also think there is nothing more important in terms of our values of who we are and what we believe in. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> lots of activity outside the supreme court today. here is the plaza. protesters arguing with each other about the health-care law. this morning, justices finished the first of three days of oral argument on the constitutionality of the health- care law. the first question was whether the court was taking on the case prematurely due to a law that says the courts cannot take on a case before a tax has been paid. it is not going to be considered premature. you can hear the oral arguments at -- on c-span3 at about 1:30 eastern time. a c-span poll found that 90% of americans are interested in the outcome of the supreme court decision on health care. slightly more than half plan to listen to this week's oral

arguments. 86% said the supreme court should allow cameras in the hearings. in 74% said the supreme court should allow cameras for all oral arguments. we are asking how interested you are in the oral arguments on health care and you can find a link at c-span.org. >> in march 1979, c-span began televising the house of representatives. today, our content is available on tv, radio, and online. >> my personal appreciation that i owe a debt to others reinforces my view a certain humility should characterize the judicial role. judges and justices are servants of the law, not the other way around. judges are like umpires. umpires to not make the rules. they apply them.

the role of an umpire and the judge is critical to make sure everyone plays by the rules, but it is a limited role. no one went to of all came to see an umpire. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies as a public- service. the house returns for legislative work in about 24 minutes eastern time at 3:00. members will consider five bills including a 90-day extension of the transportation program that runs out at the end of the week. the passage of the bill would mean negotiations could begin with the senate on a compromise bill. also several bills dealing with technical financial regulations. and a look later this week at the house republican 2013 budget plan and a vote on the senate- passed bill to loosen restrictions on small businesses raising funds.

before the house gabbles back in, we're going to look at the economic recovery and the u.s. and abroad with the chairman of the import export bank at the economy segment held earlier this month. >> we will try to bring a little bit more of the international dimension to this question of what happens to the real economy in the united states. fred has the responsibility of running one of the institutions which is a government institution, but there are no tax dollars at stake and he played a role in helping to broaden the export base of the united states. i would like to hear a little bit about that. but president obama has made a pillar of his economic strategy doubling the economic bases in five years. i would love to hear a quick snapshot about what this is supposed to be doing.

>> not only do we not have real dollars, but would not have fake dollars. it was created by president roosevelt. by wto rules, we have to be totally self funding and self sustaining. we generate fees from our customers and we are looking at snapshots of $9.1 billion. about $5 billion of the last 20 years. what we do is we help lovely the plainfield -- level the playing field.

there are about 80 other credit reporting agencies around the world. they are finding a competitor backed by government-supported loans, frequently. we provide a comparable backstop, financing. we have to make a decision. whether it is a caterpillar tractor or in different tractor. so, we'll level the playing field. that is one thing we do. i need working capital. where is it suitable. we cannot collateralized that.

-- we cannot collateralized that. as $4.2 million a year. it exports to 36 countries. guaranteed his receivables. he is now selling to china. we make sure he is not going to collections on not. that is how we move things forward. >> so, what happens, fred, if next week's the bank just disappears and does not exist? how is the world and how is america affected? with something come up in its

place? what would be harmed? what would be the opportunity? >> i do not like that term, because it makes a sound like we are the last gas station. >> so you can jack up your prices? >> it usually people come to us because they cannot find financing elsewhere. recently, we helped finance through bangladesh. the good thing about bangladesh is -- we have the oldest. banks are not lining up 45, 60. if we are not there -- i think the question as if we are not there who else is there?

airbus was not in the competition. the airline was owned by the government. make a decision. they can do this on product attributes. >> the other day, i was in california, and we were driving along between san francisco and santa clara, and there was a big beautiful building, and it just made me think about the government. >> solyndra. >> sorry. >> that is actually another company of their. i know they are happy that i mentioned them. but solyndra raise the big, big

mess in the media. have you had similar cases about the failure of generated about the function? >> they are write-offs at about 9.5% @ year. they are paid for by customers. we have much more reserves. we also can be patient. we have some loans that may have been made in venezuela. we have not had any really large scale kind of loan it systems. first of all, we are not really

concentrated in the energy sector or the loan sector. obviously, we have a concentration in aircraft. that is over 160 airlines and in 60 countries. >> when i listen to president obama when he made the speech about doubling imports -- or exports, excuse me. >> we did that already. [laughter] >> there are another -- there are other ways to think about that. when you double exports, do you do that by earnest work? you just get more u.s. companies focus on markets abroad and you are knocking down barriers that are fairly significant in a lot of other states? you see the discussions in "be economist," the protection of markets abroad.

or do you move in some other way? and i look at the global economy right now. there's a lot of discussion about the sluggishness of the european economy. you need buyers out there. i would love to get your take before you open it up to questions. as you look ahead, not just the "rah rah" thing, but doesn't it look bleak out there? >> first of all, i do not think the president actually announced that. >> in the state of the union trust -- >> your member high-school algebra. so, exports are up. for 20 or 30 years, the united states, and the world for that matter, allow all the debt be accumulate to drive the global

economy. what is really going to drive the global economy in the next decade or two is going to be infrastructure advancements which will lead to global consumer some. there will be a billion people in the middle class globally. that will be on the planet, and india. that is a huge market. in actually very bullish. what the world needs -- it needs -- we may spend too much money on health care. some places are spending 1% or 2%. in china, my recollection was they had something like $25,000 per hospital. medical to farm equipment, airplanes, aeronautics, services. we do love service exports.

-- we do all lot of service exports. what we're not making and selling is clothing, t-shirts, but we are selling these large- scale infrastructure projects that will drive the economy for the next couple of decades. >> we have a question right here. will you identify yourself, please? >> i've a quick question. i am sure you are aware many house republicans do not want to raise the loneliness of the organization. can you talk about what the effect of that would be? >> sure. most organizations will sunset september 30 at. congress renewed it until november. authorization expires at the end

of may. >> i was not really -- i did not know that. currently, one of the things they said was what was the totem amount of indebtedness. -- the total amount of indebtedness. currently we are hovering at about 90. we will quickly run out of head room, frankly, if we do not increase. it is more likely we will run out of head room before we run out of time. the question is, if we do not do it, it does open up the door for our foreign competitors. wringing their hands, wondering if it will be 110, 140, 160.

our competitors are simply licking their chops and thinking, this is great. there will not be a bank to support those u.s. exporters. our competitors are very happy to watch us in this turmoil. >> yes, sir? >> before coming to the embassy, i was running a program that was your competitor in france so we could make sure we got the best product at the best price. many companies about the continent are worried about

competition from china. we are part of the export consensus. what do you do about that? or what do you wish to do about that? >> interesting. china. this is a large threat to the nine states, because there are a lot of forms of capitalism. it does not play by the rules. china is certainly one, but they are not alone. currently, brazil, india, in china provide greater support for their exporters and all other countries combined. those threes -- those there is

an agreement to increase the international framework. we will start working on this in a specific way. until there's more information -- we need more transparency. in the meantime, we have made a decision. we have a transaction in pakistan where we have information on the chinese financing offer. we were able to offset. still at no cost to the taxpayer. we were able to reduce and extend the terms of the chinese had done. pakistan and others are still deliberating, but the financing terms are the same.

we are not going to sit back and wait for this to happen. i need time, we will find a way to offset that if we can. >> let me pose one last question before we close out. those of you who are interested, i wrote a piece for "the atlantic," and you can googol -- google my name and the brics. there was a fascinating, so bring charges. and what the chart would be in the u.s., etc., and what you saw in that chart was over time a

lot of the european share of the global middle-class whittled down to very small tiny bits. and the middle class represented by india and china was very substantial. what you just said about all of those representing really great opportunities also says something else. it was the u.s. economy in that world is probably the one that makes the weather, that creates the gravitational forces are around economic trends. while it may be good for exporters and a certain way, what kind of world is that in which the american middle class is become so small compared to the demands of everywhere else?

and how does that world envisioned the u.s. maintaining such an elaborate system? >> there are more people in the middle. to me, that is probably a world where the middle class have become stakeholders in the society. the more stakeholders we have -- we were just talking about that. more people are interested in the political environment and the economy. and that makes for great stability. they get -- >> they give greater stability, but you have such an achievement in the middle class. those countries and not playing by the rules. do you suppose the rules of basically changed? that they are abiding by our

rules system and are undermined? >> yes, i think the rules have changed. i do not think the rules will continue forever where we have the second-largest economy in the world, the largest exports in the world just going outside the rules. is not tenable. it is not tenable that we're going to have a to hundred $50 trade deficit -- to render $50 trade deficit. -- $250 trade deficit. i do not know the phone of -- the form of that. a lot of times angina, they go into an african country -- a lot of times in china, they go into an african country. there is a lot of other stuff.

