>> in the neighborhood of half a billion. the card is supposed to allow us to identify who goes into our ports. we passed the law, setting that requirement up, after 2001, right? >> i believe that was required and in 2002. >> thank you. they have produced 9.1 million of the cards are active. they printed 3.1 million of them. we still do not have all the components that were required under the law, including iris and thumbprint as far as

biometric capability, do we? >> we have capability as far as the card -- >> you do not have a standard for iras -- iris, is that right? this is not going to be "groundhog day," but i had a hearing april 14, almost a year ago. we had the director of the information technology lab testify, and my question was when would you finish the iris capability? hopefully by the end of the week. and when will you finish the standard? >> by the end of the year. >> i do not have a time. >> they told us the summer. so, we're now going into our

ninth year. reproduced the card, -- we produced the card, but then i read you are still in a pilot reader program, so, basically we have 1.1 million of these cards and we do not have readers. is that correct? we do not have readers? >> just to go back a second -- >> do they have readers? >> certain parts to have readers. >> how many of these cards are able to be read? >> we know the pilot ports have readers. i do not know outside of the pilot course -- >> at this time, a very small number of courts in fact have

readers. >> without objection, so ordered. >> thank you. behavior detection. let me go into this. i will just take one more minute. behavior technician program. we spent $1 billion in. can someone say that that is correct? >> i believe that number is slightly below, but we will get back to you. >> alright. alright, i will ask you. hen i knew that the puffers would not work, and it did not detect trace elements that were

put on me, they told me it was just a technical problem. we just destroyed those, is that correct? we paid the police $600 -- $600,000 to destroy these? >> that is correct. >> they had dod destroy them. getting something else in place because the technology did not work, and you all have seen the classified reports and the reports on the advanced imaging technology. is that correct? >> yes. >> perino by that performance, that lack -- we know by that performance, that lack of performance, will we have seen with the puffers, that is very successful, but the problem is gao viewed the performance and saw 24 times 17 known terrorists

went through airports and yet they have yet to detect one terrorist. and that was a question submitted by one of the floridians. we had an open question online. "can you name any terrorist that you actually -- can you name any terrorist that you actually stopped in the program? >> while we accept gao's assertion, we do not know that those individuals went through a the time, and they were not operational, said they were not manifesting signs of distraction. >> can i comment on that? in the gao representative, and i think our point was to study the travel patterns people associate with terrorists to see if they were exhibiting behavior is. at this time, i do not think it

is known whether they were or not.ing behavior's we suggested that reviewing the video tapes, we thought that would be a rich source of information to help define the program. at this point, mr. chairman, i will also ask unanimous consent to put in the record, we went up and looked in boston where they had a demonstration project. i think there's the one in detroit. there was unbelievable -- >> without objection. >> also passed -- >> without objection, that will be placed into the record. >> i would like to go to my colleague from the select intelligence committee who knows probably more than anyone on the dais what the skills are to read someone who may be a terrorist.

and the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you. you may have overstated that a bit. >> no, i remember our time behind closed doors. you were the senior statesman their. >> i appreciate that. what we do, mr. chairman, it is going to be a pretty mundus agency. -- 2 mundus -- huge agency. i would like to -- the one thing that amazes me. is not rocket science. i have been waiting and waiting and waiting. i was really pleased to see we have pushed to the air crews threw out a little quicker and not delayed things.

there is a member here in to help probably as high clearances' one can get for years. a suspect coming to the same airport time and time and time again. another one where things happened on the server's. there seems to be no effort to recognize, gosh, they have top- secret crypto and so on and so on. is there ever a thought to take advantage of that, or are you going to keep on doing it the way you're doing it? >> certification, the answer to that is we are actively trying to -- sir, the answer does we're actively trying to expand the

been there were part of the flyer program or they have opted into the global entry. we extended the program to active duty military at reagan national airport. that started last week. >> i understand, the ex- military and myself and others. i took off my uniform monday and did not work the next. but the history is still there. >> we are actively -- >> what is your time line for "actively"? it seems simple, straightforward. record is the repair or is not. >> -- the record is either there or is not. >> there are two aspect. there is a technology piece that allows us to verify that someone that we believe they

are -- there are over 6000 resistance in the program. we are doing it cautiously to make sure we are maintaining security. >> i understand that. i do not understand -- it is like discovering the we'll all over or passing of the fact that we have spent a lot of money doing background checks on a number of people, and how many years halves -- and many years has that been going on? but i want to stop on an apologetic note. i think the personnel are working hard and are sincere and following the will see a minister raiders -- following

the rules the administrators are asking them to operate by. i thought that would probably get salt. it takes the time, clogs up the process. it is pretty simple. there is an it card -- id card. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i yield myself 5 minutes. first, i would like to thank you for taking the time to be here. i am in the position of being the one member of congress to serve on all three committees to have jurisdiction over the csa -- tsa.

i spend a lot of time with this issue, as well as charting the services of the tsa. i'd like to say almost without exception, but there are exceptions, the employees i've met in my travels have been courteous and professional in nature. however, as part of preparing for this, just like chairman issa, i went to my social media sites for comments, and i received quite a few negative comments, and without objection, i would like to get those injured in to the record as well. >> so ordered. >> i wanted to talk about some problems that people have reported with the tsa. the tsa is squeezed into spaces and airports not designed for that level of screening.

we had one in the news at this last week. the gentleman in the wheelchair. it seems like at some point, if we could just use some common sense and slow down a little bit and offer to do some of the screenings, you know, in a private area. it is worth spending a little effort bond creating spaces that are more friendly, that we might be able to do better there. i just wish we could code should be -- coach the tsa and the traveling public not to get worked up, because there may be better ways to do this. about six months ago, i think i commented in one of these hearings, check in at a kiosk,

and my staff to the tsa. now the tsa is at least asking me for my full name. it seems like it would be better if there was a little more engagement. would you like to comment on that? >> first, if i could -- every passenger who travels through checkpoint is entitled to private screener on request. >> it might be something you can apply for, and especially for the elderly and disabled and children. >> and the video from last week was over two years old, and with the policy changes last month -- last fall, we've seen a dramatic decline in the number of times we have had to bat down children and the elderly with our new program. -- pat down children and the elderly with our new program.

our officers are trained to observe signs of deception, fear, and they are different than the other traffic. >> there is no way to test that. you cannot imitate those behaviors, correct? any deterrents program, it is very difficult. any - as an air -- as in a deterrents program, it is very difficult. >> i am dusting off my global entry card, because i am looking forward to being able to use that. >> we intend to roll it out to be 35 biggest airports by the end of this calendar year. so far, we are on target for that. we continue to roll out a couple of weeks -- a couple a week.

>> e s&p 500 fairmount of time studying what the -- you spend a fair amount of time studying what the tsa has done. do you see some things you should be doing that you are not doing? >> i cannot think of anything off the top of my head. we can pleaded -- we completed a large body of work. we think we're having a positive effect on the program. tsa has been very receptive to most of our recommendations. >> i see in that time. hopefully we will get to a second round of questions. i will recognize the gentleman from virginia for 5 minutes. >> i think we need to start,

positively recognizing the mission here. how do we craft -- graft protective measures to protect the public? in that a democracy, it seems to me we ought to be arguing about this all the time. it is my right to be protected. it is a natural tension and not necessarily a reflection on the men and women trying to fulfill this mission.

the men and women who have been recruited are doing, on balance, a very good job. as the chairman indicated, there are occasions when that has been the case. one thing i would just say -- simple training and please and thank you would really belong way the bank -- go along way. i wish people could remember that. parking orders is not -- barking orders is not appropriate. i would urge you strongly to make sure, i know it seems simple, but it's on at the traveling public's and nurse.

