answer them now. the normal schedule for today's conference would include the postal reform bill which we just enacted cloture on that and the budget. i also served in the budget committee. i need to be there also for the budget issues. that is what is scheduled on the agenda. you never know. because of today's hearing, it may come up and i might be so motivated to bring it up. >> there were no republicans testified on behalf of the bill and only one republican on the dais. what is the realistic terms for getting this bill through before the election? >> i thought the comments of senator gramm were telling. he made it clear that he is

prepared to work with us. whether you are a democrat or republican, you know we have a problem in this country with racial profiling. i would hope that he would be able to bring about a consensus to move legislation forward. quite frankly, the trayvon martin case has put a national spotlight on this. the american public were outraged by what they saw as the investigation continues, i don't want to prejudge the investigation, but everything we have seen indicates that race had an immediate impact on trayvon martin being targeted. the end result was that he lost his life. we want to make sure that never happens again. that is true whether you are a democrat or republican and i would hope we would get a consensus on this bill and we will work for that. yes? >> the bill would not really affect people like george zimmerman who are on never and watch. is there any discussion of

trying to expand to that? >> it is my intention that it would affect persons such as mr. urquhart is a mormon acting under the authority local law- enforcement. -- such as mr. zimmerman acting under the authority local law enforcement. they would go through training and understand that racial profiling cannot be used. i would hope that neighborhood watch group would be covered under our legislation and be subjected to training sessions. yes? >> [inaudible] >> i have not heard of any specific part of the legislation they have a concern about. there's always concern on new authorization. we will certainly look at that issue to see whether we cannot find an avenue which existing programs to finance this.

this is not a large cost issue. that would be one area where i would expect we would have to deal with in order to get certain republicans to sign onto it. from the point of view of the substance of the legislation, i don't know of any specific concern. congressman conyers pointed out in the beginning that this is not to impede the proper investigation of a crime. the identification of the potential perpetrator needs to be fully explores. that is not the intention of this legislation at all. the intent is to prevent the random selection of individuals because of their race or ethnic background. i think the fundamental issue, there should not be much disagreement in this congress. i am an optimist. i am in the senate, you have to be an optimist.

yes? >> you said you hope it would include never watch. does the line which already include that? >> i believe it is already included cash and the need to be clarified we will clarify it. the language makes it clear that law enforcement includes neighborhood watch groups and they are working under the direct partnership with local police. they need to take responsibility for those actions. yes? last question -- >> there was a suggestion that one of -- from one of the witnesses that this would create new causes of action against police officers. do you think your legislation would do that? >> no, i don't need to do that of that needs clarification we will clarify that. i expect there'll be some technical suggestions and we're waiting for the department of justice to give us their views on the technical language. that is not the intent of the

legislation at all. with that, i will introduce -- there is an order we will follow here and i will ask the cooperation of the different persons and of they will follow this list. but i want to welcome rev. jamel bryant from baltimore. he has extraordinary leadership and advice he has given to the trayvon martin family and the spiritual help has been noted around the nation. we're very proud of his leadership in our community and it is nice to have you here. with that, will follow the order we have here and ask -- i hope you have all good eyesight -- if you fall down, we will start with margaret wong.

if members of congress come back, they will have a chance to speak also. we have juanita rhoades berg, then tabercio, then elizabeth stan, anthony romero, a larry shelton -- hillary shelton, then a great leader and civil-rights issues, kevin levine, a retired police officer and dr. jqamel bryant comes after hillary shelton and then kevin levine. we will start with margaret wong

and then we will proceed. i will distribute this list and i thank you all very much. [applause] >> good morning everyone and welcome. my name is margaret wong, the executive director of the rice kin group, working with groups across the country to end civil liberties violations for everyone in the united states regardless of race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, immigration, or citizenship status. it is a pleasure to be here today and to have joined all of you for this momentous hearing. want to start by acknowledging center cardin's leadership as the sponsor of the act. he has been a true champion and has taken this bill and move it forward in the last year and we're grateful to him for his leadership. we also want to thank senator

