says -- guest: what we have seen is the absence of the express references to and going and hunting and it has generated a variety of nuisance lawsuits and the rich people are now arguing that because they are not expressly provided for that the agencies have to ban it and jump through costly procedural hoops for these opportunities. it is basically preventative medicine. we want to fix this before it gets bigger, before we up to face more and more lawsuits. two successful administrations appreciated this, the clinton administration issued an executive order ordering the federal land agencies to facilitate access. president bush executed taken

parable executive order on hunting. -- executed a comparable executive order. this takes it from the executive order stand puts it into a statute. host: overpopulation is a problem and give the example of the year. there is a ballots in some parts of the country but not all. -- there is a balance in some parts. guest: hunting keeps the herds at a much manageable levels. there is a classic case in point in the d.c. area. you can take eight or nine in the year. virginia has a very liberal season. most of the states do because of the explosion in the herds. there are collisions on the highway.

some of the deer starved to death in very unfortunate circumstances. they are a vector for the year tics and lyme disease. host: florida on the independent line. caller: good morning. i was wondering with today's current economy and the lack of people to be able to pay for some of these licensing fees and such, how can a local family supplement their food sources with the local game and still, i guess cannot be able to pay for the licenses? i also wanted to say that i think hunting for a trophy is just repugnant. i will take my answer offline. guest: states are the ones that set the licenses, these come and

requirements. some have special requirements that you can show a level of economic hardship that you can get the level at a reduced rate. most states have hunters for the hungry where a hunter can donate meat from deer, fish, what have you to an organization that will, in turn, provide those food products to eligible people. if you have someone who is low- income, they can basically get some of the donated meets through this program. those and probably be the best ways to deal with someone suffering economic hardship and not in a position to shell out the $50-$100 per year to buy a full array of hunting licenses. host: is there a version in the senate? guest: it was co-sponsored by

senator and the sub -- by sen. urkawski. there are other versions sitting over there. will we be able to persuade the senate to similarly aggregate those different bills to create a counterpart to 4089. host: what is their hesitancy? guest: generally, most of the opposition came from the democratic side of the aisle. i think two of the "no" votes were republican. we did get 39 favorable democratic votes. i would expect a similar partisan split in the senate. has not shown a predilection to be interested in these types of issues, so we're

hopeful we can sway democratic senators in states where we have big hunting population is that maybe the hunters there can reach out to their senators and tell them that this is good come unnecessary public legislation and see if we can get this scheduled. host: democrat from san diego. good morning. caller: i am an avid backpacker. there is a trail that starts here in san diego county and go through the canadian border. it crosses multiple types of domains, meaning state parks, counties, national land, and the reason i am worried about the bill you're trying to get through and how we protect people hiking, my brother was shot in the head with 50 yaulettes' -- pellets of a gu

hunting quail in a mountainous area. if you are just a hiker, how would you know that all of a sudden you are in shooting season for quayle to get shot by these yahoos -- season for quail > i am a fisherman. that is how i eat as a backpacker. i fish and eat within one hour or two, so i am all for that, but with all of these yahoos? i don't know. guest: most of the public lands are presently open. this is designed to essentially ensure that they stay open and fix that issue. obviously, safety is always a concern. anyone who goes out into the

woods and fields with a fire arm is always extraordinarily conscious of that. the only advice i could offer someone like the caller would be to find out what time of year the hunting seasons are. most of them are only for a few months. sometimes they are barred from the land and the non-hunting users have free access. if you're going to be in the field during hunting season, where bright orange or other clothing so that you can stand now and you will not be accidentally in someone's line of fire. host: legislation once the land to remain open. they said this is the h.r. 4089 is "a solution in search of a problem." guest: we have seen two things happen. we have begun to see this preparation from animal rights

radicals seeking to close this land saying that this does not make express references for angling and hunting. we see a problem coming. you do not build your defense when the barbarians' show up at the gate. you build your defense before they get there. this is an attempt to be proactive and provide that ounce of prevention now to prevent these from occurring rather than waiting for the problems to be at your doorstep when we have to apply this. host: pa. on the republican line. caller: i have a couple of comments on the people that are suppressed the managing these lands. introduced the wolves back in. they do not read signs, they do not know where they're supposed to stay. where were they when people put

pythons, a chinese jumping fish in our waters? now they're having problems with them. they never do anything about that. could you make a comment on the damage they allowed to happen? thank you. guest: i will start with the second part, the invasive is. yes, there are a number of parks in the country where an invasion of species have come in, sometimes deliberately and sometimes by mistake. sea lampreys got in through niagara falls and when they first came in, they decimated the fisheries in the upper great lakes. the united states and canada have a thing called the great lakes fish commission dedicated to sea lamprey control.