they get paid in time. they get paid in low market. a lot of other factors are going in. i agree on a lot of things. i walked through the factory floor. siemens runs a a facility in charlotte, n.c. they constructs components in shanghai and north carolina. in china there is greater automation. they could have done this in brazil. they did not. >> one last question. i wrote a new york times piece awhile back saying our mission

to the world was give us your brawn and not your brains. to some degree, the secret of the success of the nine states has been solving the problems of the rest of the world. -- of the united states since of and the problems of the rest of the world. i know you are a u.s. government official, but take that hat off. do you think policy is to be different given the fact that you do bring in so many smart people, train them, educate them? >> that is crazy. when the name of your bank is the export-import bank, what you do? i like to say, we import on trip lenore's -- wheat import -- we import entrepreneurs.

aere's no better place for quality education. we cannot beat quality importing and exporting. they like the company. you know what? no one is immigrating into china. the are not doing that. they are moving out of china. people moved to the united states. we have to find a way to accommodate that. we know the right answer. just like a lot of things that happened the last year with the debt ceiling. >> would you have one quick drink with us? great. i do want to see a few things in closing. this has been a very long day. we have had more than 850 people cycled through here during the day, and because of that i really owe an incredible debt of gratitude to "the atlantic,"

particularly melete thomas, elisa -- millipede thomas. i want to thank the teams that have done this. i particularly want to thank our underwriters -- the senate for -- the center for audit quality. this conference started by an idea from richard. is a print. he governor's foundation -- richard and i thought about this, and i cannot thank him enough for getting the quality of speakers. it is very are defined and economic forum -- hard to find

an economic forum. you should see the hate mail i got in my in box. i think i got hate mail for every speaker we had. that meant it was a great, that we were able to bring together we have an incredibly, cordial, a couple, 360 degree discussion of the u.s. economy and directions i have not fully expected. we have macro types, labor types, people looking at technology and innovation. those that loved the fed and those that want to see them put to rest real quickly. ant to thank you foryou kno joining us. we're buying the drinks. we would love to have you. thank you all very much.

[applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> the house returns for legislative work now. members will col consider five bills, including one on the kids vacation bill. he gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h. 2779, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2779, a bill to exempt inter-affiliate swaps from certain regulatory requirements put in place by the dodd-frank wall street reform

and consumer protection act. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett, and the gentlelady from ohio, ms. fudge, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognized the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and add extraneous material on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. garrett: i yield myself now about two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. the legislation that is before us today ensures that american businesses will not be needlessly forced to use up capital that they need to create jobs simply to satisfy some duplicate regulations system of under h.r. 2779, the interaffiliates trades would be only exempt from costly margins, clearing and real-time reporting requirements. swap trade facing nonaffiliated

counterparties would be subject to all debt or regulatory requirements under the rule. without this bill, countries could face double, yes, double, the margin in regulatory cost. last june, the controller of the currency, estimated that the margin requirements around the proposed margin rules could conservatively cost $2 trillion, which could increase substantially if regulators force affiliates to post-margins on trades between themselves. without the relief of this bill, american companies face the prospect of having to post double margins on swap trades. one the -- when the swap trades are among themselves and secondly swap trades with the outside this bill strengthens the ability of regulators to oversee the affiliates because those transactions must be reported still to a swap depository. either way, egg lators will be able to monitor these

transactions very cleesely. the -- closely. the bill also gives them the power to regulate swap transactions structured as affiliate trades only for purposes of evading regulation. so to conclude, mr. speaker, i commend the efforts of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle this morning and i urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from ohio is recognized. ms. fudge: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that 10 minutes be controlled by ms. moore of financial services. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. fudge: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. fudge: thank you. today we debate and will vote on h.r. 2779, a bill that addresses a critical issue facing american businesses. i want to thank my fellow ohioans, and ms. moore.

this bill will exempt derivative trades between -- -- between two companies. it would prevent internal interaffiliate swaps to be subject to requirements that were designed to apply to certain external swaps. these swaps are used by many american corporations in multiple sectors of our economy. under the dodd-frank financial reform law, there is no distinction between inter-affiliate and external swaps. regulation of inter-affiliate trade should reflect the economic reality that internal trades do not increase systemic risk. as our nation's economic recovery is getting under way, we need to ensure american businesses remain competitive. we all remember the financial crisis and the pain of recovery that's still evident today. we cannot and should not return to the wild days of wall street. that is why i voted for the

dodd-frank law and why i continue to support it. however, we should allow american businesses acting in good faith to effectively manage risk. by failing to clarify these important distinctions within dodd-frank, we run the risk of staaling job growth and potentially passing costs on to consumers. together with our colleagues on the committee on financialer is vessest and the committee on agriculture, we have strengthened the language of the bill to ensure it cannot be used to evade other financial regulations. h.r. 2779 was approved by the house financial services committee by a vote of 53-0 and the house agriculture committee passed it by unanimous voice vote. it is possible for democrats and republicans to work togethered on legislation that stands to benefit american businesses and our nation's economy. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on h.r. 2779 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized.

mr. garrett: i thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield five minutes to the sponsor of the legislation, mr. stivers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. stivers: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from new jersey for yielding me time and i thank my fellow ohioan, ms. fudge, for her hard work and support on this bill and i'd like to thank ms. moore from wisconsin for her hard work and recognition that she improved the bill. i'd also like to thank the chairs and ranking members of the financial services and agriculture committees and their staffs for their hard work on this bill. mr. speaker, this is bipartisan legislation that clarifies the dodd-frank financial reform act which by now recognizing that there's an important distinction between inter-affiliate swaps and market facing swaps. while market-facing swaps carry risk, inter-affiliate swans do not. they're simply a practice used within corporate families to assign ownership of derivatives

inside the corporate brem. without providing this distinction, corporations using inter-affiliate swaps that manage their risk in a central way would be forced to pay up to three times for the way they do business. in fact, they would collateralize their derivatives against the market on one side and then both sides of the inter-affiliate swap, so they'd pay three times what you would pay if you didn't manage your risk in a centralized way. the irony of that is, managing your risk in a centralized way provides better protection and allows experts to manage your risk. the problem with that also is it would tie up working capital that could be used to create jobs here in the united states and get our economy moving and focus on our recovery. there are important protections in this bill as well that the gentlelady from ohio alluded to. we put protections in this bill to make sure that businesses that utilize this provision are indeed truly affiliated.

we also made sure that there were reporting requirements so that these swaps adhere to transparency in the marketplace. we also made sure that it's very clear that any attempt to use these provisions to evade provisions under the dodd-frank bill for someone who is just trying to evade the law and does not have true inter-affiliate swaps would not be allowed. and we also ensure that regulators keep their authority to manage the safety and soundness of america's financial institution. the bottom line is, we should not overcharge businesses for an accounting method they use that does not generate additional risk. by passing this legislation, we are preventing internal transactions from being subject to duplicative regulations that could drive jobs overseas and increase costs for consumers. this bill was reported unanimously in the financial services committee, 53-0, and it passed by unanimous voice vote in the agriculture committee. i urge my colleagues to vote in

favor of this legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. thank you. the chair: the gentlelady from ohio -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from ohio is recognized. ms. fudge: i want to thank my friend and colleague from ohio for his hard work, i think it's an excellent bill and i'm happy to have co-sponsored it with him. i yield now to my friend from the great state of wisconsin, ms. moore, a member of the financial services committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. moore: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, ms. fudge. i want to first of all -- i'd like to thank chairman bachus and ranking member frank and subcommittee chairman garrett and ranking member ms. waters, mr. stivers and ms. fudge for their leadership that kept the bill moving. other members of the financial services committee, mr. perlmutter, mr. himes, mr. bole, mr. gibson, among others for all their input on this legislation. this is a bill, and some people

here today, mr. speaker, may be surprised to know that it enjoys bipartisan support. because it ensures, number one, the vitality of u.s. and global commerce by exempting inter-affiliate swaps those swap transactions used internally by companies in all our districts from clearing margin and execution requirements. but h.r. 2779 also preserves the all-important reforms of the over-the-counter swap markets as enacted as part of dodd-frank. while providing swap end users that exemption that's responsive to their legitimate business needs for flexibility, risk management, and price stability. now, in congress, four years is an eternity. but i have not forgotten the 2008 financial crisis and the

human hardship that it caused and continues to cause in milwaukee and all across america. and the work continues. and this bill is part of that. i can tell you, mr. speaker, i was proud to be part of an effort that produced dodd-frank. legislation that will improve accountability and transparency in the financial market. including the pre-dodd-frank unregulated, over-the-counter derivatives market which played a central role in the crisis. however, i did not vote for dodd-frank as retribution against -- against wall street or any punitive means. i voted for dodd-frank to enhance the transparency of markets and promote prosperity for americans going forward. for that reason, i'm happy to support h.r. 2779.