durbin for hosting the hearing today. this is the first and more than a decade to look at this important issue and we appreciate his ongoing efforts to protect human rights and equal justice for everyone in the united states. today, in 2012, racial profiling is flourishing. despite the fact that we have our first african american president, our first african- american attorney-general, our first latino on the supreme court, racial profiling is increasing on an extraordinary basis. despite all these achievements, we have to deal with this serious and pervasive problem. african-americans, latinos, asians, arabs, seeks and muslims, it affects everyone's in the united states started when communities lose trust in their police, in the government, it means they don't serve as witnesses, they don't report

crimes. that affects everyone's safety in our communities. it means that parents don't take their children to school. it means that loved ones don't take ill family members to the hospital. all of us become less say when racial profiling is not addressed. passing the and racial profiling act would be a major step forward in countering this problem. it defines the problem, it bends it, it requires law enforcement agencies to adopt clear policies and train their officers to avoid racial profiling. we need this legislation. today we hope that a number of members who testified earlier this morning will be coming back to share their comments with you and take questions. also hereby number of directly affected people, people who have in fact suffered racial profiling, the want to share their stories with you. we hope you'll join us in this fight to end racial profiling

and pass the end of racial profiling act. i would like to call up my colleague, juanita rhaodes- burke, to offer up some comments this morning. thank you. >> good afternoon, i was born and raised in minneapolis, minn. along with my siblings. we were brought up to be proud of who we were and my father was a 20-year veteran for the minneapolis police department and he made it quite clear to us that we better not get in trouble. i grew up believing that if i abided by the law and treated myself and others with respect, i would not have to face questions by law enforcement or be singled out for any reason. that changed 11 years ago when the dea at the minneapolis st. paul airport stopped me for no reason other than the color of

my skin. i was returning home from a two- week trip, visiting my younger son damon reside in los angeles, california. i took the red eye. i was using my frequent-flier miles and it was the only available time i had to come home to use my rewards. i had taken the day off from work in my job in downtown st. paul and i had planned to go straight home because you get tired flying the red eye. i was wearing jeans, a jacket, and a baseball cap and no makeup because i like to be comfortable in flying. once i got off the plane, i collected my luggage and headed toward the elevators to take the shuttle downtown because i live in downtown minneapolis. while i was waiting for the doors of the elevator to close, i saw a man and a woman running

to catch the elevator so i held the door open. they entered the elevator and rode down with me. when the elevator doors opened, the woman said," excuse me." i turned around and they have their badges out. they said they were dea agents and it was their job to watch for people bring in drugs and money for laundering. and ask them what their criteria was for stopping me and they told me that might carry on looked heavy. after a question of them, they got defense of and told me not to be indignant. they wanted to see my airline ticket and my identification. the female officer asked to check my carry on and i told her to go for it. in my carry-on, she found my bible, my devotional studies, a toiletries, jewelry, lingerie, my pajamas, and a soy protein

products. at the age and closed my bag and went on their way. after the let me go, i proceeded to catch the shuttle. on the way, i started crying. i was so mad. i knew they had stopped me because i was an african- american and i knew i had been racially profiled. immediately after that terrible experience, i got in touch with my representative, the senator, and i call the governor's office to let them know that the dea had stopped me and i did not do anything wrong and i wanted to know why they had treated me as if i had. but since that time, i have obsessively -- i have successfully settled a civil will rights lawsuit in july. from that day on, my feelings about police and law enforcement have not been the same. the following saturday, i had to go to the airport again to catch another flight because a friend

of mine, her husband was giving her a 50th birthday party in orlando florida. after i arrived in orlando, i went to catch the shuttle to the airport -- i mean, to the hotel. as i was walking to get to the shuttle, a policeman said," may i help you?" >> i did not ask for help, why is he asking me that question. from that day on, my feelings about police and law enforcement have not been the same per. in regards to being stopped by the police and the dea, i have been paranoid and never relaxed in flying again. you have that relaxed feeling 11 years ago and i have that no more. that was taken away from me, thank you. [applause]