-- traveling public's nerves. what we are trying to do is get compliance. most of the public is able to tolerate intrusiveness. i think we would also go along way to understanding the compliance, knowing we are all in this together. >> 200 entities were ranked as the best place to work. it was in the bottom 5%. of federal agencies. as "yeah, i would like to work their." it was second to last in pay and

family friendly policies. >> i am aware of that survey. i would like to comment. gao is consistently ranked near the top. i saw the scores for tsa. i think that reflects a large screening work force that has somewhat stressful job. they are interacting with the public day-to-day. it is not clear to me what the department was doing on that. we have work underway. >> i am going to give you an opportunity to tell me that. would it surprise you to learn it was 13%? >> if that is accurate, it would not surprise me, no. >> and 10% for the last five years? higher than the average federal agency. >> anytime an agency experiences

that kind of turnover, there is that kind of challenge. >> given the nature of the mission, should it not concern us we have low morale and high turnover and that could affect the performance? >> i am not sure what the causes are. >> putting aside causes. with that not suggest we're putting in danger the mission? but i am not that enthusiastic about the mission or i do that even care about the mission and i do not like my boss or the agency. what is the impact on the traveling public if they are not carrying out their mission? >> i will not ask any more, but if he would not -- if you would not mind asking mr. mclaughlin

to respond to that? >> thank you. to your comment on training, i am pleased to let you know that earlier this year, we began an initiative which is training that all tsa employees and their managers will focus on, which focuses on empathy, and communication techniques that hopefully will improve that experience. the caveat being airports are the most busy and allowed places and sometimes it is hard to balance the need to communicate and be heard without being over, so to speak. there's a difference between -- please put your hands up and "please put your hands up!" we're working to get that training is complete by december

of this year. my goals for -- my goals were 6% attrition for full-time, but the overall number might be excused somewhat by bad data. with regard to what we're doing to improve their standing in the best places to work, i can tell you that being an employer in the private sector and now in federal service, having worked with thousands of employees, i will tell you i am very proud of the dedication of my work force and their commitment to the mission. overall, their focus on the mission is not consistent with the rating we receive. that being said, we have a number of initiatives to improve the overall morale. they have a national advisor recounts all. they have training like the one i described with feedback from officers. one officer described it as a

like changing effect. and i would also say it comes with the newness of our agency. is keen to have a different growth curb then an agency -- it is going to have a different growth curve. >> now let's go to the gentleman from minnesota, a former airline pilot himself. >> thank you, mr. chairman. expert, i do not know about that. and user, definitely. hat everyone was to be safe. -- everyone wants to be safe. thank you for the coast guard. just a couple things. i see spot developing into

something more like we see in israel, going through more proactive challenge reply. .et's just deal with the now so, we hit spot, go to the screen areas, and 30% are seen by ait machines. >> according mclaughlin to mr. -- according to mr. mclaughlin, that is correct. 100% -- are ait's

100%? >> any technology will allow limitations. >> the metal detectors are a little bit less. only 30% of the people have gone through the first phase and are going through 30%. then they go through the ait machine, whereas the other 70% have gone through metal detectors that are less safe, but not as good. ok, we go to the gate. you have the gate agent, make sure you get on the right aircraft. we have some security here, but there is the possibility something could slip through. this talk about the aircraft. -- let's talk about the aircraft. we have nearly 1 million airport

workers that are credentialed. they have direct access to non- public areas, and they are working in the shadow of the airplane. could you tell me how these 1 million workers are credentialed? >> there is a secure identification display, and they are essentially vetted from databases and criminal records. >> we have seen recently drugs being smuggled on aircraft, drugs in and around the aircraft. is it fair to say there are holes in this program as well.

>> so we have a potential going to the aircraft, passengers being screened, having a very good potential and just and equal opportunity of a potential -- of items being put on board the aircraft, perhaps in the shadow of the credentialed workers. my question to you, and i am going to give you a very good one, if you do not mind, sir. and i say this with all due respect. the potential of having someone with bad intent coming on the aircraft, with a device on board the aircraft in the shadow of that aircraft, if that aircraft gets underway and is in the year, what are the line of defenses capable in the air at

that time? who is the last line of defense, mr. mclaughlin. and do not say the cockpit door. >> there are multiple layers in place. we do have air marshal's. the ultimate layer that is an important player today and we talk about it from time to time is the actual passenger. that individual who learns as many lessons on 9/11 as the rest of us have learned. >> true. but a professional terrorist has done this routine 100 times. they know when that cockpit door is going to be open. may know when it is going to be closed. they know lot of things about the aircraft that your average member of the public does not know. my question -- there are

certainly not any fams available per flight. y on god's green earth would be cut in half a volunteer program that protects the aircraft for $15 per flight? why would we do that? >> >> i can reinforce of the layers that are on the ground, including the work we do in and around the airport. we can take that question for the record. >> i would appreciate that. the program is being cut in half. it was the last line of defense for many terrorist wishing to take that aircraft and using it as a weapon of mass destruction. i would appreciate your information on that. >> thank you during a match. we will recognize the gentleman

from tennessee. -- thank you very much. we will recognize the gentleman from tennessee. >> the tsa personnel have all been courteous. they have a tough job having to do a monotonous gig. they are not the most popular people to save. -- to see. the other is about the twic cards. they are important, but it seems like there could be a better way to allow the people who receive them to pick them up. improvement in that system would be helpful to my community. who is the expert on the process at the airport? >> the airport would be myself.

>> today, i was asked to take off my watch. why? >> i was not there with you. it is possible that the officer working to facilitate the travel of customers might have felt that it would alarm and you would have had an easier experience by removing it. you are not required to remove your watch. >> everybody was. she was announcing, take off your watch. if the light is on, they will not pass you. they say, it will save you cost in the future. that is not epa's job. nor is it your job to make it less likely. i do not get it. it makes no sense to me at all.

she said, you've got to take it off. the rules need to be consistent. for a while, we did not issues. -- do shoes. shoes must be looked laid flat on the conveyor belt. is that a uniform rule? >> at one point, we change our procedure. we have subsequently change that back to allow them to be placed in may then -- a bin. >> it is not a big deal, but sometimes your issues get crushed. -- shoes get crushed. i am comfortable in my manhood, the guy was fine. i did not have a problem. when i got out, he wanted to pat me down.

the machines must have messed up is all i can figure. >> i cannot speak to your specific situation. i can look into it for you. >> it's just seems like there should be some consistency. the machine might be set at different levels or something? sometimes you go through and they want to look at your arm or this or that? whatever. i am not the bionic man. it makes no sense. >> the role is to be uniform and consistent. we want to be random and unpredictable at times because we find that is helpful in terms of our work and security. we are looking for a uniform and consistent experience for travelers. i am happy to follow up.

>> there probably should be some type of a system where you have you're most likely -- frequent fliers, up one day, there was this lady, she has the richest woman -- she has the richest has been in town. they were going through all for staff. -- all of her stuff. sometimes, it just takes a little common sense. helmets to the process costas? >> -- how much did the process cost us? >> i can take that question for the record and get back to you. >> that was a loser from jump street, too. if you are a terrorist you would go to the line that did not have it.

it did not work, so the terrorist could have chosen either line. if they looked at you closer in the other line, why did they look at you closer? it was really bad. otherwise, all of the tsa people are great. it is a tough job and i know you will make it better. >> the staff informs me they were around $30 million. the same situation exists today. i fly home on american, sometimes on united. if you are going to united at dca, you go through a full body scanner. if you are going through american, you go through eight metal detector. it does not take a rocket scientist to recognize a potential issue there. >> i had a conflicting schedule. i apologize.

these questions may have already been pursued. what has been the total cost of the program to the federal government and the private sector? >> to date, the program cost approximately $374 million. that would include $100 million in appropriations. $274 million in user fees for individuals. >> that is the federal government and the private sector? >> yes, sir. that is the appropriated money to start the program. $274 million in user fees when you enroll. >> thank you, sir. what is the amount of money that you allocate for twic administration each year? >> about $2 million, looking at commercial technology. >> that is $2 million annually?

>> that is to date. i do a number of missions, one of them is validating twics. >>, and the coast guard personnel are dedicated to oversight of the program? >> they are not dedicated solely to twic. it is just one element of that, so they are looking at everything. those exist at all of our sectors, all of our ports throughout the united states. one example is we recently shut down a facility in miami because it did not have the appropriate safeguards. there were literally holes in the fence line that would allow people with no business to enter into those facilities. >> how long has twic been online? >> it was implemented on april