a little bit of background about the critical need the bill addresses and how a bipartisan collaboration produced the final bill. swaps are versatile financial tools that have become instrumental for the management and risk and for allowing companies to more efficiently transact in global markets. swaps aid companies to hedge and to mitigate things like interest rates and currency exposure. but also more exotic risks associated with unique markets and businesses. h.r. 2779 clarifies that end users, not investors, have the ability to hedge risk for legitimate business purposes. now the flip side of swaps are that they may also be used to acquire risk by investors. in that capacity, swaps allocate risk to parties that want to and are able to bear the risk. however, in the unregulated,

pre-dodd-frank world, swaps and derivative -- over-the-counter swaps and derivatives lacked transparency and allowed risk to pool and gather in a way that helped drive the financial crisis. dodd-frank duly addressed the lessons of the financial crisis by pushing as many product types as possible to be centrally cleared and traded on eelect -- electronic exchanges or other facilities, subjecting swap dealers and major market participants to capital and margin requirements and requiring public reporting of transactions and pricing data of both cleared and uncleared swaps. h r. 2779 does not, i repeat, does not disturb any of the important reforms accomplished in dodd-frank. inter-affiliate swaps are simply transactions between a single group of affiliated entities.

in other words, many entities that prepare financial statements on a consolidated basis. therefore, inter-affiliate swaps do not add or subtract from overall systemic risk. therefore, 2779 -- h.r. 2779 simply builds on the original intent of -- my original intent of voting for dodd-frank, the promotion of u.s. prosperity going forward. and through the process of drafting the bill, a numb of revisions were adopted thanks to the thoughtful input of many of our colleagues. the definition of control, which is central to the issues of a legitimate interaffiliate transaction was clarified. anti-evasion measures were added so that the exemption would not lead to abuse. language was adopted that made sure standard authority over interaffiliate banks was

preserved and it does nothing to end that. this is a good bill, mr. speaker. i urge my colleagues to back this legislation and i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: i thank the speaker and at this point i yield three minutes toe the gentleman from texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from -- three minutes to the gentleman from texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. conaway: those swaps is an important tool for the companies to manage their risk. as a member of the house agriculture committee and the chair of the general farm commodities and risk management subcommittee, i want to commend mr. stivers and ms. fudge for bringing together a commonsense bill that will offer our businesses and agricultural

firms certainty about a small and important dodd-frank rulemaking. it can yield economic benefits and reduce that firm's overall credit risk. in addition to creating operating savings to the economy at scale, these companies can also reduce a number of external facing transactions altogether. by looking at a firm's entire risk portfolio, they can reduce the need for entering the market. fewer swaps means less money tied up in clearing, execution and more money being spent on hiring americans, buying splice rand funding innovation. unfortunately, ambiguity in the dodd-frank law can undo this innovative risk management strategy. if interaffiliate swaps are treeded are the same way as other swaps, they can they can have the same swap twice. once for the public trade and once for the internal trade that assigns a swap to the appropriate business unit.

needless to say, posting margin for the same transaction twice means that companies are likely to abandon the use of interaffiliate swaps altogether and with it the efficiencies that made the strategy attractive in the first place and thereby driving up their business costs and risks. it's important to note this legislation simply clarifies the intent of congress. it does not repeal in the protections in dodd-frank. it does not create risk rand does not pose a systemic risk to the financial markets. it will unlock the value of the limited resources. i want to thank mr. stivers and ms. fudge for bringing forward this lgs and chairman lucas and -- this legislation and chairman lucas and chairman bachus. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from ohio is recognized. ms. fudge: we have no support

speakers because we are going to reserve. -- so we are going to reserve. mr. garrett: i was hoping the gentlelady had more speakers. without seeing him here -- without being here, i'll yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from ohio. ms. fudge: i want to thank everyone involved in this bill and ask my colleagues to please support it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentlelady from wisconsin is recognized. ms. moore: thank you, mr. speaker. again, very, very happy to have been part of this very important initiative, and with that i'd yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2779, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the

affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. garrett: mr. speaker, we would ask for the yeas and nays on this. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey has requested the yeas and nays. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. garrett: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2682, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2682, a bill to provide end user exemptions from certain provisions of the commodity exchange act and the securities exchange act of 1934, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett, and the gentleman from texas, mr. green, each will control 20 minutes.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and add any extraneous material on the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. garrett: at this point, i'd like to yield myself three minutes for my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. garrett: mr. speaker, this bipartisan bill would do what? it would provide a clear exemption from margin requirements. margin requirements imposed by the dodd-frank act on, where, on swap transactions for so-called end users. and who are derivatives to hedge their business risk and whose swap transactions really don't pose a systemic risk to the financial system. you know, following the really late night of the dodd-frank conference, there were numerous assurances made that margin would not be required on end users transactions. now, these assurances were subsequently followed up by formal letters and colloquys by the architects of the bill.

it was clearly intended to -- unfortunately, the regulators have interpreted it a different way and they have interpreted dodd-frank's somewhat rushed language as not providing a clear exemption for these end users. now representative grimm's bill here finally provide american businesses with the certainty they need to use derivatives to hedge against business risk. end users, you know, were not the cause of the financial crisis, and by any measure whatsoever, end users are not systemically significant. and who are these end users that we're talking about here? well, they are the main street businesses from all over the country that represent all types of industries that rely on the use of derivatives to responsibly hedge their own business risk. and so they should not be and were not considered under the same umbrella, if you will, as regulations that banks are that subject to posting margins on their swap transactions. so requiring end users to

subject to a mandatory margin requirement, what it basically does is it forces entities to act as banks. it would tie up working capital that otherwise could and should be use to expand business investments, build factories or compreat jobs. so i conclude on this, it is critical we provide u.s. main street businesses throughout this country with this important certainty, with this clarity. and so i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bipartisan bill. and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. and mr. speaker, i'd like to note that i will be yielding 10 minutes of time to my colleague from the ag committee.

mr. speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. green: thank you. mr. speaker, i do want to concur with those who announced that bipartisan is alive and well -- bipartisanship is alive at the committee level and on the floor today. i want to thank mr. garrett, mr. grimm for nair cooperation and our ability to work together. i'd also like to especially thank the staff of the full committee and the staff of each congressional office for the outstanding work the staff members have done. it is very difficult to get legislation to this point without the benefit of staff having had a helping hand, and we thank the staff. mr. speaker, the passage of the wall street reform and consumer protection act of 2010 established a system for regulating the over-the-counter, that's the o.t.c., derivatives market. authorities provided to the securities and exchange commission, the commodity futures trading commission and the banking regulators which

have been proposing the regulation that will eventually govern the o.t.c. derivatives market. previously banks and other financial companies were able to amass considerable risk using o.c.t. derivatives without reporting to the regulator or to the public. the wall street reform act requires that most derivatives transactions, primarily those between dealers, now be centrally cleared rand exchange traded -- and exchange traded whenever for and all transaction data be collected and publicly reporting at clearing-houses. it is intended to allow regulators and the public to better analyze the derivatives

risk-taking activities of banks and other financial companies. the new rules are not intended to hold in place onerous requirements on companies that use derivatives only as the means to hedge the risk of the company. h.r. 2682 clarifies congress' intent when passing the wall street reform legislation by more clearly exempting end users that are only using swaps to hedge or to mitigate commercial risk. h.r. 22 -- h.r. 2682 is also consistent with our colloquy between representatives frank and peterson as well as a letter from senators lincoln and dodd which noted that the reform legislation provided the regulators with sufficient authority to exempt end users from the margin requirements.