>> mi nombres >> my name is -- >> speaking spanish. >> a proud citizen of this great nation. i was born in mexico yet my mother was a u.s. citizen in texas. >> [spewaking spanish] >> becoming a u.s. citizen was

one of my proudest moments. >> [speaking spanish] >> i will never forget the way that i felt raising my hand and taking the oath to this country. i felt i was part of a community like every other american. >> [speaking spanish] >> that feeling was short lived for me and my family. >> [speaking spanish] >> in february of 2011, i

confronted the harsh reality that so many in my community faced. >> 3 [speaking spanish] >> racial profiling. >> [speaking spanish] >> while driving a company van of the company it where i worked at -- >> [speaking spanish] >> i was stopped by a michigan state police officer. >> [speaking spanish] >> the officer said i had run a red light. >> [speaking spanish] >> i would have preferred that the officer just give me a ticket rather than interrogate me about my citizenship. >> [speaking spanish] >> he called me a liar. >> [speaking spanish]

>> the ticket would have been much easier to explain to my children than racial profiling. [speaking spanish] >> when the officer came to my car, i handed him my michigan chauffeur's license. >> [speaking spanish] >> yet the officer was more interested in my immigration status. >> [speaking spanish] >> i repeatedly told him that i was a u.s. citizen >> [speaking spanish] >> he didn't care. >> [speaking spanish] >> he went to his car to look at my record and when he returned, he told me to get out of the

car and that i would be deported. >> [speaking spanish] >> the officer had called border patrol. >> [speaking spanish] >> my car was impounded, i was handcuffed and driven to an empty parking lot to wait for border patrol officers. [speaking spanish] >> i could not understand why this was happening to me. >> [speaking spanish] >> i felt worse than any criminal because the criminal knows that when he is arrested, it is because he is at fault. >> [speaking spanish] >> he knows he has to pay for something he did wrong. >>

[speaking spanish] >> but i did nothing wrong. i was working. >> [speaking spanish] >> hi pleaded with the officer to listen to me, to believe me that i was telling the truth. >> [speaking spanish] >> i told him i am a citizen. >> [speaking spanish] >> but it did not matter. >> [speaking spanish] >> i offered to show him my social security card. >> [speaking spanish] >> but he refused to look at it. >> [speaking spanish] >> finally, border patrol officers are arrived. >> [speaking spanish]

>> the michigan state police officer had left - >> [speaking spanish] >> and the border patrol officers confirmed that i was telling the truth and i was let go. >> [speaking spanish] >> i never received a ticket from a traffic violation but, more importantly, i never got an apology. >> [speaking spanish] >> i believe in the opportunities and drains the u.s. represents. >> [speaking spanish] >> i believe in the promise and the quality of justice for all. >> [speaking spanish] >> and, as i thought more about

this experience, i realized i could not just ignore what had happened. >> [speaking spanish] >> because there are others just like me who are harassed, arrested, and deported. >> [speaking spanish] >> for no other reason than a police officer's perception of what a citizen should look like or sound like. >> [speaking spanish] >> i want to read sclu of michigan >> [speaking spanish] >> for help. >> [speaking spanish] >> and they sent a letter to the

michigan state police on my behalf asking for answers and then internal investigation. >> [speaking spanish] >> a few days later, i sat in the sclu office. >> [speaking spanish] >> while a police internal investigator asked me to tell my story. >> [speaking spanish] >> that was another proud day for me because i knew i had made a difference. >> [speaking spanish] >> although i still believe in

the promise of equality, i know i have to speak out to make sure it is a reality for me. >> [speaking spanish] >> my family and my community. >> [speaking spanish] >> no u.s. citizen should be made to feel like a criminal. >> [speaking spanish] >> sent because of the color of their skin, language abilities, or >> religion> [speaking spanish] >> thank you, that is part of my story. [applause] >> hello, my name is elizabeth stans that want to thank you for this incredible opportunity