now we have a thriving fisheries in the upper great lakes because of this. in florida, you had people letting pythons go from pacs that were too big and now the ever radar couple of them. a lot of the work, on the control of these species, various games, that is where the conservation dollars go. if you do not have the dollars coming you cannot have control on these invasive species because by continuing to ensure access for angling and hunting and insuring the compare role -- comparable issue is so important. host: off of twitter -- guest: that is generally the

rule of the road in all of the state's right now. you have to go out and sit through a class. in virginia is a two-day class you have to go through and pass a written test before you are allowed to purchase a hunting license. i can say one of the problems the hunting community has based is that we want to be in favor of hundred vacation, but we do not want to create a barrier to bring in kids. we put together a program called families and fields in cooperation to create an apprentice program to bring children in to the program, expose them, take them out. at some point, if they want to proceed from there they need to go through the hundred vacation programs to do it on their own. -- the hunter education programs. host: what is commonly hunted? guest: it depends.

white-tailed deer, goose and duck hunting and those are probably some of the most popular species in this part of the world. host: fresno on the democrat line. caller: my father and brother in law, they all haunt, but when they go out they would shoot one gear, and my brother would cut the deal up and we would eat it. that is what it was for. that is what the theme was when it started. you haunt the need for food. now people are hunting animals that cannot protect themselves for ego and for money to hang their heads on the wall. the thing about the polar bears, to me, is disgusting. the way that the polar bears are going through now, they cannot

even survive on their own and have people shooting them for a reason at all. the only thing they took from the polar bears are at their head to mounted on the wall. the nra, is they want a bill passed, they will get it because they will buy it. my cousin was it shot when i was a teenager by an idiot that was out hunting deer. he had on his orange vest. he just shot him. he's dead. they would shoot each other's dog's. they did not care. they just go crazy when they go out there. time,we're running low on caller. guest: that is why we have hunter education. it's very important.

frankly, hunting is safer than bicycling in this country. let's be honest. there is always some inevitable small percentage of human beings that will not listen with the put them behind the wheel of a car or in the woods with a firearm. it is unfortunate. the vast majority of american hunters take game to go home and eat it. when i go duck hunting, trust me. they do not go to waste. in the context of trophy hunting, it is a predominately overseas enterprise and provides a local source of funding. the polar bear program as large and run by the native inuit people in canada. they said the license fees and it helps them find and save the conservation program.

it is a caliber of fire are often used in the woods for deer hunting. host: the the law dictate what kind of fire arms you use when you want? guest: it depends. when you get closer to the urban areas, you have special deer hunt to control the population and you may be limited to just using a shotgun with a slug, that has a much shorter range than a rifle would. when we talk kant, you use semi- automatic shotguns and you could have no more than three loaded -- when we hunt duck, we have semi-automatic shotguns. there are a variety of limitations about where and when you can use these things. most hunters are tuned in to those regulations because the vast percentage are law abiding citizens.

hunting regulations are far more complex and comprehensive than most fishing regulations. host: if the senate does not pass the version of the house bill, what happens to those like you that want to hunt on public land? guest: we will continue working with the sportsman alliance and continue the heritage and traditions. if we do not get the bill passed this congress, we will come back. when a similar circumstance 12 years ago. we passed the wildlife refuge bill to make hunting and fishing a priority in the refuge system. it passed in the house. we could not get it through the senate. but the next three got it through both and president clinton signed into law in 1997. we know perseverance is the order of the day. host: bill horn with the u.s. sportsmen alliance.

if you want find out more about the legislation, you can visit their web site. next up is the weekly american by the numbers series. this week, american wages. bes >> this year, we asked students to create video about which part of the constitution is most important to you and why. the second prize winner is from colorado. hello, brandon. what is the 10th amendment? >> it says that all powers nor prohibited by the states belong to the states and its people. any right or power that is not and still to the government at a national level are instilled to the state and its people.

basically, it is creating a system of more individuality. for example, the education system is not currently standardize that the national level but at the state level. basically it gives the individual states and people like chance. >> why you call this the amendment for individuality? >> it is individuality in the students' eyes because they are able to pursue the subject they want to pursue than what the schools just require them. it is nice for students to be able to have a little bit more personalization, if you will come in their education. >> why did you choose to use state education standards to explain federal vs. state power is? >> you can use the education system as an example because it is one of the only things that applies to us as high-school student. some of the political debates out there do not really have an

effect on me because i'm still a teenager in high-school. education is the one big thing that really reflects on me as a high-school student. >> top of the curriculum standardization began at? >> most recently back in 1983 when the u.s. department of education released a report entitled, "a nation at risk," which said it was being eroded by a rising tide of bureaucracy. it went on to say that students in america were not being adequately trained to the bill the jobs of the future. >> between federal and state government, which you think is better suited to set education standards? >> i personally think it's a better idea to set them at the local government, not federal. setting the standards of a national level is just a bit too controlling. it is better for the individual

states to have their say in their own education system. having a national standardized indication system creates problems with individual states not being able to have that the run say. >> as a student, what do you think of the education you have received? >> i mostly approve of the indication i have been receiving. we created this documentary not to save an issue we are already having. we think that the bigger issue is that the national level. the debate is that the indications system should be controlled at the national level and we just think that would be a little bit too far. >> thank you, brandon, and congratulations. >> thank you.