this bill passed favorably out of both the house financial services committee and house agriculture cre with strong bipartisan support -- committee with strong bipartisan support. in no way should h.r. 2682 undo any of the important protections of reform legislation. its purpose is to recognize that end users' responsibilities to use swaps as a part of their business. i congratulate mr. grimm and mr. peterson and i encourage you to support this bill. i will reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: thank you. at this time i'd like to yield five minutes to the gentleman from new york, the author of the underlying legislation and also someone who's been instrumental to make sure we worked in a bipartisan manner

to get it to the floor today. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. grimm: i want to thank chairman garrett and thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of my legislation, h.r. 2682, the business risk mitigation and price stabilization act of 2011. h.r. 2682, i'm very proud to say, is truly a bipartisan bill. and i'd like to thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, especially mr. peters of michigan, mr. upton of michigan and mr.oens of new york for working with me on this extremely important issue. h.r. 2682 will clarify congress' intent under the dodd-frank act and provide an explicit exemption from having to post margin for true commercial end users of over-the-counter derivatives. despite clear legislative history to the contrary, regulators continue to misinterpret the dodd-frank act, giving them authority to sbose margin requirements on end users. this bill will ensure once and for all that true end users are not subjected to margin requirements that congress never intended to be applied

and make sure that regulators do not attempt to exercise authorities they were never granted by congress in ways that would certainly do harm to the economy, specifically by diverting working capital away from investment and expansion which fuels economic growth and certainly job creation. true end users are firms and companies that use derivatives to manage their various financial risk. for example, firms use these products to lock in the costs of raw materials they are going to need in the future which ultimately protects american consumers and creates jobs here in america. if true end users were required to post margin, tony blair hedging costs may -- their hedging costs may become so far, leading to great price variations for raw materials and ultimately an increase in consumer prices for a whole host of products, from food to energy. at a time when constituents in staten island and brooklyn are

struggling with sky high tolls, rising gas prices, they simply can't afford to pay more for items they rely on every day. furthermore, this legislation will not only help to keep consumer prices table but will also protect u.s. jobs. the cost savings end users will realize will not only be required to post margin, will free up capital for business expansion and job creation. in fact, it's been shown that imposing a 3% margin on over-the-counter derivatives held by standard & poor's companies could cut -- s&p 500 companies could cut spending by up to $6.7 billion. that could lead to 100,000 to 130,000 job losses at a time when unemployment is 8.3%. this cannot be overlooked or overstated. finally, without this clear exemption provided in this legislation, i believe that u.s.-based commercial end users may continue to hedge and move their derivatives products

overseas. that will put u.s.-based financial institutions at a major disadvantage and driving more u.s. jobs overseas. in addition, this could also encourage regulatory arbitrage. in closing, i ask that my colleagues support this commonsense, bipartisan, pro-jobs legislation, and i yield back the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new york is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of 2682 and i would like to thank chairman lucas and ranking member peterson for their work on this issue as well as mr. scot from the agriculture committee and our colleagues from the committee, mr. peters, mr. green, and mr. grimm. as a co-sponsor and one of the

authors of the legislation, i believe the definition of an end user needs to be very specific to ensure that the cftc implements the intent of congress in exempting true end users from certain derivatives regulations. my district in upstate new york contains a number of entities that would be categorized as swap dealers under the proposed rules, including farm credit institutions, community banks and electric cooperatives. mr. owens -- mr. owens: none of these were intended to be part of this. if forced to comply, it could make the services currently offered by end users cost prohibitive and impede their ability to conduct business, likely resulting in higher

prices for my constituents and diverting capital that could otherwise be invested and used to help create jobs. these are all negative consequences that our economy can ill afford at this time. these financial instruments are particularly important for dairy farmers in my district who depend on their cooperative -- cooperatives to offer them tools to manage price risk and lock in margins. a local cooperative must have the ability to enter into swaps with its members and have affordable access to the market with other counterparts to offset the riske of providing swaps and contracts. under the cftc's proposed rules, the cooperatives would be regulated as a swap dealer even though they're using derivative contracts to support the viability of their members. there is no doubt in my mind that the derivatives market needs to be regulated and certain participants need to post margin to cover their trades in order to mitigate systemic risk throughout the

financial system. however, this legislation will codify congress' intent and ensure that commercial end users can continue to hedge against risk. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this important bipartisan legislation and i reserve the -- i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: thank you, once again, mr. speaker, i would like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. conaway. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. conaway: thank you mr. speaker, and thank you to my friend mr. garrett of new jersey. i rise in full support of h.r. 268 , the business risk mitigation and price stabilization act. as chairman of the commodities farm committee i'm happy to see this brought to the floor today. it will offer mitigation for one of the most important points that underlie dodd-frank, that

end users should not be required to post par gins. congress could not have been clearer in its intent to temperature users from post margins for the risk mitigation transactions, yet despite our clear intent, regulators have proposed rules that could result in margin requirements for these end users. every dollar that a business has tied up in a margin account is a dollar they cannot spend on job creation or other productive business purposes. the chamber of commerce recently estimated the cost of requiring these end users to post margins could reach billions of dollars and cost over 100,000 jobs, all other the objections, clear and concise objections, of congress. this legislation simply affirms the original position of congress that nonfinancial end users do not need to tie up scarce resources to participate in the swaps markets, much like h.r. 2779, which we debated earlier, the business misk mitigation and stabilization act

would not undermine the established goals of dodd frank. nondf of dodd-frank. these end users represent less than 10% of the swaps market and have never posed a risk to the market. as we continue to advance legislation to put america back to work, we should prevent unnecessary regulatory burden on businesses. i'm pleased to support h.r. 2682 because it would do just that. i want to thank mr. grimm, mr. peters, mr. scot, mr. owens for sponsoring this important legislation. i am pleased to note that it is a bipartisan effort supported overwhelmingly by both committees. i want to thank my chairman, mr. lucas, and chairman bachus, for this. this legislation will protect jobs and businesses struggling to meet the multitude of mandates coming out of washington. thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: i close by indicating

i concur with my colleagues, this legislation enjoys the bipartisan support that we believe will help us to get a message to our members that it is a good piece of legislation that should be totally supported by the membership. i ask my colleagues and members of the congress to please support this legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: i think we have one more speaker, i yield to the gentleman from georgia, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for twomens. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 2682. this bill provides a clear exemption for nonfinancial end users qualifying for the exemption of legal cause 7 of the dodd-frank consumer protection act. across the country, consumers and businesses alike are confronted with risks associated

with their day-to-day operations. to mitigate this, they use many methods which may arise or otherwise be less specific. consumers benefit from these prudent risk management practices through lower volatility in the day-to-day prices in products they purchase. congress provided an exemption from clearing and margin requirements for businesses and individuals who are not financial institutions. by providing this exemption, less than 10% of the capital involved in the derivative markets is relieved of burdensome regulations and can be kept in the economy. to further the official goal, we clarify congress' intent of keeping much-needed capital in the u.s. markets which place them -- play a role in the country's continued economic growth. i ask my colleagues to support h.r. 2682, so businesses and individuals can manage their risk while not being constrained

with the burdensome capital requirements. i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: does the gentleman -- they have no other speakers? we yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2682? those in favor say aye. -- as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended and the bill is passed. without objection, the motion is reconsidered and is laid on the table. mr. garrett: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman requests the yeas and nays. the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from illinois seek recognition? >> i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 3298.

the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3298, a bill to establish the position of special assistant for veterans affairs in the department of housing and urban development and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlelady from illinois, mrs. biggert, and the gentleman from texas, mr. green, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from illinois. mrs. biggert: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and add extraneous material on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 3298, the homes for heroes act of 2011. sadly, approximately 1/5 of our country's homeless population consists of veterans.

in part that's because re-adapting to civilian life is not always easy, even for some of our country's true heroes. but research shows with a stable living situation, our veterans are far more likely to overcome other challenges. these are men and women who braved bullets and basic trains to protect our country and freedom. they have the will and strength to overcome any obstacle but it is our job to give them the tools. that is why it's essential that h.u.d. and the v.a. work hand in hand to help our veterans get the housing assistance they have earned. the homes for heroes act of 2011, of which i'm a co-sponsors, which was introduced by my colleague from texas, mr. green, and my colleague from new york, mr. grimm, establishes the position of special assistant for veterans affair within h.u.d. to effectively coordinate services among veterans and serve as h.u.d.'s liaison to the department of veterans' affairs,

u.s. interagency counsel on homelessness, state and local officials and nonprofit service organizations. the bill requires thoud submit a comprehensive annual report to congress on the housing needs of homeless veterans and the steps undertaken by h.u.d. to meet those needs. in h.r. 298 takes these steps with an existing budgetary constrains at no additional cost to taxpayers. similar to h.r. 403 and h.r. 3329, the homes for heroes act of 2008 and 2009, both of which passed this house, this legislation has strong bipartisan support. once enacted, the legislation will help us better understand the needs of homeless veterans while fostering a better working relationship between h.u.d. and the v.a. the result will be better services for our heroes and while we can never repay our veten ran -- veterans for the selfless sacrifices they've