about what students have been going through for the past few months. i'm a convert to islam. i am in my final year of law school at nyu. i am the average share of the nyu law students association. i and many other things as well. i am a descendant of english immigrants who arrived in this country prior to the revolutionary war and of irish catholic immigrants. imi wife and an expectant mother. the racial profiling that has commented in the nypd surveillance of muslim students in and outside the new york city area has appalled me. after finding out about the surveillance whether any suspicion of criminal activity of muslim students from yale to the university pennsylvania, i felt a variety of emotions. i felt fear not only of harm directly caused by the nypd but for what this means about the standing of my community in the eyes of american citizens, fear

that we are considered an enemy that can never prove itself' neighborly or kind with any amount of safe neighborly or kind behavior. fear of what is coming next for us, fear of the legacy of internment of law-abiding japanese american citizens during world war two and when that legacy might be resurrected. fear that we will have trouble finding jobs, finding space to worship freely, finding our voices during this and other political moments. fear that for the moslem students of so many universities who are young, hopeful, and patriotic, the surveillance will destroy some of their faith in fairness, justice, and law enforcement. fear that muslim students will lose a bit of their innocence and artfulness. fear that my friends and community members would suspect me of being an informant because i am a white convert. fear that my unborn child will feel it necessary to make a

choice between the expression of her religion and the fulfillment of her professional dreams. fear of what i will tell her about her place in the city of her birth when her entire faith community is washed with suspicion. fear that the surveillance that we know that is only the beginning and we will be powerless to change it. i was angry. i was angry because this action is a violation of the values this country holds most dear, the freedoms of speech, religious expression, and association. i was angry because the students around were afraid to be angry because terrorists are angry. students are terrified that if they sound angry, even though they have been wrong, someone will be watching them and know that they're dangerous people, people of interest. i was angry because commissioner kelly is the son of immigrants and a member of a religious minority in this country and he

has forgotten the pain that irish-americans suffered at that hands of racist english protestants. i was angry because i felt violated because i am a student of law and because i believe in rules. i was angry because i did not know what else to feel. now i am disappointed. i am disappointed this happened at all. i am disappointed that the muslim community has not forced the relationship with people of other faiths that are strong and at the other faith-based communities would be outraged our behalf. i am disappointed that this is where we are, spying on the public lawful activities of young, unsuspecting students to look for terrorists because nobody has any better ideas. i am disappointed because of what this means for our constitution, what this means that our values, what this means about the melting pot we live and. if certain groups are subjected to treatment that makes them too

terrified to speak or pray, how can they melt into this wonderful pot that is america. i understand and command any intention to keep new york city and, more broadly, this country safe but i do not believe in my heart of hearts, in my incredibly american, born and raised new englander part that surveillance based on racial or religious distinction is a way to keep us say. we are all entitled to a feeling of safety, all of us, white, brown, yellow, black, christian, jewish, muslim, buddhist, we're all entitled to the protections of our laws and the protection of law enforcement. we minorities are harmed by these kind of practices. we feel less safe than we are less safe as a result of characteristics about ourselves that we are powerless to change. it is not being adhered to and a religion that makes one a threat to security.

it is not being in a particular color that makes someone a threat to security. it is hateful, markell, and just actions of individuals that are a threat to securities. communities do not their collective responsibility for the wrongdoing of any one person. if i could assign a different religious label to every terrorist who has ever lived, i would. i disavow them, their beliefs, their values, their manes, and their ends. i have felt anger, sadness, and disciplined but those feelings make me want to build a better future, not tear anyone's present down and that is what i am a student of the law, that is why and the average share of the moslem law students association, that is why i muslim and that is why i am speaking to you today. i asked the house and senate to pass the end of racial profiling federal introduce a actb

bench and i asked the subcommittee to urge the department justice to revise its 2003 guidance to apply to profiling based on religion and national origin, remove national and border security loopholes, cover law enforcement surveillance activities and apply it to local law enforcement and make the guidance enforceable. i want to thank the naacp, the aclu and the right to working group for putting together this conference. thank you to all of you for coming in listening to us. [applause] >> good afternoon, i am anteroom mara, national director of the civil liberties union. -- buy and anthony romero. - i am anthony romero.