>> here is a brief portion from his documentary entitled, "the 10th amendment -- the amendment for individuality." >> they would be more motivated if one part of the day was academics and the other part of the day would be more hands-on, computer technology, video operations, and they can get excited and they can see how the basic math, basic english in the courses like that apply to that particular job and feel that i think that's the answer to get motivated. what the debate is that the government to head have more control over the content in schools, but is this contradicting the 10th amendment? >> to the indicators and individuals watching those -- i have a question for you. would you rather students in america be the most successful they can be? the 10th amendment mentions that the rights should be instilled

to the states or the people. >> i'm thinking for the students of america when i say we do not need to standardize this further. but keep a variety we have because the right is what makes as individuals and it is the individuality that motivates us. believe me. you could be surprised with students will do when motivated. >> you can watch this video as well as the other award winning ones at stewcam event.org. you can continue the -- studentcam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: this time for the american by the numbers segment. we're gonna look at american wages. joining us, two guests, jodi schneider with a bloomberg news. we're also joined by philip doyle from the bureau of labor statistics. he serves as the existing

commissioner. thank you for joining us. when the bureau of labor statistics looks at wages in the united states, what is the big picture? what are you trying to find it? guest: what has been happening in the trends in wages? are they going up? are they staying flat? what we have been looking at is wagewing in the rangte of change. we believe the recession is the big factor. people are not getting as big of a wage increase as the man have in the past. host: according to your research, you say wage increases have gone up about 1.5% per year. can give as a context? guest: we are running at about that rate, the average across the economy. some get more, get less. we were seeing increases before

the recession around 2.5% hike and 3.5%, so things have really been slowing down. that is consistent with each of the recession began seen since 1990. the rate prior to the recession, during the recession come and will not really recover. it will stay at a lower rate. host: will that stayed the same whether you are an executive or blue-collar? are there variations? guest: it looks at a variety of occupational groups and status, full-time verses part time. typically we see quite a bit of difference among them, but the trend overall is the same. everyone is lower than they were. host: jodi schneider, looking at this from someone who looks at their wages every week. what can you say? guest: people do not necessarily

see the average. their wages have not gone up. one thing that has happened is that there has been payroll tax cuts. they extended it through this year so the people are taking home, on average, $50 more per pay period and that is real money in their paychecks. that was added to the deficit. that is the real issue in congress, when they do things to help people help more in their paychecks that they're often having to look at what that does for the long-term fiscal health of the country. host: 1 talk about increases, arctic talking about the standard increases for like a cost of living adjustment and things of that nature? guest: was also an issue parade social security benefits and

other cost of living increases helps determine in the private sector what kinds of increases there are, as well. employers look at what the government is adding as a standard increase when they decide what to do with their own employee wages. host: 81 to ask questions, we have divided the lines regionally this morning treated to live in the eastern or central time zone -- 202-737- 0001. in the mountain and pacific time zones, 202-737-0002. you can also send us an e-mail or tweet. this is consistent with the patterns seen in prior recessions. guest: prior to the recession, we had been trucking along at a

rate and we have seen wage rates dropping and then recovering part of the dip but never all. the increase in wage rates have been slow were going in and still slower coming out. host: howdah the longer time factor in? -- how does the time factor in? guest: a drop to 3.5% to 1.5% is fairly substantial. we have not seen anything track up. we're watching. we will release the next set of data next week. host: what goes in to compiling this data? what do you look ouat? guest: business establishment, state and local government establishments. we talk to about 11,000 of these every quarter and we asked how much they pay in wages for each

different occupation and the cost of a variety of benefits so that we can look at the total picture of wages and benefits, what we call compensation. we track that same group of occupation from quarter to quarter so that we are tracking a fixed market asset and we're not seeing a shift because they have the appropriate weight from quarter to quarter. host: one of the charts to provide brings us to where we are at now. the benefits rise substantially? guest: the benefit costs did start picking up and there are a variety of different benefits. benefit costs are in part tied to wages. the cost of providing you with holidays and vacations obviously

goes up when your wage goes up. elkton trends is not tied to your wage rate, so increases in health-care costs go up, increases in retirement plans go up, a traditional pension plans are largely based on returns on investments made by the investment plan itself. if the market is not getting good returns, then more money needs to be invested in order to pay the benefits of the retirees which causes a spike in that area. host: according to people that you talk to come and our benefits doing as far as people depend on them? guest: that's a big issue. the cost of the benefits, the part they are expected to contribute, have outpaced what they're getting in terms of wage increases which is something that has obviously been discussed and will continue to be discussed with the health