15, 2009. on that milestone date, all facilities were in compliance. the reader will be critical as we go forward. that will be the next enabling mechanism. the biometric chip is what provides the next level of security. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you very much. >> i think the committee for allowing me to participate today. this is an issue that is important to my constituents. mr. lord has mentioned constituent satisfaction, customer satisfaction as a goal. i would just commend to you, looking at the economist

magazine, pole. they have up right now. they're asking whether the changes to airport security have done more harm than good. at last check, it was 87% agreed that changes have done more harm than good. gentlemen, i would contend that we are not doing our best i customer service. i think my colleague from the other side of the aisle spoke well to that. i want to talk to you about the vipr team. my home state of tennessee became the first state and the country to deploy vipr teams simultaneously. the teams included explosive detection, a k-9 teams. my office was informed that the point of operation was for tsa

agents to recruit truck drivers. those involved in the operation were only supposed to be handing out recruitment brochures. since neither position has actual federal law enforcement training. however, i have a couple of posters. if you look at these posters, i will call that exhibit a. if you were watching the video of this transaction, you would see that this individual, who is designated as an employee, is walking around and inspecting the trucks. if they were supposed to be handing out brochures, what are they doing inspecting the tracks? what type training do they received to detect abnormalities or potential threats in semi trucks? >> the vipr you referenced was a

joint training exercise. 23 different agencies, both federal, state, and local. tsa was invited to participate. the exercise went off very well. it was an important opportunity for us to build relationships to ensure that in the event of a real national security emergency, we have the types of relationships -- >> you are using my time. what type training do they have? to detect the abnormalities that would be on our nation's highways? they have no federal law enforcement training, correct? >> during the exercise, the officers did not conduct any screening of the vehicles. >> let me put up poster number two. why did they ask to open the top

of this truck and look -- was there a specific threat to to tennessee highways on october 20, 2011? was there any intelligence suggesting that a suspected terrorist may be driving a semi truck across tennessee? were there specific threats that were deterred by conducting this operation? >> i cannot talk about threats that might have been deterred. this was a training exercise, not an exercise based on active intelligence. >> ok. do you have anything to add to that? >> no. >> you don't? i want to go back to this question. what type of specific training do they have to be on the nation's highways conducting this type of searches? >> they do not receive specific

training with regard to screening vehicles. >> ok. >> a the k9 team appears to be a multi modal dog that is trained in that mode of transportation. >> even though they have no federal law enforcement training, you are pleased that are participating in these exercises? >> again, the program is set up to provide a visual deterrent and to work in conjunction with their state and local partners in all modes of transportation. part of that, again, is to build a relationship in times of an exercise. >> they have been administratively it reclassified probing screeners and given no federal law enforcement training are going to be out on our nation's highways and seaports participating in this type of activity?

>> i am not sure i understood that as a custom. >> based on the performance that you have seen with the teams, and their ability to prevent specific terrorist threats, what kind of grade would you give them? >> i think they do a very good job in a mode of transportation where we have very limited resources. i think they do a very good job of providing visible deterrence to people who might be attempting to do something bad. >> a to f? >> i would not be experienced to say specifically. b + to an a-. it is a program that is only five years old.

>> i would remind you that your agency has agreed that performance measures need to be developed for the vipr team so there can be some quantifiable data. we will follow that as we move forward. one last question, have they ever pulled over cars or vans? >> i am not aware of a tsa assets on a team pulling over a car or a van. >> i would love to have that answer. there is no terrorist that has ever driven a semi truck. we find it very curious the method that was being employed with the team's. you can go look at the example. >> thank you very much.

we will now start our second round of questioning. i will give it a go for five minutes. and then we will go to mr. cummings. >> as we talk about the spot program, if an agent were able to see something they considered to be a suspicious behavior, what is the follow-up? what can they do? did they engage the person in conversation? what is the procedure? is there something they can do? can you tell me what that is? >> in our spot program, our officers are trained to observe the behavior and engaged in casual conversations with individuals. if the circumstances warrant, they can engage local law enforcement for further follow-

up. >> if they detected something suspicious, i can stop them from boarding the plane? >> if they can physical detain an individual, spot officers are not trained, nor do we want them to physically detain an individual. >> i just walked on and get on my plane? they cannot stop me. >> i misunderstood your question. a spot officer, if they have reason to believe that you are suspicious, can engage in local law enforcement officer, who will interview you and either send you on your way it or asking additional questions. >> has a spot officer ever stop somebody from boarding a plane? >> not to my knowledge. there are times when a spot

officer will engage in conversation, but i do not know all the time when an officer has stop someone from getting on a plane. >> how much are we paying these guys? >> are spot officers are paid in the same range as our federal officers. summer between 37 and $50,000 -- somewhere between $37,000.50000 dollars. >>-- $37,000 and $50,000. >> whether or not they could detect surgically implanted explosive devices. the unanimous answer was no. on july 6 of 2011, the tsa released a notice to airlines. earlier this month, someone posted a video on the internet demonstrated how to defeat these

machines. why do we continue to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on technology with such obvious and vulnerabilities? >> i would point out that recently, our minister testified with regard to effectiveness. -- our administrator testified with regard to effectiveness. he will be able to get into more detail in a classified setting. on a daily basis, we review of vulnerability is in our system. ait is our best deterrent and detection against metallics threats. >> that is not our current plan. based on our evolution would risk based security, we're looking at the best way to deploy the best assets we have

and configurations that makes sense across the system. >> are they getting deployed in a timely manner? i know there are some warehouses that a lot of this equipment sits in. we were not using modern deployment techniques. >> to my knowledge, there are no ait's in the air -- in the warehouse that you referred to. art utilization numbers are improving dramatically on a daily basis. >> where are you getting a safety evaluation on these machines? for tsa agents operating them? the airline staff are diverted through. i saw a pregnant officer, right by one of those machines. i was concerned because i

understand there are no safety checks there. >> this is the one that uses radiation. there have been three independent studies, one from the fda and the u.s. army. the machines are subjected to regular testing to ensure that they fall within safe limits. with every test that has been conducted, the units are well below established limits. all the tests are available john website, tsa.gov. >> i am comfortable with what i heard. if you are interested in having

as conduct follow-up, i can talk to your staff. >> we will be in touch. i now recognize the ranking member for five minutes. >> the audit found that tsa had inadequate screening systems in place. to deny the issuance of twic to them. what steps have you taken to address these findings? >> the first thing we did was we created an executive level of oversight board coordination strategyto map our to address these recommendations. after receiving the report and recommendations, we retained the trusted agents, the individuals

that collect the information at the enrollment sites. we also made system modifications that allows us to collect more information on the documents that are collected. they could be reviewed more thoroughly. on the longer-term plan, but we are making arrangements with the u.s. system so we could send our fingerprints into that repository and check our fingerprints that we had against the fingerprints in their repository to see if anybody is applying under multiple names or identities. the other long-term project we're working on this capability with fbi. currently, we are required to submit fingerprints each time we want a criminal history records check. the want to see if we can submit to the fingerprints we have on file to the fbi to get a criminal history records check

without calling somebody in to submit a new set of prints. it will tell us if the individual has committed some type of criminal offense and between the applications to make every five years. there is a number of things we are doing. we took the recommendations very seriously. >>, during a hearing on twic in may of 2011, mr. lord indicated provide a normal driver's license is as least as secure than a twic. is a twic more or less secure than in normal driver's license? >> for the twic, we think it is a secure a credential. prior to, you could go to a port

and gain access with multiple credentials. a credit card, a union card, any number of credentials. the first thing i would say is that it is the first time in a common credential has been issued in the maritime environment. we developed many security features to put on that card. we did that in coordination with other agencies, including the forensic document last at ice. we did the best we could to make that cards secure. it has a biometric on it. the readers are not in place yet, but the coast guard has portable readers to do the checks. >> section 809 of the coast guard authorization act of 2010

and since mariners cannot need access to secure area of a vessel from the requirement that they obtain a twic. 115 implement -- implement sections 809, but still requires those seeking their first mariner credential to visit a twic enrollment center. to complete the enrollment process and pay the enrollment fees. i understand that the exemption has been estimated by the coast guard to apply 60,000 of the 210,000 licensed mariners in the united states. is that correct? >> that is correct. we've only had 68 take advantage of that 809 provision. >> why do you think that is? >> they see it as an employment opportunity. for an employer, in this competitive environment, they

see it as advantageous to have that credential. >> i see my time has expired. >> thank you very much. there are quite a few other questions. some of the other members have had to leave. i did want to ask some additional questions. with that in mind, we will be submitting additional questions in writing to complete the record. without objection, i would like to leave seven days open for members to submit those questions and opening statements. i would like to thank each and every member of the panel for being with us. i commend you for your service to the country. i encourage you to look for ways to improve with you and your agencies are able to do to better served and better spent more efficiently the taxpayers'

money to provide a safe transportation environment for all of us. thank you for being here. we're done. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> the house will be back in and about half an hour. 6:30 eastern time to take votes on of to four bills. they were scheduled to debate five bills earlier today, but they recessed. democratic leadership aide said leaders encouraged democrats to vote no. back at 6:30 this evening for a vote in the house. later this week, a look at the republican 2013 budget plan and the small business capitalization bill. tomorrow, more from the supreme

court on the second of three days of oral arguments on the health care bill. he will be able to hear the arguments on c-span3 at about 1:00. on the facebook page, and viewers are weighing in at about whether cameras should be allowed in the supreme court. you can join that conversation on facebook. earlier>> general john allen tad about u.s. military operations in afghanistan, and this is about a half an hour. gentlemen, good morning. -- ladies and gentlemen, good morning. some of you may have seen my testimony from last week, and i have seen a good bit of the coverage, so i expect you are

familiar with the points i made on the progress we're making. i will not repeat it, but i would like to make a few points before we take your questions. in the case of staff sergeant bales, i extend my sincere condolences to the loved ones of those who were killed and injured in that senseless act of violence. i extend my sympathies to the bales family. they deserve our support as they come to grips with the drastic changes that will cause a change in their lives. charges have been preferred against staff sergeant bales. compensation payments to the families of the victims have been paid, and with a criminal and deep and administrative investigations continue. because these investigations are ongoing and jurisdiction has

been pass to officials at base mccord, will not be able to go into more detail today. the investigators have and will retain my full support to let the facts take them where they made. we must let the process is played out in their own time in accordance with our own regulations. speculation in the media and through anonymous commentary serves no one's purpose in our interest and in our earnest desire to see justice done here. set it on the issue, future troop levels, i was clear in my september i willwe conduct an analysis of the kinds of power and combat power we need in 2013. i believe the power to be significant, but i do not say it will be to rest at any certain level to route this year or