prior to 9/11, racial profiling was seen as on american. after 9/11, racial profiling is now seen as a necessary evil where in order to keep our streets safe, to keep our airport travelers safe, to free us from the "harm done to us by undocumented immigrants, "we hear many justify racial profiling as necessary to ensure the american way of life in their mind. today's hearing and the testimony you hear today challenges that the very notion. in fact, it is only by challenging the use of racial profiling in many different forms and circumstances that we will uphold the american way of life.

as the legislation proceeds, it has a very challenging road ahead. there will be many within congress and even within the advocates who will try to strip away certain positions of the and racial profiling act as a way to get it done. we will try once again to negotiate whether there should be a national security exemption and whether immigration or customs border patrol protections should be forfeited and whether we should focus on the traditional minority groups like latinos and african-americans suffer at the hands of the police. i would exhort all of us in this room to not allow those politics to be played off one against another. that is part of the difficulty we now find ourselves in when we have exemptions based on national security or on ethnicity or national origin. that is precisely the patchwork of acceptable racial profiling

that is found in bill law which is unacceptable wherever it is. thank you very much and we look forward to working with you to make this legislative dream a reality and thank you all for organizing this event. [applause] >> good afternoon. my name is hillary shelton, director of the naacp washington bureau and senior vice president for advocates in policy. let me thank the three and all of the acp japan's in congress -- let me thank the three naacp advocates in congress -- senator durbin who has been active in trying to address racial profiling encumber santa introduced a reasonable search standards act over a decade ago. senator cardin, who introduced

the and racial profiling act last year and has been a tireless champion and congressman john conyers who has introduced the and racial profiling act in the past and continues to be our leader as well as a host of other civil rights concerns. racial profiling is unconstitutional, socially corrupting, and counter protected too smart law enforcement for the naacp heartily believes the majority of law enforcement agencies are hard-working, courageous individuals as exemplified by chief ron davis who testified earlier today who should be commended for their sacrifices they make on a regular basis and are willing to serve their neighbors and communities car racial profiling by just one officer can lead to mistrust all officers. in fact, it is safe to say that the continued use of racial has undercut our

communities and the integrity of the american justice system. we need a data base approach to define the problem and determine the scope and its magnitude in order to fix the problem of racial profiling in order to fix this problem, you must first measure it. then he must have an education and training at all levels to eliminate racial profiling once and for all. the training must be uniform and regional levels from the federal government down to a neighborhood watch groups. from unit commander is down to the cop on the beat and even the desk sergeant. finally, in order for lot to be effective, it must offer citizens and the government real accommodation -- that is avenue is to enforce and insure the racial profiling stops. not only is racial profiling more labor room and a ineffective but a misuse of government resources and detrimental to effective policing. racial profiling must be stopped and on behalf of the entire naacp, i applaud our champions

here today and urged the immediate enactment of the end of racial profiling act. thank you very much and i look forward to the work we will do. [applause] >> good afternoon, everyone. i want to give commendation to center card in and particularly to john conyers to have been consistent in ringing the alarm across the country about the deficit and skating get that racial profiling is doing in america. my mind goes back to 1995 that in the cannes film festival was an undiscovered on that would not go far. it was coined and named after one line from "casablanca." it was entitled "the usual suspects." it was a motley bunch of criminals found on a ship and as the film developed, they think the person who they thought did

it is not the person who did it. they thought was going to be a con man and they figured out it was somebody they would never have suspected for it whenever it is we participate in racial profiling, it is in fact the usual suspects, who is the media has portrayed criminality in america is supposed to look like. any person who has any breadth of memory will remember that when dukakis ran for president that the linchpin to his demise and fair was raising a portrait of criminality with a black man. you don't have to go to many days for them that when a distraught woman in south carolina claimed that her children were in fact kidnapped but she, in fact, killed her own children was racial profiling. you remember when "time magazine" a dark and the view of o.j. simpson so he would look more criminal and his attend causing the publishers and editors to apologize for making