made, we can work to ensure that they have a place to call home when they come home. i urge my colleagues to support this bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. i especially thank my colleague, mrs. biggert, for her support of this legislation as well as many other speeses of legislation that we've had the privilege of working together on. mr. speaker, i'd like to thank you as well for your co-sponsorship of the legislation. it means a lot to have bipartisan support for our warriors. those who are willing to go to distant places and risk their lives such that we may have better lives. many of them do not return home as they left. many of them find themselves living on the streets of life. and as a result, we believe it's necessary for us to do all that we can to help them secure the kind of home, the kind of

housing, the kind of -- the kinds of services that they need so that they can re-integrate themselves into american life. this bill, the homes for heroes bill, will help to some degree with our goals and ambitions of helping them to have a place to call home. the bill does place a person in h.u.d. whose sole responsibility it will be to monitor homelessness among our veterans. this person is to file an annual report with congress on the status of homelessness among veterans in this country and to give us some insight as to how we are progressing in eliminating and abolishing homelessness among our veterans it's not going to do everything we need to do but it's a step in the right direction. if i may say so i'd like to commend h.u.d. what has been

done thus far because there is a person who does this sort of thing with h.u.d. currently. but what we are trying to do now is institutionalize the position such that administrations may come and go but the position will still be there and our veterans will receive the kind of help that they merit and deserve. mr. speaker, in our country in 2009 approximately 136,334 people who self-identified themselves as veterans spent at least one night in an emergency shelter or transitional housing program. that speaks volumes about the amount of work that we have to do. while 136,000 may not seem like a lot to some people, i contend if we have but one veteran who is finding himself or herself in transitional housing or sleeping in a shelter or sleeping on the streets of life, i think we have work to do. this bill will help us with our

veterans who are doing this, who are sleeping in this transitional housing. i'd also add that our veterans compose about 16% of the homeless adults while they are 8% of the american population. 8% of the population but of those who are homeless they are 16%. this, of course, is something we cannot continue to tolerate, so i am going to beg that all of my colleagues, please, give serious consideration to this piece of legislation. it will not break the bank. it may not do all that we'd like to have done, but it's a step in the right direction and somebody will be helped as a result of what we do today. i beg of my colleagues, please support this legislation. i thank mrs. biggert for the outstanding work she has done. i especially want to thank staffers who worked with us on this piece of legislation, and i can say candidly, mr. speaker, that but for the

assistance of our staffers, we might not be standing here today. they do make a difference, and i'd have the veterans know that behind every member, we have staffers who are working to help them return to our homeland and integrate themselves or reintegrate themselves into society. i'll reserve and take a moment and hear my colleague. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: we have no further speakers on this side of the aisle. if the gentleman would like to close. mr. green: i'll simply close by saying this -- mr. speaker, thank you, again, for your support of this piece of legislation, and i'd hope that my colleagues will give it the kind of consideration that our warriors are giving to us when they decide that they are willing to go to distant places and make great sacrifices for us. please give it consideration. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from illinois.

mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time -- i'd like to commend the gentleman from texas, mr. green, for all of his hard work on this issue. it is really nice to have these bills that are bipartisan in nature and certainly homelessness is something we all, all care about and would like to find a way to end homelessness, and there's different categories of that and i think that the veterans certainly is very, very important. so with that i have no further request for time and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3298. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the

motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlelady from illinois seek recognition? mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 4014. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 287. h.r. 4014, a bill to amend the federal deposit insurance act with respect to information provided to the bureau of consumer financial protection. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlelady from illinois, mrs. biggert, and the gentleman from texas, mr. green, each will

control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from illinois. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to add extraneous material on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield to the sponsor of this bill, the gentleman from arizona -- michigan -- i always do that. the gentleman from michigan, mr. huizenga, for as much time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. huizenga: it might not be the right state but right pronounciation. that doesn't happen often. so thank you. the consumer financial protection bureau fails to safeguard proprietary information given to the bureau by regulated entities. i rise today in support of my bill, h.r. 40 14, which will create more peace of mind while

offering more oversight and consumer protections to hardworking taxpayers. if you remember one thing, remember this -- we all agree on stringent consumer protections. this bill is a commonsense measure that adds necessary oversight to the bureau. specifically, h.r. 4014 would immediately close a loophole in the law that was created under the creation of the cfpb. currently information collected by the cfp fwmbings from financial institutions is not protected by the same confidentiality provisions that other financial regulators are required to provide. additionally, we must ensure parity between state banks, supervisors and other state regulatory agencies that oversee nonbanks. h.r. 4014 would protect that data that depository and

nondepository has. therefore, giving financial institutions the much-needed certainty and -- that the information will be kept private. unlike current statutes regarding other federal agencies, excessing -- accessing relevant information, the dodd-frank bill did not have such protections despite they wouldn't share such information. the simple truth is if we don't pass 4014 the cfpb could share information to third parties. absent this specific legislation, the courts permitted access to this information. although the bureau said they will take reasonable steps to protect pry pry tear information, we are not sure. therefore, we must pass this bill to restrict them from doing so. even president barack obama's

secretary of the cfpb said he would be supportive of a legislation solution to ensure privileged information is not leaked to third parties through the cfpb. my bill is that real legislative solution. this is a commonsense fix that will put an end to the needless uncertainty and legal costs to pothe the cfpb and to financial institutions. mr. speaker, while i believe this issue must and will eventually be addressed in the dodd-frank act, this is a very important step. i urge swift adoption of this important legislation, to restore genuine accountability to the cfpb, and for delivering a more efficient and effective government for america's hardworking taxpayers. i look forward to working with my senate colleagueses to make sure that this is rectified and sent to the president for his signature. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker, h.r. 4014 is a

good piece of legislation and it is designed to protect proprietary information which is exceedingly important in the business world. this bill ensures that when an institution smits confidential information to the cfpb, the information will remain confidential. this bill is in line with existing law for other financial regulators. we have confirmed that the cfpb believes this fix to be acceptable. the bill is identical to legislation introduced by the senate banking committee chairman johnson and ranking member shelby. this legislation will give financial institutions legal certainty when turning over data to the cfpb. mr. speaker, current law states that a bank does not waive

confidentiality and thereby should not have to risk its disclosure of information to other parties. these parties are sometimes engaged with litigation against each other. this piece of legislation will assure a party that its information given to the cfpb will not end up in the hands of another party that may be engaged in litigation. this is but one example. this bill is designed to protect pry pry tear information. i want to thank the gentleman for introducing this piece of legislation. i thank mrs. biggert for, again, showing the bipartisanship that has helped bring this legislation to the floor. and i at this time i'll reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from illinois. mrs. biggert: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in support of h.r. 4014,

a bill to ensure that confidentiality -- confidential, private information collected by the cfpb remains confidential. this legislation addresses a crucial oversight within dodd-frank act. under current law many supervised institutions have expressed concern that supplying privileged information to the cfpb at the government's request could avoid attorney-client privileges against third parties. under the new director, richard cordray, as was talked about, hasing a nodged constitutional concerns and indicated he would be supportive of a legislative solution. and h.r. 4014 is that solution. mr. huizenga's bill makes it explicitly clear that having

privileged material to the cfpb does not waive attorney-client or work product privileges to third parties. it also guarantees that any privileged party that the cfpb shares with other federal agencies will remain privileged. this bill has earned nearly universal support from republicans, democrats, regulated institutions, the regulators, senators, members of the house. our financial house financial services committee supported this. this should be on the president's desk in a matter of weeks, not month. the senate introduced an identical measure. s. 2099, which also awaits consideration. passing this legislation today marks an important milestone. it is the first time that both the house and the senate members on both sides of the aisle are acknowledging and connecting -- correcting a

serious flaw in the dodd-frank act. with that i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 4014 and commend mr. huizenga for the hard work on this issue. and i have no further speakers. if the gentleman would like to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. i have no additional speakers, and i would simply encourage my colleagues to support the legislation and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas yields back. jafmente illinois. mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, with that i'd again commend the sponsor of this bill, mr. huizenga, and i thank mr. green for managing this bill, and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 4014. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are

suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pusuant to clause 12a of rule 1rk the house will stand in recess subject to the call of the chair.

there will be more argument tomorrow. you can listen to the argument on c-span3 at about 1:00. a c-span poll finds 95% of americans are interested in the outcome of the supreme court decision on health care. 86% said the nation's highest court should allow television cameras in the hearings. 74% support tv coverage of all supreme court hearings. right now, on c-span facebook page, we're asking how interested you are in the supreme court arguments on health care.