2013. there is no way i can know that right now, certainly not until we have emerged from the fighting season and after i have had a chance to assess the state of the insurgency, operational environment we anticipate in 2013, and the capabilities of the afghan forces going forward. it is not just a matter of what to do with remaining 60,000 u.s. troops. i must carefully consider the combination of forces in the theater. there will be some 40,000 isap forces in the field, and increasingly capable and numerous afghans security forces. force levels will represent a composite number, which is a key point, of the international and indigenous force. it is not just about the numbers, is about the

operational environment we find ourselves in 2013. we have done much to degrade the taliban's capability, to deny them resources and sanctuary. we need to get to the fighting season to understand the combat power we will need in 2013. i have given my president ande k through, and i know they -- i have their support to take the time i need to develop those options further. a word about transition. i meant what i said about transition been the linchpin of our success. of the prairies -- prairies' i laid out when i took a man, the first of these was to keep up the pressure on the enemy, and we have done that. a very close second was to focus

more sharply on our efforts to grow and develop -capability- street they are better than we thought they would be. they are better than they thought they would be at this point. i use an example of the bravery and skill which they demonstrated that when they attempted to quell violence that resulted from protests last month, bravery that cost them to lives and more than 60 wounded. i can easily point to the thousands of operations, some large, some small, that the conduct alongside isaf tropps can in the lead as to go forward. in last two weeks, afghan security forces across the country on their running -- on their own killed nearly half a dozen insurgents, including some who were included. -- some who were planning to assassinate an official.

it is not just about the army doing good work. the police have been contributed to see the security and the cities and towns, most recently protecting that celebrations. people will look at these and other examples and say they are anecdotal that we still face real challenges in ethnic composition, and even corruption, in some of the ranks. i'm not saying things are perfect trade much work remains to be done. for every tribe accepted and for every insider threat for what is known on a green-on-blue incident, and we had one overnight, as two young british soldiers were killed, for everyone afghan soldier that does not return from leave, i can cite hundreds of examples where they do perform their duties, where the partnership is strong, the confidence of the forces is building, and where the trust and confidence we have

in them and they have in themselves grows steadily. this would make the argument otherwise will never convince me that these brave men do not have the will to fight for the government and for the country and for their fellow citizens. that willingness is the thing most hopeful about the entire effort of transition. they want this responsibility, they want to lead, and we're on to help them to do that. with that, i will happily take your questions. >> general, one house keeping think it there has been confusion about the jump in the number of casualties. maybe you could address that briefing. seneca but considering the corruption and the gray-on-blue incidents, can you tell about how the united states can give the afghans some advance notice or use some warrant procedure for the night raids, and how do

you think that to be done without damaging operations? >> i am getting your one question in three parts here, so give me a second. there was an increase in the number of what we believed to have been those who were killed in this event. the number increase was based upon the initial reporting by the afghans, so we should not be surprised that as the investigation went forward that an additional number was added to that. that was something that we understand and we accept, and as the investigation goes forward we will get greater clarity on that. onscreen on blue, -- on green on blue, we will continue to partner with the afghans.

we have done that significantly and the last several months treat the afghans themselves who also suffer from what is called green onscreen, they have taking a lot of steps themselves. they have worked closely with in the national director of security to place counter intelligence operatives inside their schools, recruiting centers, inside the ranks about the ibm to assess the potential emergence of an individual who can be an extremist or in fact a telegram infiltrator. withine taken action takenis isaf, to better prepare our forces across the board. between what the afghans have done for themselves, what we are doing, and how we partner together, we seek to reduce this

strategy to the maximum extent possible. with respect to the night operations mou, we are at a delicate moment in the negotiations. i am confident we will end up where we want to be on both sides, and i will leave it there. thank you for the questions. >> general, about a month ago, the afghan interior ministry, there were two officers murdered. afghan officials said they had a suspect. recently you told cnn there are no suspects. could you elaborate on where that investigation stands come and how could there be no suspects were the building is highly secured, cameras, people would know who is going in and out of that building?

>> we will need this to develop more. there's still significant investigation that remains, not on who they believe might have been adopted the shooting -- conducted the shooting, but wear ties may be elsewhere outside the building into the taliban. or investigation needs to be conducted. [unintelligible] not that we have been presented at this point. >> have you allowed advisers to go back into the ministries? >> i have permitted my commanders to do assessments in the areas where advisers are involved. they will come back to meet with their assessment, that the situation is now sufficiently secure for our advisers to the back. most of them are back. we will continue to have died with the security situation as it develops. >> if i could follow up, isaf l, there were 15

service members have been killed, almost 25% of all the casualties so far this year. what accounts for the increase in these kinds of attacks on isaf forces? do you consider it a significant threat, and is there evidence that the taliban is purposely planting infiltrating the afghan forces, or are these random acts? >> mattel that takes credit for all of them, when the majority are not a direct result of taliban infiltration. it is no secret that taliban has had as an objective infiltrating the ranks of both peaks ansf and those elements that support us and our camps. it is difficult to tell right now whether this is an increase in the operational tempo, but we

can all probably assume that with some of the incidents that have occurred in the last several months that that has been a potential causal factor in some of the extremism that resulted in a green-on-blue events. >> how can they work side by side and in many cases city in the same encampment with this kind of threat looming over them? >> in many cases the relationship is very strong. in most cases, the relationship is very strong. they know each other well. we have taken steps necessary on our side to protect ourselves with respect to sleeping preachments. -- sleeping are arrangements. the posture of our forces to have someone always watch over our forces.

on the afghan side they are doing the same thing. they are helping the troops to understand how to recognize merchants ofsation, extremism in individuals who may be suspect, but they are also being trained and through the use of the nds, they are very quick to be able to report this up. there have been some breakthroughs in afghan investigations in arrests that have been made of elements that have been found in ranks that potentially could have been a perpetrator for green on blue. question is an important one, and we watch this very closely. thank you. >> to what extent are you concerned about revenge killings based on the bales case, and

perceptions in afghanistan? >> i do not connect them two of those. in any case, it is prudent for us to recognize that revenge is an important dimension in this culture. we would be prudent ourselves in looking for the potential for that to emerge. it is something we will keep an eye on. i have seen no indications yet that it has emerged as a potential factor, but we will keep an eye on that. >> second question, two major challenge as you pointed out last week in pakistan, corruption and safe havens creek what level of degradation to the safe havens unique to see over the next year to give the president some comfort level that the safe havens will not be utilized by the taliban?

>> we will need to see the cross-border movements. we believe as a result if you have been following the reduction in an e-initiated attacks over the year, if we see that a second year, we believe there will be important indicators were the safe havens are in fact or are operationally relevant to the insurgency. we will continue to push for as much velocity as we can achieve in the integration. that has helped us, recalling that many folks who live in safe havens live in afghanistan, they are there for a short period of time, if we can accelerate reintegration, that is a means of neutralizing the safe havens. then the process of reconciliation. it is a piece-making process, which could -- peace-making

process which could have a political outcome emerge in conjunction with the reintegration process. it could deflate the value of the safe havens ultimately because many insurgents home rather than become continue insurgents. [unintelligible] we would enjoy a pakistan military assistance across the border, but they are deeply engaged across the board. in the last couple years, they have suffered 3000 dead and a couple thousand wounded, and they have a an ied problem that is essential as well. i would not purport to dictate to the general how he should conduct his operations. there are vigorous operations across the border, and my hope is as our relationship continues to unfold we could perhaps cooperate with complementary

operations across the border. >> [unintelligible] >> given [unintelligible] d you think there is a problem with leadership by your senior nco's? have they been worn out by the pleaded deployment, so there are missing things or not enforcing things with leadership break down a common thing between your incidents, the koran burnings, and what might you be doing about that? >> each one of those was a result of a leadership failure in some form or another. as i understand your question, as i think back across how many

tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of our forces have served in afghanistan and these incidents have been so infrequent, and as i know the force myself, and i have to speak or as a marine than a soldier, although i believe there is no difference in the institution of the army and marine corps in this regard -- after this period of time of and, we find our staff nci's our non commission offices are extraordinarily well trained. repeated tours in afghanistan and iraq do not inherently reduce the effectiveness of the force or reduce the effectiveness of some all unit leadership. over the years, and our school systems, and i spoke to one of the schools at quantico, the kinds of institutional emphasis by our great army and marine corps on insuring the high

standards of leadership and supervision are not just sustained, but enhanced, still remains at the core of those two institutions. those were failures. when i think back across so many of our service members that have served successfully in afghanistan, i am encouraged by the cno bishop, -- nco leadership. we can always work to look at the individual incidents in and after-action review to make sure we understand how they occurred, and then learn from them and world those lessons learned back into our training institutions and our leadership academies. i'm confident that the institution is solid and we will continue to work to develop a small unit leaders about which you know in a counter insurgency

is were the most important issue occurs on any given day. >> can you explain why those decisions to pick out compensation to victims' relatives, before we have a verdict? >> it is a natural and cultural norm that we would pursue. we have done that in the past. in this case, it was appropriate, we believe, given the circumstances of this particular tragedy. >> can we get a total of the compensation paid out for this incident and the war on a whole, and can you explain how it is done? suitcases of cash given to families? >> we will get you that information. >> can you elaborate about the defense department ordered review of the anti-malaria drug?

>> i was made aware of it this morning. the review is a natural course of periodic reviews, as i understand it, within the department. that is the best i can do for you. >> you were not told there was a concern about troops that were deployed, being given this drug? >> no. there are reviews constantly of our procedures. that is not uncommon. when i hear one of the anti- malarial drugs is under review, that is an important process that is pursuit regularly. would suggest you ask them that question. >> when you expect the border with pakistan to be opened, and had you asked that the haqqani group be listed as a terrorist

group? >> i do not know when the border might be open, but there is a review of relationship under way in the pakistani parliament, and i believe probably as a result of that review the policy relationship by the parliamentary committee on natural security, we might find a recommendation in that review. otherwise, i have no particular indicators at this point. >> haqqani group to be listed? >> i did, yes. the investigation was clear that there was no criminal dereliction of duty found in the investigation, but i took administrative measures. >> do you shake the analysis that most of the heavy lifting for transition is on track to be completed by mid-2013?

how will that affect your analysis of what continued troop components you will need? where are you looking for that distribution to go? >> those are two very different questions. i am not sure that there has been analysis that says the heavy lifting in transition is done by the latter part of 2013. what will happen, if you know about the lisbon transition, there are five tranches of afghan geography that move into a process of transition. the fifth and final will occur, president karzai will announce it in 2013, we will begin to implement that tranche in the early fall, and with that technically withansf moves into

security nlead. the process will continue until we reached the end of 2014, where ansf will be in control across the country. we will then be in support of the ansf as they move into the lead for security across the country. >> deep you think we are on track to do that, how did that impact -- >> thanks for the fallout. as you might imagine, some of those components, the elements of the tranche 4 and 5 are in the east. we anticipate in the natural course of the campaign, which will emphasize this coming year consulting our holes in the south while conducting

operations in east, we will see eventually a confluence of the movement of geography into the transition process and the campaign seeking ultimately to facilitate and accelerate afghan security operations in the south and ultimately in the east. >> they will come together in 2013? >> probably, but it will continue in 2014. >> secretary panetta has suggested that we are not going to see the end of these and this is part of the price of war. would you agree with that? >> i think it is a characteristic of counterinsurgencies that we have experienced before. we experienced these in iraq, in vietnam, and on any occasion where you are dealing with an insurgency and where you are

also growing and indigenous force, which will be the principal opposition to that insurgency, the enemy is going to do all they can to disrupt both the counterinsurgency operations, but also disrupt the integrity of the indigenous forces that have been developed. we should expect this will occur in counterinsurgency operations, and as we saw it in iraq and historically in counterinsurgencies. also in vietnam. it is a characteristic of this kind of warfare. >> did the afghans miscount that someone died in the initial assessment? >> we will need to let that come out in the investigation. >> on the question of -- how do you know yourself that troops

are not exhausted, are not at a breaking point, commanders are not exhausted? the notion there is alcohol on the base, they go off and on the base -- it is not what anyone would think typical in your area of command. how do you know that you do not have troops at the breaking point with some troops, from ptsd? what are you doing to look at these questions yourself? >> i talked with our command chaplain come out surgeon, my command sergeant major. all of whom are traveling to all of whom are taking the temperature within their areas of responsibility, and they have entered connections. i travel on a regular basis. i have met with commanders of every one of the regional

commands, and they gave me an assessment on the state of their command and the state of their campaign as they see it unfold and not just today, but how they see it unfold in 2012. i am very interested in small unit the ship because they are what generate success to the point of impact in a counterinsurgency. there could be, bar or, as your question implies, there could be troops that at an individual level due in fact demonstrate or evidence the traits ptsd. have to complement the services in this regard. the army and marine corps have gone and long way to try to help and deployment preparation, but also while we are in theater, with behavioral health and operational stress teams, religious support teams, the constant review by leaders how the chips are doing in the context of an after-action review, and when they go home,

what the service is due for the troops. >> something went terribly wrong. investigation pending. something went terribly wrong. how are you making sure something like that does not happen again? >> very important question. we are investigating this one of the early, and i am looking at command climate of that unit, in fact, as a direct result of these actions. while i will not get into detail describing the unit or this particular event, i will be satisfied when i get the report that we have looked closely at potential -- of rule 20, proceedings will resume on questions previously postponed. votes will be taken in the following order. h.r. 2779 by yeas and nays, h.r. 2682 by the yeas and nays, and agreeing to the speaker's journal -- approval of the journal de novo.

the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. remaining electronic votes will be conducted as five-minute votes. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2779 as amended on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2779, a bill to exempt interaffiliate swaps from certain regulatory requirements put in place by the dodd frank wall street reform -- dodd-frank wall street reform and consumer protection act. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or

commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 357, the nays are 36. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2682 on which the the yeas and nays are ordered the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2682, a bill to provide end user exemptions from certain and the securities exchange act of 1934 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house assist pend the rules and pass the bill as amended.

members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 369, the ncaas are 24. -- the nays are 24.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 370, the nays are 24. 2/3 of those voting 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. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the speaker as i approval of the journal which -- speaker's approval of the journal. the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the

journal thofmentse he is -- journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. >> madam speaker, request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 310 and the nays are 80. the jurm stands approved. and four answered present. the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> madam speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee on rules for filing under the rule.

the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 595, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 3309, to amend the communications act of 1934, to provide for greater transparency and efficiency in the procedures followed by the federal communications commission. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. please take your conversations off the floor. the gentleman deserves to be heard. the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: mr. speaker, the found ers purposely defined the role of government in the u.s. constitution to protect, quote, we the people. from the chains of government. today the united states supreme court began three days of oral arguments on the national iced health care law. the issue, whether or not the federal government has the constitutional authority to force citizens to buy government-approved insurance. but much more than that is at stake. mr. speaker, if this law stands, it is the end of limited government as we know it.

and the beginning of unlimited government is forced upon the people. citizens are frightened. our ancestors were forced it pay a tax on tea so they threw the british tea in the sea. in nationalized health care law should be thrown into the sea of government oppression. if the supreme court upholds this law, we will be on a path of return to the philosophy of the british crown. where americans were mere subjects of unlimited government. then the constitutional days of limited government will drown in the abyss of the sea. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask for unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to

revise my amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, today i rise to continue my calls for justice in the murder of trayvon martin. it has been 30 days since his death, exactly one month since the police actually talked to the killer as he hunted and pursued young trayvon with a loaded gun in his pobblingt -- pocket. mr. wilson: from every indication and every -- mrs. wilson: from every indication and every piece of evidence we have, zimmerman was the aggressor in this case. this is a classic case of racial profiling. he pursued trayvon as he walked down the sidewalk, the police dispatcher said, stand down. leave the boy alone. and trayvon ended up dead. a small 17-year-old from miami who we all love. this is not a victim we will forget, though. we will fight, we know the killer, we will not be quiet.

i demand justice for trayvon. i demand justice for trayvon's family and i demand justice for all of america's murdered children. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, everywhere i go americans are filling the -- feeling the pinch of high gas prices. in response the president has begun to claim he supports the republicans' all-of-the-above energy policy. although the words sound inclusive, a glance to the record shows -- shows president obama means none of the below. the policy is none of the below on federal lands. on average the bush and clinton administrations leased more than three million acres for oil, gas development per year. the obama administration has leased less than two million acres per year.