o.j. seemed darker to give a more criminal intent to his distinction of his own wife. let we stand today in 2012 and my heart is a thunder knowing that 49 years ago this very day, martin luther king jr. wrote a letter from a birmingham jail. on this day, the 17th of april, he raised the question why we are here. we are here because in justice is here. 49 years later, we come into this room and this senate building, muslim, jews, protestants, catholics, african- americans, latinos, asians and want to know why we are here with visitor badges. we are here because in justice is still here. all the merit palls wind is we heard the glaring report about trayvon martin. here is a young man, not driving while black, but walking while black, and profiled and we all have the 911 tapes to prove it.

what is his crime? he looked suspicious. that we get to a place that in middle-class america you are suspicious because you have on an athletic uniform. what is your crime? your suspicion because you have a bag of 69 c skittles for a can of arizona iced tea. what is the crime of millions of americans who are now afraid to walk outside of their homes, not that he was part of a gang and not that he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. he simply is suspicious in america because he is a young black team. we have to come to a place, ladies and gentleman, that the legislation must be passed. martin luther king jr. was very clear that you cannot legislate love. in a book it said in order for us to change america it will not happen for congress, it will not

happen in sentiment, it will only have to happen through a change of heart. regrettably, ladies and gentlemen, perception is reality. when many of our young people look at the housewives of orange county and the spire that that is what success looks like the what the camera does not show is that 37% of the houses in aren't counted are under foreclosure. what is the perception? what is the reality? they turn the channel and look at basketball wives and out of nine frustrated women, eight of them are not even married. what is the perception and what is the reality? if you've got a large stomach and can handle your nerves and look at the house was of atlanta and seek an on written script that a soap opera does not have that vivid imagination -- what is perception and what is reality? it is a question while we sit here in this panel today, talking about who is wrong. is a police officer?

how i wish we could give every police officer in america rose colored glasses. what we found out is that a bill is not in the budget. because we cannot give them rose colored glasses, we need to change the perception of how america looks at our minorities and pellets that are women and how it is we look at different religious affiliation. just while it is we were assembling here, my own bishop was late coming into the galley. the reason he was late is a few blocks away from here he caught a cab but the cab pulled over. it pulled over because the cab driver wanted to see the launching of discovery. it is amazing, ladies and gentlemen, that whenever you do excavation or archaeology, you always look down. whenever you wanted to discover, you have to look forward and you got to look up. the cab driver pulled over and made a bishop of the church wall because he was looking to

discover, not going back into the past, not opening up the annals of racism, but he is looking up to see if america will live up to its constitution, will america be its greatest dream or be its greatest deficit? ladies and gentlemen, how i wish i could have seen my bishop walk for two blocks because it is a marvelous testament of what it is minorities, ethnicities, and the church community will have to do. while the new generation is looking up, we may have to go back to marching so that america can in fact be the place it was intended to be. thank you so much. [applause] >> thank you. first off, i would like to start off by thank you all for allowing me to speak to you on a

matter that is near and dear to my heart. i speak to you today from two perspectives. one as a professor of criminal justice at jackson state university and itt technical institute end as a current deputy commander hines county sheriff's department and also a onetime law enforcement officer of the year and three times law enforcement officer of the year and all was accomplished without using racial profiling. as a law enforcement officer, i have heard various arguments for the use of typecasting, also known as racial profiling. as a law-enforcement officer, i have also heard many complaints from citizens who look just like me about the use of racial profiling tactics also known in its professional connotation as typecasting or t-casting.

as an academic, i have my own perspective of both terms. if you ask a law-enforcement officer who spends much of his time conducting interstate interdiction, what method of observation he or she uses in determining which vehicle to stop, i'm sure you will hear well-articulated and politically correct narration. you will hear simple terms like observation, attracting, or visual awareness e,tc or you may hear the term more traffic stops lead to more arrests. however, what you will not here is the use of the turn "racial profiling." the most common example of police racial profiling is dwb otherwise known as driving while blacks. studies have shown that african- americans are former likely to be stopped and searched than whites.