>> in march of 1979, c-span began televising the u.s. house of representatives. today, our content of politics and public affairs, non-fiction books, and american history, is available on television, radio, and online. >> i owe a great debt to others reinforces my view that a certain humility should characterize the judicial role. judges are like umpires. umpires do not make the rules, they applied them. the role of an umpire and the judge is critical. they make sure everybody plays by the rules. it is a limited role. nobody ever went to a ball game to see the umpire. >> a house hearing on the method

used by the transportation and security administration, including the use of body scanners at airports. this is about two hours. taxpayers have a right to know what they get from their government.

we will work tirelessly and partnership with citizen watchdogs to deliver the facts to the american people and bring genuine reform to the federal bureaucracy. this is our mission statement. today, we are calling the third hearing of -- conducted by the oversight committee, a joint hearing, we plan to hold the least two additional oversight hearings in april and may. there is no question that the tsa serves a vital role. in a post-9/11. , are we getting value for our money? do we have a system which is complete and takes care of all of us? or do we have a system -- fairly expensive, labor-intensive system that is not making us safer? in a time of budget limitations,

tsa must deliver value to the american people. with more than 65,000 men and women working, it is not a small agency. this is more men and women working for an aviation based safety organization then build although ford automobiles in america combined. only one-quarter of the funds used by tsa come from aviation fees. three-quarters come directly from the american people. those of us who do not fly are paying a heavy price for those who do. even the $1.5 billion paid for out of landing fees and ticket fees, to run the airports is a high price to pay. a burden, if you will, on our efficiency. whether the dollars come from ticket fees or come from the taxpayer directly, it is

essential that we review gtsa's effectiveness. in addition to public outrage over privacy violations, classified reports painted a dire picture of ineffectiveness. gao believes screening of passengers by observation techniques, which has already cost taxpayers $800 million, is ineffective. congress should consider limiting funds for this program. gao claimed tsa deployed spots before having solid scientific basis for its effectiveness. when it worked, it was only an accident. despite the potential $3.2

billion cost to the federal government, gao continues to find that tsa has properly -- improperly packed -- has failed to administer the edification credentials. i have seen this failure myself. i have seen a mandated id waived, showing a picture id is not what congress mandated. deploying these and applying them in a way in which they are affected is essential. let's remember, at a cost a lot of money to produce the cards. using it as a high-priced id card is not acceptable. without creating a plan to upgrade the detection system, which will cost $964 million to the taxpayer ,tsa cannot insure updating will be feasible or cost effective.

let me reiterate. it is an important system. whether it is the inadvertent touching of fertilizer or a real operational use of explosives, we need to know and we need to screen. it is an effective tool if it works. if it does not work 100 percent of the time, we have the biggest problem impossibly have. lastly, the visual intermodal prevention and response program faces script -- faces serious questions from security experts and legal scholars about the effectiveness and constitutionality of this initiative. tsa is not performing or taking into serious consideration the cost benefits. that is a big part of what this committee is here to ask questions on today. not, it is nice to have? -- not, up might work knack

might it work? but we do know is we have fielded products that do not work in the past. when it becomes known by the public that a product has a flaw, that product becomes essentially useless. sadly, what we discover is even when it becomes public, there is no other tool. we continue screening people knowing that screening alone is not enough and the public knows that. with that, i recognize the chairman of the subcommittee on a visit -- aviation infrastructure. >> thank you very much. thank you for organizing this important hearing and doing so with the transportation

committee. after 9/11, the transportation committee held a number of hearings to attempt to determine what happened and what needed to be done. it became very clear at those hearings that the existing federal policies of requiring easy access to the cockpit in case there was a medical emergency or something of that sort was not the most secure way to go. that policy was changed and now our cockpits are pardoned. it is difficult for a passenger to take over an airplane and turn it into a weapon. that is the most significant security changed since that time. beyond that, if it were to go to

a football stadium or a cruise liner any sort of modes of transportation. we do have a security problem, but it is not restricted to airlines. the major part of the danger of airlines, i think, was dealt with when it became impossible for people to take over and turn it into a weapon. of course, we have this regime that all of us experienced -- we are inspecting millions of travelers, hundreds of thousands every month, the same people over and over again. that has to be wasteful and intrusive. this has been going on now for

10 years. if it is going to go on for another 10 years, it behooves us to come up with a more efficient, less intrusive, more sensible program so that we concentrate on where there might be a risk rather than inspecting the same people over and over again. when we had hearings back at the time of 9/11, experts testified before the transportation committee from israel and in the number of other countries that have faced very heightened security threats. all the things they advised, we have not done. trying to track people when they buy tickets. working on the intelligence side of things to see if there is some sort of a likelihood that

that person might be a risk. ways of inspecting people and how they behave, not just at the airports. looking at how they interact with ticket agents. held aba and wanted at the airport, but as they go about their business -- not just how they be paid at the airport, but as they go about their business. there are a lot more strategic and intelligent ways to go about this. then spending hundreds of millions of dollars. changing the psychology of americans to have been starting to feel that they have done something wrong and there been subject to shakedowns. as we do when you're worried

about someone who has committed a crime. we are assuming everybody is guilty and treating them like prisoners. they are american taxpaying citizens. i feel that we have a lot to do to straighten this mess out. it is not a cost-effective approach. after 10 years, we owe more to the american people. >> thank you for having this hearing. >> i ask unanimous consent that our colleague from tennessee be allowed to participate in today's hearing. i will note that the ranking members of each of the committee's are driving and and have been delayed. it is not a flight as far as i know. they will make their opening statement after our witnesses. i am sure they will be your guide then. with that, i would like to introduce our first panel.

mr. steven sadler, the transportation security administration. mr. steven lord is the director for homeland security of the u.s. government accountability office. rear admiral is the u.s. coast guard and the assistant commandant a former marine safety security and storage shed. -- stewardship. pursuant to the rules of this committee, would you all please rise to take the oath? raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear the

testimony you're about to be -- about to give is the truth and nothing but the truth? but the record indicate that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. face is upsor's there. he began a tradition of explaining the obvious. he did it every time and i appreciated it. your entire opening statements will be placed in the record. in front of you, you have the countdown clock. like so many things that you looked at, doesn't really matter? the answer is please summarize if you run out of time. we would like to get through all of you and get you added. any time if -- out of here in a timely fashion. you have five minutes. >> good afternoon. thank you for the opportunity to

testify today. tsa has made significant strides in our utilization over the past year. automatic target recognition software, and hence passenger privacy while streamlining the checkpoint screening process. in the fall of 2011, my office began to for the development -- develop performance targets. tied to this, we implemented a plan to increase utilization across the nation. as a result of these efforts, at our performance between february 2011 and february 2012 improved by 200%. in addition, we are employing technology to automatically verify passenger documents. it will eventually replace the current procedures used to detect altered documents.

we will deploy this technology for operational testing beginning next month. technology is only one mechanism to identify potential threats. the spot program uses behavior observation and analysis to identify high-risk individuals who may pose a threat to transportation security. spot was scientifically validated in 2011 by the science and technology division. represent the most thorough analysis of any screening program to date. no other counter-terrorism program is not to have been subjected to such a rigorous evaluation. the study revealed that spot was significantly more effective at identifying high-risk passengers than random screening profiles -- protocols. subsequent to the validation study, we took steps last fall to enhance the program. under a new pilot, the behavior

detection officers employed a special interview technique. this interaction enables officers to better verify or dispel concerns about suspicious behavior and anomalies. preliminary analysis shows an increase in the rate of detection of high risk passengerst. sa is conducting an analysis with the directorate to inform the validation process. completing this program deployment, we have begun teaching a tactical communications course for our front line workforce. this training focuses on active listening, empathy, and will be complete by the end of 2012. these initiatives are some of the key aspects that provide the backbone for our overall risk

based strategy. this strategy demonstrates our commitment to move away from the one size fits all security model. this approach was necessary after 9/11 and has been effective over the past decade, we will move towards a more recent -- intuitive solution. the widely known is thepre- check. 600,000 passengers have experienced an expedited screening. by the end of 2012, we expect to offer passengers the benefits. we just expanded to include active duty u.s. military traveling out of reagan national airport. in addition, last fall we implemented this screening procedures for children 12 and under, allowing them to leave their shoes on and go through a less intrusive screening process. this last monday, we began

testing simply modified procedures for passengers 75 and older. we're supporting efforts to test identity based screening for airline pilots. over 470,000 uniformed pilots have cleared security through the non crewmember program. these initiatives have allowed us to expedite the screening process for children, military, frequent fliers, and the elderly. they resulted in fewer requirements and a significant reduction in patdowns. by enhancing the effectiveness of our current programs, tsa continues to work toward our goal of providing the most effective security and the most efficient ways. thank you for the opportunity to testify. i would like to introduce my colleague. >> the gentleman is recognized.