on federal lands, oil and gas production is down in the last year. there are now fewer offshore production facilities in federal waters than have been for more than 50 years. do the president's policies matter for gas prices? "the washington post" argues that global oil prices are being driven up by a decline in global supply relative to the demand of about a million barrels of oil a day. that's a lot of oil. but let's keep that in perspective. it's less oil than the keystone x.l. pipeline president obama blocked could carry each day to u.s. refineries. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. . >> mr. speaker, the phrase "it's never been done before" has often been used for the world's first, but thanks to

perseverance, the providence lion's women's basketball team won a victory. in an incredible game they erased a second-half seven-point deficit to win the girl's 2-a state basketball championship. when asked about the game, it was team meab mary ann who remarked, we all went out there as hard as we could. these young student athletes extol the poise of champions. i would like to congratulate the team, also congratulate coach finley and the athletes and the entire school as you celebrate your win. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: are further requests for one-minute speeches? the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for ms. corinne brown of florida for today, mr. jackson of illinois, for today and the balance of eff -- of the

week and ms. jackson lee of texas for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. for what purpose does the gentleman texas rise? >> to address the house for one minute and revise and extend and to yield to my colleague from florida if i may. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlelady is recognized. ms. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask for unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman has been yielded to. mrs. wilson: mr. speaker, this is tre'von martin. his murderer -- is travon martin. his killer is still at large. i want america to see this sweet young boy who was hunted down like a dog, shot in the street,

and his killer is still at large. not one person has been arrested in travon's murder. i want to make sure that america knows that in sanford, florida, there was a young boy murdered. he is buried in miami, florida, and not one person has been arrested even though we all know who the murderer is. this was a standard case of racial profiling, no more. no more. we were -- we will stand for justice for travon martin. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady -- the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentlewoman from the virgin

islands, mrs. christensen, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mrs. christensen: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and add any extraneous material on the subject matter of the special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. christensen: and i'd like unanimous consent to enter into the record they have statement of congresswoman eddie bernice johnson. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. christensen: soon we will be called upon to come up with a budget for 2013. budgets are a statement of our values and our vision. that's the case with the congressional black caucus budget. as it says in the title, it restores america's promise and invests in our future. at this time, i would like to yield such time as he might consume to the person who leads us in developing the congressional black caucus budget and who has done so for

several years, one of the senior members on the budget committee, congressman bobby scot of virginia. mr. scott: thank you, and i thank the gentlelady for yielding. mr. speaker, we have difficult choices to make when it comes to addressing our budget deficit. the republican budget makes the wrong choices by deeply cutting vital programs like medicare, medicaid, education, job training and transportation to pay for massive tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthiest americans. our nation's communities of color have been hardest hit by the effects of the great recession and the republican budget does little to address the priorities of these communities. even as our nation -- nation's economy has created nearly 3.9 million private sector jobs since february of 2010, communities of color are still experiencing disproportionately high rates of unemployment, home foreclosure, educational

disadvantages and economic hardship. as a result, vulnerable communities are increasingly relying on public programs to meet their basic needs. with the passage of the fiscal year 2011 continuing resolution, then the budget control act of 2011 and the fiscal year 2012 consolidated appropriations act, the -- these same vital programs have been slashed and targetted for deeper cuts in the house republican budget even as tax cuts for the wealthiest americans are extended without problems. the congressional black caucus has a long history of submitting fiscally sound and morally responsible alternatives to budgets proposed by both democrats and -- democrat and republican presidents. the c.b.c. alternative budget for 2013 continues that long tradition, putting forth a plan that reduces the deficit over the next decade, alleviates some of the harm inflicted by the budget control act and increases economic opportunities and job

creation by ensuring sustained investments in education, job training, transportation and infrastructure and advanced research and development. the congressional black caucus budget proposes significant increases in these if you thinks of the budget for fiscal year 2013, to further accelerate our economic recovery and ensure our recovery is felt at every corner of the nation. at the same time, the c.b.c. budget protects and enhances social security, the social security and social safety net that saves millions of families from poverty in the great recession. unlike the proposed republican budget, the c.b.c. budget does not significantly reduce medicaid or cut food assistance or force seniors to put more of their hard-earned money to health care services by dismantling medicare and other services. the c.b.c. budgets makes tough

but necessary decisions by making our tax system fairer, closing corporate loopholes and helping close those things that cost american jobs. we cannot win the future by leaving our most as a rule neble -- vulnerable behind. our success as a nation is intervovepb in the success of every community and this goal is ore flected in the congressional black caucus alternative budget for fiscal year 2013. now let me go through some of the details of the budget because many of the budgets that have been presented in the past have missing numbers or unspecified cuts or things that you know aren't going to happen. these are our recommendations for a budget and where we are on the bottom line. the c.b.c. budget starts off with an assumption as its baseline, all of the president's spending -- president's spending and revenue assumptions.

the c.b.c. budget then not only extends certain tax cuts but also pays for all the tax cuts for hardworking, middle class americans and then enacts tax reform measures to pay for the extension, raising nearly $4 trillion in revenue over the next decade. we do that by reining in wall street speculation with a financial speculation tax, that will raise approximately $ 40 billion other 10 years, ensuring wall street bankers pay the same rates as hardworking americans by taxing carried interest on dividends and capital gains as ordinary income, that will raise almost $10 billion over 10 years, enacting the buffett rule and enacting a surcharge similar to legislation in the house version of the affordable care act, that will raise approximately $600 billion over 10 years. we closed certain loopholes, tax loopholes and preferences.

there are so many of them we can, by closing those loopholes and deductions, raise $1. trillion over 10 years and ending the mortgage deductions for vacation homes and yachts which will add a few billion over 10 years. the bill protects social security, medicare, medicaid, food assistance, welfare under tanif, and other vital safety net programs hit hard by the republican budget. we restore important funding for programs that were cut under the budget criminal act and cancel sequester of security and nonsecurity program well, match the majority budget on defense, with another $153 billion over the next decade in vital programs to accelerate our economy and support hardworking american families. we do that by increasing the maximum pell grant by $,000 to a

total of $6,500. we invest in adegreesal -- an additional $25 billion above the president's budget in education and training in 20 alone. -- in 2013 alone. we also continue unemployment benefits and provide benefits for those who have, through no fault of their own, been unemployeed for 99 weeks. we invest another $55 billion in job creating, transportation, and infrastructure programs in 2013 alone and $155 billion over the president's budget over the next decade. we match the independent budget for veterans affairs as recommended by the coalition of veterans groups, reinvest $12 billion more in advanced research and development, programs like nasa, department of energy, and national science foundation, which will create jobs now and in the future. we have additional funding for housing, foreclosure assistance,

and other programs in community development. we provide an additional $10 billion in vital health care programs such as community health centers and we create a public option for -- under the affordable care act, giving the american people a real choice when the exchanges come into effect by allowing them to paycheck as one of their choices a public option that has been scored at $100 billion savings because those programs will cost less, $100 billion over 10 years can be saved by adopting a prick option. when the dust settles, the c.b.c. budget will reduce the deficit by an additional $769 billion, compared to the republican budget over the next decade. let me say that again. we will reduce the deficit by an additional $769 billion compared to the republican budget over the next decade. it is more fiscally responsible,

it addresses the needs of our public, and therefore i would hope that we would adopt the congressional black caucus budget and not the republican budget that will be presented on the floor. thank you and i yield back to the gentlelady from the virgin irands. mrs. christensen: thank you, congressman scot and thank you for your leadership all these yoords in -- years in developing such a responsible budget. the c.b.c. is proud to offer that as an alternative this year. now i would like to yield such time as she may condition sume to marcia fudge of ohio. congratulations for being back on the education committee, and thank you for closing the gaps in this budget. ms. fudge: i would like to thank my colleague, representative christensen, for her work to continue to anchor the c.b.c. hour. i think it is very, very important, she is very special

because she is determined to make sure that the united states knows that we, the c.b.c. are fighting for them every day. i thank you. mr. speaker, i rise to address the devastating impacts that the republican budget would have on the middle class an american workers, as well as students, seniors, and the poor. a budget, mr. speaker is a reflection of priorities. it exemplifies objectives and goals. the republicans' priorities are clear. cut taxes for the most wealthy americans, while achieving deficit reduction through drastic spending cuts to medicare, medicaid, snap, and other important programs. the republican budget would abandon the economic retvry we are in and implement policies that ship american jobs overseas. it would assume deep cuts in transportation spending next year, ignore job creation and reject sensible proposals for economic growth and future competitiveness. the congressional black caucus