the fact is, racial profiling is a legal but users of such tactics will tell you that a 1996 supreme court decision allows police officers to stop motorists and search their vehicle where they believe they are traffic in illegal drugs or weapons. i challenge anyone including my colleague from denver i challenge him to show me where in that ruling it states that blacks or minorities will be your likeliest suspects. it does not exist. the wb has no respect for a person. recently, filmmaker tyler perry became a victim of the misuse of authority on last sunday when he treated about his experience of being stopped by two atlanta police officers. in his posting which has drawn more than 100,000 comments, told

what happened when two white police officers stopped him while driving from his southwest atlanta movie studio last month. a department of justice reported racial profiling shows an alarming racial disparity at a rate at which motorists are searched by law enforcement. they are -- their findings demonstrate a clear and significant racial disparity in a way in which motorists are treated ones that have been stopped by law enforcement officers. the report also found that blacks were roughly three times as likely to be searched during a traffic stop. blacks were twice as likely to be arrested and blacks were nearly four times as likely to experience a threat or use of force during their interaction with police. this is why i am a supporter of the ending racial profiling act. as police officers, we are

empowered with discretion of powers. the way we use that discretion of powers, some officers choose, and i like to think i being fair and impartial but others use it simply because they want to do selective police work. you take a portion of a law and you use it to justify your actions, that is what racial profiling is. use community policing, a term we used when we empower the community to work with law enforcement to determine solutions for their problems. it is their problem because i don't live there. as a deputy commander, i commend my officers to go to these neighborhood association meetings and listened to the people. then they bring those solutions back and together we will find a solution. i asked the congress do the same with the racial profiling act. made with the people and find

out the problem and bring back solutions from the people and i guarantee you we will come up with a solution that will end racial profiling. thank you. [applause] >> in addition to our congressional champions, senator carden, congressman conyers, and senator durbin, we are very grateful to the other members of congress who testified this morning, congressman allyson, congress ju womandy chu, congressman gutierrez, and congressman wilson were extraordinary speakers and we appreciate that they took the time to come to the senate to testify. unfortunately, they could not come back to the press conference but i believe all of our other speakers are willing and available to take questions if there are any from the media, thanks. if not, we thank you so much for

your time. people are available for personal interviews and we hope you'll join us in the fight for passing the ander racial profiling act, thank you. [applause] -- the and the racial profiling act, thank you. - the end racial profiling act, thank you [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> the cspan congressional directory is a guide to the 112 congress with detailed information about every congressman, kappa member, supreme court justice, and governor. it is available for $12.95 plus shipping and handling and you can order your copy and c- span.org/shop. >> coming up on c-span, [video clip] " is liveon journal

followed by a live coverage of the house. today there will work and a transportation bill. >> this weekend on book-tv, live coverage from the los angeles times festival of books. the coverage starts at 2:00 p.m. eastern saturday and sunday. at 3:30 p.m., authors on clarence darrow, dwight d. eisenhower, and jfk at 7:30, call in with your questions for steven ross, author of hollywood left and right. that is sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern and the take on liberals and the cause and a panel on surveillance and secrets with lori andrews, any jacobsen and s michaelhermer. the entire schedule is online @ book-tv.org. >> this year's studentcam competition asked students across the country was part of the constitution was important to them and why.

the second prize winners selected article 5. >> i am here in front of the national archives, home of the original copy of the constitution, the framework of our government, the holy grail of our american history. article 5 of this document is a little-known provision that makes america the growing and changing society it is today bennett to better understand what most people values were in regard to the and constitution, i began by asking random people what provisions of the constitution they felt they benefited most from. >> freedom of speech. >> freedom of speech that the freedom of religion. >> freedom of speech. >> the right to bear arms. >> the general consensus was that the most important parts of the constitution or the amendments would gave rights to citizens. >> a lot of the things that people think about when they think about the constitution are