>> good afternoon. i appreciate the opportunity to testify on some of the work we are doing in coordination with the united states coast guard to strengthen security. the transportation credential program is an important security measure designed to ensure that individuals who pose a threat to security do not gain on escorted access. prior to this program, there was no standard verification or background check for entrance to reports. -- a port. the identity verification requirements of the program supports the multi layer approach to protecting the nation's transportation systems and enhance security at airports. several key objectives were met during the initial rollout of

the program in october of 2007. these include milestones for implementing enrollment sides, conducting assessments. on april 15, 2009, u.s. coast guard regulation implemented the requirement for all unescorted workers in secure areas and all mariners to possess a valid. almost 2 million transportation workers have received them. this past february, holders -- when applying for a hazardous material endorsement on a state issued commercial driver's license. hazmat applicants do not need to go to an enormous center predicting go directly to the state licensing agency to apply for this endorsement. 11 states have availed themselves of this capability. we also recently awarded the universal enrollment services

contract. this new capability will allow individuals to apply for multiple programs at the same location. allow enrollment for new and future programs. on may 31, 2011, we completed the required data collection phase. tsa gathered in permission from seven ports, at 13 facilities. -- gathered information from seven ports, 13 facilities. besides purported -- these sites provide data. the final report was submitted to congress february 27, 2012. this data provides a clear picture of the likely impact of using readers at maritime facilities. this pilot conclude that system's function properly when they are designed, installed,

and operated in a manner consistent with the characteristic and business state of the vessel operation. thank you for the opportunity to testify. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the progress and related challenges and deploying three t security programs. my observations are based on a large body of work. i would first like to note that tsa have made some notable achievements since the 9/11 attacks. as the witnesses noted today, some remaining challenges still exist. the first program of like to discuss is the behavior detection program. also called spot. this program consists of over 3000 behavior detection officers that are deployed to over 160 u.s. airports.

this program is a key part of t. essays efforts to focus more attention on dangerous -- tsa's efforts to focus more attention on dangerous behavior. much more work remains to fully validate, establish sound performance metrics, and assess costs and benefits. as we noted in our prior work, all these additional steps could take several more years. as we noted in our report on the program, we deployed spot nationwide before determining whether it had a valid scientific basis. the good news is that they did complete an initial validation study in april of 2011. it concluded that the program was more effective than random screenings. however, it was not designed to fully answer the very important question of whether you can use

behavior detection principles for counterterrorism purposes in the airport and are met. a scientific consensus does not exist. another key report recommendation was to develop better performance measures. the importance of this is underscored by looking at the arrests made under the program. 27% of the 300 spots arrests made in 2010 were illegal aliens raising questions about mission focus. the second program i would like to discuss today is the body scanner program. advanced imaging technology. as you know, these scanners were deployed in response to the attempted christmas day attack. 640 of these units are now in place at over 160 airports. these machines provide superior benefits over metal detectors.

earlier this year, we issued a classified report. most of the details are still classified, we agree to allow to note some of the details regarding the utilization for today's hearing. we found that some of these units had been used less than 30% of the days since their inflation. in response to our report, we agreed to take steps to address these low utilization rates. the last program i would like to discuss today is the maritime biometric provincial program. in terms of progress, tsa has and rolled over 2 million maritime workers in the program. 2011 report identified a number of significant internal control weaknesses in background checking and used that we believe has limited the security benefits of the program.

these weaknesses may have contributed to the breach of selected u.s. facilities during a covert test we conducted as part of this review. we recommended the strength in program controls as well as complete and effectiveness study to clarify the current programs contributions to enhancing maritime security. dhs has established a working group to address are important report recommendations. we look forward to seeing the results of the committee's work. in closing ,tsa has established a number of security layers to thwart potential terrorist attacks. our pastorate has identified a number of ways these could be -- are passed work has a defined in number of ways this could be strengthened. i am hoping that today's hearing can provide some additional insight on how these programs

can be strengthened and made more cost-effective. mr. chairman, this concludes my statement. >> thank you. >> i am honored to appear before you today to speak about the coast guard's role in enforcing compliance of the transportation worker identification credential. the twic program requires such all merchant mariners and transportation workers seeking unescorted access undergo a security check undersea at twic. it is required to 2700 regulatory facilities and 50 unregulated facilities.

the transportation security administration has primary responsibility for the issue when it's oftwics, the coast guard has responsibility for ensuring compliance. the coast guard continues to conduct unannounced and announced inspections to ensure compliance. the coast guard has verified more than 213,000 twics. in accordance with a safe port act, the pilot program was conducted to evaluate the feasibility and technical and operational impacts of implementing a system. electronic readers add another layer of security associated with the twic. report on the pilot

program was delivered to congress on february 27. the coast guard is incorporating the results of the pilot. this will apply requires to leverage security benefits and abilities. section 809 of the coast guard authorization act of 2010 and amended the original requirements. as elements of the coast guard issuance process relies upon data out receipts, the provision was neither self executing or easily implemented. the coast guard issued a policy letter in december of 2011 to remove the requirement to hold a twic for mariners inactive. the coast guard continues to work towards codification of this change to a rule making process. a gao report in may 2011

identified a weakness in identification. in response, we issued policy towards the field finance directing for wrote investigation. a quick flash a of thetwic is not acceptable. electronic readers insure each person attempting to enter a facility is carrying a twic. we continue to work with our partners and state and local agencies to improve the program. by balancing a steadfast commitment to security, while facilitating commerce. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. i will be pleased to answer your questions. >> thank you. we will not recognize the gentleman from maryland for his opening statements. >> today, the oversight

committee convened to examine measures to secure our nation's transportation networks. they must achieve a delicate balance. they must be effective in meeting the evolving threats posed by terrorists. we also expect it to be responsive. since the terrible events of september 11, 2001, several attacks have been attempted against commercial planes. including the attempted bombing of christmas day 2009. northwest airlines flight 253 and the attempted bombing in 2010 of a cargo jet using a bomb disguised as an inkjet cartridge. these instances demonstrate the of all been threatstsa must counter. the 43,000 security officers must screen more than 2 million passengers every day in our

nation's 450 airports. the vast majority of passengers pose no risk, these officers must find the equivalent of a needle in a haystack. tsa increase the deployment of advanced imaging and technology systems to screen passengers for both metallic and nonmetallic press. they have developed the pre- check program to expedite screenings to low risk to travelers. i welcome the efforts to develop a more intelligent risk based approach. recognizing the enormity of the challenge they face, the agency develops new screening techniques, we must ensure that its tracks the appropriate balance between moving too quickly or moving too slowly to address new threats. today's hearing will review at the transportation work identification credentialed.

when i served as chairman of the subcommittee on coast guard and maritime transportation, i convened hearings in 2007 and 2008 to review the rollout of twic. unlike many screening techniques, congress mandated what became the twic program. there are now more than 2.1 million enrollees. they have paid approximately $280 million to implement this program. to close the security perimeter, we must implement the use of leaders so that these cards are not just expensive flash passes. twics are not issued to in eligible applicants. we must also view it in a broader maritime security context.

it is meant to control land side access to secure areas of u.s. ports. there are many risks that approach our ports, particularly from the water side. none of the individuals on the estimated 17 million small boats operating in our waters are required to carry a twic. none of before and mariners, -- foreign mariners carry twics. the coast guard must defend our coast, rusty thousand but see, respond to marine casualties and -- rescue thousand at sea. this service of 42,000 active-

duty officers do all this on a budget of less than $10 billion a year. less than 2% of the budget. they now face additional cuts. the coast guard does all we ask them to do. we cannot continue to stretch the service and a sam they will never break -- and this and they will never break. i yelled back. thank you for your courtesy. >> first of all, thank you so much. i am honored to co-chair this hearing with you. sorry there was a little bit of a delay. i am pleased to be with you.