will present a budget this week, thank you to my colleague mr. scot, will present a budget this week that would protect seniors who rely on medicare, who -- the disabled who need medicaid, and the unemployed who would go hungry without snap. it would support our economy through investment in transportation and infrastructure and encourages american innovation. the republican budget would reject investment in innovation by cutting funding for research and development. it would ignore the benefits of these investments on future generations. should the republican budget go into effect, we would miss a great opportunity to support american innovation and develop emerging technologies that create the jobs of the future. in addition, the republican budget would fail our students by proposing drastic cuts that would devastate education funding and increase costs for college students. it would allow higher interest

rates on student loans starting this year and eliminate the income-based repayment plan that helped graduates manage their loans. in contrast to the republican budget, the c.b.c. budget would increase the maximum pell grant by nearly $1,000, and invest an additional $25 billion above the president's budget in education and jobs training in fiscal year 2013. . alleviating state and local education budget cuts and protecting jobs for teachers. even the middle class is not spared from the republican cuts. the republican budget would outsource jobs through tax policies. it would actually encourage multinational companies to ship thousands of jobs overseas while costing the american economy billions of dollars. by contrast, the c.b.c. budget would ensure that wall street bankers pay the same tax rates as working americans, by taxing

interest, dividends and capital gains as ordinary income. the c.b.c. budget would close corporate tax loopholes adding approximately $1.3 trillion in revenue over 10 years. just like last year the republican budget would end the medicare guarantee and shift costs to seniors. rather than having guaranteed coverage of benefits, seniors would receive a voucher. yet the voucher will not grow as quickly as health care costs. simply shifting costs onto seniors. as the aarp pointed out, the premium support method described in the republican proposal would likely price out traditional medicare as a viable option, thus rendering the choice of traditional medicare as a false promise. the c.b.c. budget would support our seniors, working americans and the middle class and the c.b.c. budget will reduce the

deficit by an additional $3.4 trillion as compared to the president's budget over the next decade. the republican budget would repeat last year's attempts to drastically reduce snap formerly known as food stamps for struggling families. it would slash snap funding by roughly $130 billion over 10 years and completely eliminate categorical eligibility. snap is currently serving 47 million people, nearly 3/4 of whom are families with children. throwing people off the rolls would make it practically impossible for people to afford a nutritionally sound diet. for two years in a row we've seen republican priorities and the republican vision for the nation. mr. speaker, the republican budget is the wrong plan for american workers. it is the wrong plan for families trying to put food on the table. it is the wrong plan for unemployed americans and the wrong plan for students and the wrong plan for seniors. i urge my colleagues to support the budget presented by the congressional black caucus and to vote no on the proposed

republican budget. i yield back. >> thank you, congresswoman fudge, and thank you for your strong defense of programs for children, for our seniors and for families across this country. mrs. christensen: i'd now like to yield such time as he might consume to congressman danny davis, strong fighter for health equity, for justice in our criminal justice system and a valued members of the ways and means committee. -- member of the ways and means committee. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. first of all i want to thank the gentlelady from the virgin islands for her leadership in convening and anchoring these sessions that we hold each week. i also want to commend and pay tribute to representative bobby scott for the tremendous leadership and work that he

provides each year, helping the congressional black caucus analyze, synthesize and look seriously at how we move forward as we prepare a budget. as has already been indicated, budgets are indications of priorities. what is it that you're really hoping to do? what do you really hope to accomplish? and so this budget i view as a tremendously positive alternative to any other budgets that we have seen, that i have seen at this time. so i rise in strong support of the congressional black caucus' f.y. 2013 alternative budget. february's job report reveals three months of strong jobs growth in america. while there is a sigh of relief for millions of consumers and

the unemployed, moving from the sidelines in search of work with hopes that their prospects will improve, there is no change for the 5.4 million long-term unemployed, 8.1 million involuntary part time workers and marginally attached individuals no longer in the labor force who wanted and were available for work and looked for a job at some point during the last 12 months. and so it becomes obvious that any budget should have at its core job creation opportunities so that people can experience this opportunity or this commodity that we call work.

this does little for minorities residing in disinvented communities, blighted with high rates of joblessness, poor performance schools, poverty and crime. indeed promise of a new day and new hopes are few and far between for poor, low income workers generally, and returning citizens with barriers to employment in particular. indeed over the past decade the poor in america have gotten poorer and of course the wealthy have gotten wealthier and those who have called -- those who are called middle class have been squeezed to the point where they are teetering and certainly could go in either direction.

that is up with the right kinds of opportunities and down with the wrong kind of opportunities. i don't believe that we can afford in good conscience to continue to turn a blind eye to census figures and monthly data reports of the economic injustices and suffering being imposed upon a growing number of people. moreover we cannot continue to hold a great nation hostage for the sake of a few while millions suffer. if we're truly going to address the crisis in america and put all americans back to work and reduce poverty, we must create a mixture of universal and targeted programs capable of weathering political obstacles. the congressional black caucus alternative budget is a means to

this end. indeed the c.b.c. budget safeguards investment in public education, pell grants and transportation vital to equipping minority youth and adults with skills so that they can obtain and maintain access to gainful, sustainable employment in our ever-changing global economy. by renovating and building new schools and investing in additional $50 billion in transportation and infrastructure in 2013 and $155 billion above the president's budget over the next decade, repairing not only and building bridges across lakes, rivers and streams, but also bridges to opportunity. the congressional black caucus

budget protects the health care safety net programs that have been developed. it also protects second chance funding while restoring funding to department of justice programs, the citizens who are returning home from jail and prison with serious barriers to employment. we hold these truths to be self-evident, that if america is to become the america that has never been, but the america that all of us hope for and know that it can be, then we would take the principles encased in the congressional black budget and comply those to whatever budgets are ultimately passed.

so again i want to commend mr. scott, i want to thank delegate christensen and i yield back the balance of my time. mrs. christensen: thank you, congressman davis. and i'd like to just say a few words about the congressional black caucus budget and strong support of this budget. as i said, it's a responsible budget that is a statement of our values and priorities and as the title says it restores america's promise in investing in our future. our budget, as congressman scott said, builds upon the president's budget. and it reensures that our children, our veterans and seniors are protected and adequately taken care of. we invest in education and health care as wells in research and innovation. our budget provides revenue by enacting tax measures that are fair, that close loopholes and that protects tax cuts for hardworking middle class families while protecting vital safety nets that help the poor

and provides them with stepping stones out of poverty. those safety nets that we protect are for example social security, medicare, medicaid, critical programs, the supplemental nutrition assistance program, snap, temporary assistance to needy families and many, many others. and it does all of that while reducing the deficit by an additional $3.4 trillion compared to the president's budget. our budget stands as a direct contrast to the republican ryan budget. the ryan budget begins at the outset by breaking the hard-fought agreement on caps set in the budget control act of 2011. if they can't keep their board on -- word on something that they forced an agreement on, then what will they keep their word on? so the republican budget begins across the board d cuts at -- across-the-board cuts. they do not cut any defense spending as agreed to in the budget control act, but in 2014

they would reduce those caps 19% before -- below the agreed two caps in nondefense spending over 10 years. and i guess they noted the supreme court arguments made by those 26 states that began today against the affordable care act are not going to win the day. that that court will uphold the constitutionality of the law and so the republican budget would repeal the affordable care act. just to take a look at what republicans take out of health care. they would cut funding for the indian health service by 19% beginning in 2014. that would greatly diminish access to health care for the american indians who already suffered disproportionately from many diseases and as a result have a very low life expectancy compared to the white population. there are cuts to funding to the center for medicare and medicaid services which would make it very difficult for that agency to meet its responsibilities in overseeing these critical

programs. there are also cuts to the food and drug administration which would reverse what democrats were able to do to strengthen protections in food and medicines and put the -- those -- cutting back on those programs would put the american public at an increased risk. while in this difficult economic climate, the president's budget managed to fund n.i.h. at its current level, the republican ryan budget would jeopardize new research by cutting that budget, that research that would lead to innovations in medicine and improve lives would be jeopardized. in addition, they cut w.i.c. and turned snap into a block grant which weakens their ability to help those who increasingly find themselves in food insecurity as the grap between the rich and poor has widened and incomes have plummeted. and it cuts the republicans' favorite target, the e.p.a., which would reduce our investments in public health and harm our ability to protect our

public from air and water pollution and land contamination. on the other hand, our budget, the c.b.c. budget, which is also a very responsible budget, responsible to the american people and fiscally responsible, while it provides more deficit reduction than the republican ryan budget, it still makes important investments that are critical to a strong future including in health care. first of all, our budget upholds the affordable care act and fully funds it, but it takes it one step further by creating a public health insurance option that by itself saves almost $103 billion in health care costs over the next decade. . it adds $10 billion to health care funding in the 2013 budget and that $10 billion more robustly funds the following important programs, such as the aids drug assistance program, which has been underfunded for years, causing states to drop

persons from their roster with h.i.v. or aids, or reducing the coverage, reducing the benefits, and causing increasingly long waiting lists. it also increases funding for ryan white, the minority aide's initiative and prevention activities for h.i.v., s.t.d.'s, t.b. and hepatitis. our budget funds the offices of minority health, which were expanded and strengthened under the affordable care act to improve equity. we expand and pay for oral health programsing for health care improvements and construction. we increase funding for the maternal and child health and the preventive health block grant. we fund the physician training sciences program, which brings minorities into underfunded health care careers, both in the practice of medicine and in

research. we provide additional funding for substance abuse and mental health, and we provide adequate funding for the national institute on minority and health disparity on n.i.h. and we restore reach program that assists racial and ethnic minorities to develop programs and unique approaches to health care uniquely for those communities. we fund many other health related programs and services and still with all of that we redouse that deficit by $3.4 trillion over the next 10 years. the health provisions -- those health provegses, wells those in education and research and innovation and protection of the safety net programs and tax fairness, those -- and the c.b.c. budget makes it one that's clearly a statement of our values and priorities, a statement of america's values, values everyone in this body should support.