not in the constitution. they are in the amendments to the constitution. very few people might think about the constitution think that congress has the power to regulate commerce among states and congress having the power to raise a navy and army, those are not the things that people think about. they think about freedom of speech. that is the first amendment. article 5 was pretty vital. when you take most people and ask them something, tell me three things about the constitution, most of those things are in the amendments. >> what is article 5? i asked people whether they knew what article 5 wado you know what article 5 is no? >>. >> no. >> i don't know. >> nop. >> what is article 5? >> it says one 2/3 of both houses to unnecessary shall

propose amendments to the constitution and should a joint resolution passed with 2/3 of the vote in both houses, it goes to the states where 38 states, recorders of the states, would have to ratify the amendment before it becomes a fundamental law of the land. there is another provision in article 5 which allows the states in the face of inaction by congress to ask for a constitutional convention to be established for that purpose. >> what makes article 5 so important? let's take a look at the preamble of the constitution. the framers road that we the people of the united states in order to form a more perfect union -- what did they mean by a more perfect union? >> i think it is an acknowledgement that the constitution represented a sword and anothertry, if you will, to

bring the states together. the articles of confederation which was prior to the constitution had a lot of shortcomings. people realized that. i think it represented the idea that the state wanted to have some sort of vital central government but at the same time, retain their uniqueness as states and retain their individual sovereignty over local issues. >> by a more perfect union, they meant at a minimum something better than what they had under the confederation. i'm sure different public figures had different ideas on that point. >> i interpret that to mean a o more perfectne than the political structure from which they can and they had observed and were subject to. >> the founders thought that the

constitution was a machine that would go by itself. they thought this experiment in democracy would be an experiment. we are in pursuit of happiness. the constitution says in order to form a more perfect union -- we are obligated to keep tinkering with these things and keep experimenting and that is the real great beauty of this thing. >> there are different schools of thought and what the framers intended when they wrote a more perfect union, either that was better than the original articles of confederation were meant to be adjusted. in any case, its goal was to improve the nation and america has been made better through amendments to the constitution. what would america be like without a process to amend the constitution? >> without article 5, if there was no process for amending the constitution, there really would have been major problems. some of which have been resolved fairly well by the amendment process. >> it certainly would not be

america as we know it without them. it is a testament to the fact that you cannot think of everything and now -- no matter how carefully were drafting. you have to fix it. >> some people think the amendment process has been a failure at times. >> there has been instances where amendments have turned out -- people have changed their minds and prohibition is the easiest example. >> during prohibition, the amendment process backfired but article 5 enabled the country to repeal certain laws which seems to be unnecessary. >> in the end, in some ways, we talk about the unintended consequences. it had some positive things. it shows that democracy works. >> amendments can be flooded due to public opinion, the amendment process itself is something that makes this country extraordinary. we, as americans, are subject to

a document that changes for us. we can grow. we can modify a. ourselves without article 5, i would not be able to speak my views or write letters to the editors, to protest the loss or carry a gun or refused soldiers and having dinner at my home, to have reasonable privacy or stay quiet during a trial, have a quick trial of five arrested, be subject to non-coupon and, be banned from having slaves, have my mother votes, to drink at 21, and be able to vote in the next year. i would be subject to a document of antiquity along with other americans. article 5 changes the constitution to fit our changing country. >> i don't see how you can have an organic document and one that could govern evolving doctrines and evolving populous without an amendment process. i think it is obviously critical in any document that you have, there must be a

process for revising it. otherwise, it could become irrelevant. are quickly america couldhink have achieved its stature without article 5 and the possibility of amendments to the constitution without passing many of the amendments that would take for granted. >> go to studentcam.org and watch all the winning videos and continue a conversation on our facebook and twitter pages. >> this morning, live coverage of the house begins at 10:00 eastern on c-span. they will work on a surface transportation bill. on c-span 2, treasury secretary tim geithner will be at the brookings institution to talk about the economy. that is at 8:30 eastern and on c-span 3, live coverage of a senate hearing on mismanagement at the general services administration.