thank you for your leadership. this is a very important agency that we have joint responsibility over. our committee has some limited oversight responsibility under transportation, as you may recall. tsa was created -- i happen to share of the subcommittee on aviation in 2001 after the terrorist attacks. since that time, tsa has grown from 16,500 screeners and a small cadre of different transportation security activities, which would join together. it was a much smaller beginning. unfortunately, tsa has mushroomed to 65,000 employees, of which there are 14,000

administrative personnel. 4000 in washington and 10,000 out and the fields. we never intended it to mushroom to this size. i have been critical of the administrative cost, we might be able to endure that kind of expenditure, which has now grown to $8 billion. if that meant we were secure. instead, as this committee reports today, we have a number of programs that are so far behind, i would like to talk about the transportation worker identification card. hundreds of millions of dollars in limbo. some of the equipment that has been purchased does not do the job. i know we cannot talk about all of it in this open setting.

the deployment of an ax -- acquisition of expensive and equipment that is supposed to protect us the deployment could have better by a high-school class project. tsa has had five administrators in nine years. we had a period it when we had no administrator. it is difficult enough with an agency to operate with an administrator in washington. let alone not having an administrator for that period of time. i have other concerns, have been monitored this as closely as anyone in congress. we are still at risk. the nation is still address. unfortunately, even the layered

system -- almost every layer is a flawed. the behavior detection, which i have worked with previous administrators to put in, we have equipment that did not work. tsa again bought equipment that did not work. i have had might investigative staff follow that. they have sat and a sad and we were paying rent on them. they were sitting in a warehouse, they spent $600 per piece of equipment. only after we prompted the actions. some investigators looked at another warehouse. we got information that it was full of equipment.

the nerve to cause us to delay. i might even ask if we can not get the information to subpoena. when you were in forming tsa that we were sending our investigative staff -- as are investigators were appearing on the scene. it is a very expensive and disappointing operation. i had faith and administrative -- administrator mcchrystal. he promised reform. i do not see that happening, unfortunately. that is the highlight, mr. chairman. it's important that we get to

the bottom of this. there is a lot of hard-earned tax money going to theaters security, and not real security. we have to stop paying that price before we pay a huge price of a successful attack. >> i will not recognize myself for five minutes. i have the advantage of knowing your bio. i spent nearly three decades in security. the one thing i know about security is there are two types. there is the type that convinces people that your target is harder than somebody's else's. i cannot protect all cars. that is what i would say you have is a system your today. you have a series of hardening spread the word sometimes, and i

am speaking about the aviation. these programs certainly seem to be good programs. in every case, as the wind blows, those spots will stop targets. targets are exactly like you would expect. they are mobile, responsive. if we do not have a layer of security system that has a sufficient force to rallies to be like a ship, one in which we know there will be a few leaks, but for the most part, it is watertight. our security system today is not watertight. the accidental catching of the bad guys belabors two points. the many people who find themselves going through security and sometimes they have

us pull something out, and sometimes they do not. sometimes they do is secondary, sometimes they do not. we opened up this hearing to facebook. i am giving you anecdotal once. i will supply all of them and i will place them in the record. so you can respond to the individuals. for example, joe is a u.s. marine. he was flying in his dress blues uniform. he was forced to remove his trousers in full view of passengers. it did not matter that he explained what it was. it did not matter that it was something that he had seen many times before. you and i know the turnover is high and the training is perpetual.

the next one says, i am a disabled person and have been targeted for groping. my wife travels with a portable oxygen concentrator and to reduce of the machine means she gets pawed by hand every time we travel. julia -- the tsa has taken away my freedom to travel because i wear a medical device and i cannot go the the amount of radiation i would be subjected to. there are plenty more. over 350. i am wendy. i have worn an artificial leg since i was four. i am now 61. i used to travel a lot for work, gave up traveling after

being insulted by tsa constantly. -- assaulted by tsa constant. the first question i have, 65,000 tsa workers. a quarter of them are employed in administration. do you think that is a fair ratio or are you a bloated, bureaucratic organization that has a lot of people working and a lot of systems that do not work? >> thank you for recognizing the hard-working men and women of tsa. i will have to take a ratio for administrative to front-line personnel. i think it might be different

from that. >> when i travel, obviously, to a number of places. houston, sacramento, san diego. i can tell you that i periodically count. for four active checkpoint in san diego, there will be 35 people standing there. wouldn't you agree, based on your own observations, the amount of people directly at a checkpoint versus the total number is extremely high? you have not created any efficiency in the 10 years of your existence. >> i do not agree with that. tsa is working hard -- >> let's go through the numbers. there are four times as many employees as there was seven or eight years ago. correct?

>> i do not believe -- >> 16,000 in your initial authorization. 2005, still below 35,000. you are now over 65,000. in the last five years, have the american people seem shorter lines? yes or no? >> i do believe they have seen shorter lines in the last four or five years. >> i would like you to check your figures. they have not seen a shorter lines. you are not given shorter lines. you are taking longer for each one and using more people. with that, i recognize the ranking member for his question. >> thank you very much. tsa the recently completed a test required by the safe port act. to maximize the security, and we

must move to implement the use of the readers. tsa was responsible for the recent pilot test. the coast guard is responsible for the final reader role. will it be feasible for facilities to install readers that can quickly read twic cards? i think it seems like we ought to get this done, gentlemen, in some type of way. we have been messing round with this for a while. >> i would be pleased to answer that. we have embarked upon a rule making process. getting to a final rule. before we did that, we need to

adjudicate the comments. that will be very informative. with the objective of not seeing commerce. there are over 32 recognized commercial twic readers. one of the concerns will be whether you use a mobile system or a fixed system. we would envision approximately two-year period of time from the time a final rule was on the street to full implementation across industry. >> do you have a response? >> we did showed that when the leaders were installed properly, -- readers were installed properly, the people were trained properly, and the workers were assimilated to the use of the cards, they did work properly. they did not impede the flow of commerce in those particular parts. it does depend on the

installation, on the training, it does depend on whether the facility has picked the right reader. >> the employees were successful and accessing -- let me ask you this. i want you to clarify. in individual ports, to the have the responsibility to deny admission to those who have valid and authentic twics if they have no business on the property? >> that is correct. >> what steps has the coast guard taken to address the gao's findings? the thinkable help close the security gaps? >> -- do you think it will help to close the security gaps? >> i do. they have been out in the field

during spot checks. we have done over 200,000 of the spot checks. last week, we ran over 450 spot checks. out of those 450, we found 58 members who had no business being at those particular facilities. we engage extensively with our stakeholders. the facility owners. we are interested in those who may have criminal intent, which is one of the information's that twic provides. the card holders are being screened against the terror screening data base. there is real time information and a benefit to the facility owners. >> it is the only part of our maritime security -- and that is very significant. the coast guard will be the most important element of that

regime. the strain of budget cuts on the service are obvious. in 2010, at 10 of the 12th suffered significant problems and had to be taken out of service. is that right? >> i was involved with that response. >> in fact during of the fisher, the issue a new report of findings that -- in fact -- in february of this year, the issue a new report of the findings. these are required by the safe port at to be established by october. the inspector general and others have noted the coast guard's inability to meet safety and security emission requirements in the arctic as the ice cover opens to allow more shipping operations in those latitudes. onetheless, the presenident's

budget -- this budget will conclude the acquisitions of the fast response and a number below the approved program record. this is my last question. i know the coast guard strive to meet every mission requirements. can you comment on the challenges the service is facing and balancing its competing commission and means and the maritime security arena at in light of the significant budget constraints? i have always complained about the coast guard having not enough money. >> i would be pleased. i was involved in the deepwater horizon oil spill. the president directed that we tripled our response efforts.

the coast guard has no -- we are constantly doing front-line operations. we had the good fortune, if you want to call it that, where we did not have another contingency occurring at the same time. i was able to redeploy and marshal all those resources into the gulf of mexico. beaver able to do the same during the earthquake in hate -- we were able to do the same during the earthquake in haiti and hurricane katrina. the challenges we face is what if we have multiple threats? what if we had a hurricane and then we have a threat to national security? taking place concurrently. that is where we run into resource challenges. we have to reallocate resources from one mission to another. we do not have the resources to do both. >> we now recognize the chairman of the committee for five minutes. , since mynds at tsa

last hearing, the appropriations subcommittee, i was not a member of that subcommittee, but was allowed to ask questions. >> we recommend that system to all committees. >> the funny thing about that, mr. chairman, tsa found out i would be a witness. they send an e-mail. the e-mail said, when he asks a question, take a long time answering act. so you eat up his time.

the problem is that sometimes you think it is the gang that can shoot straight. they shot the e-mail to cq. reserving my time, if you would answer fairly briefly, one of my concerns, of course, is that transportation worker identification card. we spent over half a billion dollars, is that correct? 500 a lid -- $511 million. >> we have spent approximately hundred $74 million. >> i have $500 million. perhaps he may be including -- >> you may be including grants. >> you may be including grants.