at this time, i would like to yield again, such time as he mason sume, our leader on budget in the c.b.c., congressman bobby scot. -- bobby scott. mr. scott: i thank the gentlelady for her strong statements. mr. speaker, we have tough choices to make and when we start the discussion with how much people will get in tax cuts, we know the rest of the discussion will not be serious. we have decided, if you're going to have tax cuts, if you're going to extend them, they have to be paid for. that is a stark contrast between the c.b.c. budget and the republican budget. now, mr. speaker, when people say we have to cut medicare, they should look at the republican budget. because the only reason you have to cut medicare is to fund the tax cuts. if you do not extend the tax cuts, you don't have to cut medicare. when the same budget includes massive tax cuts and cuts in

medicare, people ought to notice that if you don't have the tax cuts you don't have to cut medicare. now, the republican budget has virtually dismantled medicare, provides -- it's a voucher but i think they like to call it, what, a premium support something or other? basically, you dismantle your right to medicare and you get the tissue some money to go see if you can buy some insurance on the private market. turns out that the amount of money you're given, i'll call it a voucher, is about -- will be about $6,000 short of what you need to get the equivalent of medicare coverage. that's where the savings is. you don't reduce the cost of health care you shift it over to the seniors. now, one of the ways they try to convince people to go along with

it is they tell people who are paying attention, those over 55, they say, it's not going to apply to you. we'll continue to plan for about 10 years and then we'll inflict this scheme on everybody else. and so people over 55 say, well, that's good, i don't have to worry about it. well, actually, people over 55 do have to worry about it because the people making the promise that you will be able to have a cadillac medicare program when people coming behind have a little motor scooter for their health care and you think people are going to pay taxes when they're going to get a motor scooter for your cadillac plan, i think the idea that they're going to continue paying those taxes are remote. ened you have to notice that 10 years from now, when the decision gets made to start inflicting this scheme on younger people, the people who will be keeping the promise for

those over 55 aren't the ones that made the promise. they will be new representatives. who don't have any commitment to keeping that promise. in fact, election after election, some of the younger people, might ask, well, are you going to continue taxing me to support a premium medicare program when all i'm going to get is a vouch her i want to know, which one of the candidates will either cancel the medicare for everybody and have everybody get this voucher thing, or continue the medicare program for everybody. i want to know if anybody up there is going to tax me for a medicare program that i'm not going to get. and after five election cycles, the people at the -- that survive that will be the ones dealing with the promise that

others made. i doubt if any of them will be able to sustain that kind of pressure. when the time comes, either everybody will get a voucher thing or everybody will get a medicare card. and the idea that some will get a nice big medicare package and everybody else coming behind, getting a piece of the voucher and think that's going to be sustained for any length of time, i think they've got another thought coming. so people ought to recognize that even those over 55 have to protect medicare and the reason it's being cut is so that millionaires can get their cacks cuts. you let the million tears' tax cuts expire, you don't have to -- you don't have to cut medicare. as the gentlelady from the virgin islands said, we have a responsible budget. we name the cuts that are made, we name the taxes that will be affected, and you can see exactly what we're doing.

unfortunately, in the republican budget you get unspecified cuts. 19% on average. you know it's not going to be on average. it's not going to be across the board. some programs won't be cut. you're not going to cut the f.b.i. by 19%, you're not going to cut federal businesses -- prisons by 19%. so all those that you don't cut, you end up having to double up, double up on the next one. we have no idea what's going to happen other than all of these kind of unspecified cuts and hopefully everybody is thinking, well, that's not going to be my program, that's not the one i depend on, when in fact it might be 19%, bhithe 20% or 30% cuts in those programs. the fact is the congressional black caw us is is a responsible budget and it comes in almost $800 billion better on the bottom line than the republican budget that will be the alternative. we have shown you can be responsible, you can be

compassionate and you can be fiscally responsible and that's the congressional black caucus budget. i yield back to the gentlelady from the virgin islands. mrs. christensen: thank you for summarizing that for us and for pointing out the very important point that in order to -- in order to keep those tax cuts for the millionaires, those programs that so many people in this country, the poor and middle class, depend on will be cut. and that's a tradeoff we don't -- that this country should not be taking and we do not support so we are very pleased to present our budget and as i said , as congressman scot said, this is a very responsible budget that not only invests in the future and keeps america's promise to its people, but it saves money. $.4 trillion over 10 years to reduce the deficit. so with that, we ask for the support of our colleagues and i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from new york, mr. reed, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker, i rise tonight, and i'm joined tonight with many of my colleagues as freshman members of the u.s. house of representatives, to have an open and honest conversation with you, mr. speaker, and with all of america, to talk about an issue that i believe is timely, with the court case that is now pending in the united states supreme court, dealing with the affordable kear act, otherwise known as obamacare, otherwise known as many other items but tonight we'll refer to it as obamacare or the affordable care act. to me, mr. speaker, it is clear that obamacare is a legislative act that overpromises,

overspends and underperforms. all at the expense of hardworking taxpayers. the law does little to get to the root cause of the problem in health care and that is escalating cost increases across america. to me, the law is more focused on health insurance reform an does not do much in regard to curving the increasing health care costs in america down. in the house of representatives, we have voted repeatedly to repeal this atrocious law. i believe that is the best course of action for many reasons and i'm sure we're going to get into those reasons tonight, but tonight we are joined by many freshman colleagues and what i'd like to do at this point in time is yield to my good friend from georgia, mr. scot, a great member of the freshman class, and president of the freshman class torque offer some comments in regards to this. mr. scott: as you know this week, the united states supreme court began hearing comments on the constitutionality of the

president's health care law a law that according to a "usa today" poll, 72% of americans believe is unconstitutional. the key question is, if the federal government can mandate that its citizens buy health insurance, what can they not mandate from from washington, d.c. that americans must buy? the consequences of this mandate are severe. if the supreme court does not overturn it, what will the federal government allow themselves to mandate next? life insurance? just one word different. health insurance vs. life insurance. bank accounts? a red car instead of a blue one. organic apples instead of grapes. president obama has put america on tissue america on a steep and slippery slope and house republicans are here to stop him. during his takeover of 1/6 of the u.s. economy, and that's what this is about, president obama stated that if you liked your plan, you can keep it. it was a promise, a pledge, he made to the american citizens. however, americans soon found

out, as we know today, exactly what he meant. under president because ma's health care law, you technically have a choice. technically, you have a choice. you can keep your current plan, as he promised. the health insurance plan you chose. and yes, as long as the president, by his commission of unelected bureaucrats, approve your purchase, you can keep the plan without paying a penalty. however, if his bureaucrats don't approve your plan, you pay a penalty. mr. speaker, the american people know that's not a choice. now two years after this bill was signed into law, our worst suspicions are now being confirmed. thanks to president obut ma and the democrats who used their control of congress, americans will have higher costs and reduced level of care. the nonpartisan c.b.o. estimates that nonemployer sponsored health insurance premiums will be 13% -- 13% -- higher than if this legislation had not been signed into law, mr. speaker. over 90% of seniors will lose the scription drug coverage they

currently enjoy and be hit with double digit premium increases and it's been noted that the health care law may hinder job creation. ible there's no doubt this bill kills jobs. in fact, when you get right down to it, a small business owner who has more than 50 employees is actually going to be encouraged to terminate the number of employees that they have above 50. otherwise, they will be penalized if they do not comply with the law. now think about that, mr. speaker. not only does this -- does this -- not only does this law hinder job creation but it encourages employers to be under the 50-employee threshold so they don't have to deal with the job-killing bureaucracy this bill forces on them. since coming to congress last january, the house republican conference has voted to repeal not only this health care bill in its entirety but the 1099