care law. in congress, one thing the ways and means committee is looking at is whether the tax-writing committee in the house has looked at whether there should be changes in how retirement costs are accounted for and whether we are having too complex equation for employers to be able to offer retirement benefits to their workers. host: our first call is from the battleground, washington. caller: i am here. hello? one subject that is normally not bought of in wages and benefits is the end of the cold war. the soviet union represented an alternative social system, for all of its laws and crimes, starting back in the 1930's. american businesses felt the need to compete for the loyalties of the working-class because they looked at the possibility of a different system besides capitalism.

with the end of the cold war, business is no longer need to feel the need to compete for the loyalty of their workers and we're in the horrible predicament of defeating themselves because they no longer had any leverage your bargaining power with their employers. they're just another set of laborers. i was wondering if you could just talk about the decline in marxism as a source of bargaining power and leverage for the working class? if you have any comments, thanks. host: how does labor feel about itself and the power they hold in demanding more wages and things like that? what ground do they have to stand on? host: for private employers, it's a negotiation between the employer and the employee often

carry the public sector -- often. then there are the public sector and unions. they do not have to do anything, and that is the frustration. wages were held down and now many workers do not feel like they are participating in the recovery as much, but there's nothing compelling employers to have to share with their workers as they get better. one thing starting to happen is that workers had been staying with their companies much longer during the recession because they were afraid of losing their jobs. as things get better, people will feel more free to move about. that causes employers to raise wages to keep their best workers.

host: next caller from cedar rapids. caller: two questions. i know, given the which decreases prior to the recession, but how does this particularly affect employment? when we see the minimum wage increase, we do not necessarily see a big change in employment, or rather unemployment, as a result. can you elaborate on how wages happen to affect employment as a result? that would really be my biggest question with regard to this particular topic. guest: there is a very complex relationship between wages and employment. it basically depends on how the changes in employment come about.

if we go into a recession and employers decide to lay off the most recently hired workers, they could see a temporary increase in wage rates because of the newer workers are perhaps at the bottom of the wage scale. they offer incentives to the older workers to retire early, then we may actually see a greater decline in the rate of increase in wages simply because the higher paid wage workers are no longer in the mix. it is really difficult to say that there is an equal relationship between changes in employment and changes in wage rates. host: you talk about the changing cost of benefits. can you explain what we're looking at? guest: the measure about 18 separate benefits every quarter, the cost to the employer of providing these benefits. these are benefits like holidays, vacations, insurance benefits, life insurance,

disability, retirement plans, workers compensation, social security, medicare, a whole range of these benefits. we track the change in the cost to the employer from quarter to quarter. most of these have been slowing down. some of them, because they are tied to wage as, like a vacation. vacation goes down when wages go down marce days the same. on the other hand, some benefits are different. the chart shows the cost of health care benefits as well. you can see that it traffic -- typically tracks at a faster rate of increase than all other benefits, recently they have been coming together. first is the cost of health insurance. how much are the employers required to pay to the carriers? second, how they decide to share the cost with the employees. if the employee premium goes up, there may be a different

cost. how many people are in the planet? if they drop out of the plan, the cost of the employer drops and brings the lines closer. all those dynamics the one at the same time. host: so the employer cost of compensation, this says wages makes up 71% of that. how should we interpret this chart when it comes to whether benefits? guest: roughly 71% of the cost to the employer of having an employee on the job is wages. the rest is broken up into a variety of benefits and some are out of the direct control of the employer. the cost of social security, for example, is there. jodi mention the payroll tax

cut. that did not happen on the employer side, so there was no change here. employers have a set of benefits that they can offer or not and that may lead to some other choices are as to which the benefits they want to offer to their employees. we see vast differences in the size of a company's and the type of workers. full-time workers are much more likely to receive benefits. host: jodi schneider, off of twitter -- guest: that's right. that is a negotiation. the companies feel they can get workers at a certain percentage and they can still have a work force.

they're not going to pay as much. but is often what we see in workers. that is what we're seeing now and employees are having to cope with that. many of them dealt with that in the recession or just talk to the recession that there were not in a good. sheeting position. they're in a better negotiating position and we will start to see those wages increase. that has been the pattern after a recession. host: martin from monroe, new hampshire. good morning. caller: i have a couple of things that i want to talk about, mostly about the interaction between government and the individual, the

employer, the setting of wage and benefits. i would say that the total compensation of a working person is divided, like you had that pie chart up before. it is divided between your hourly wage and certain government programs. i just wonder, as a fiscal conservative, would be better for the american people to take out all of that money and they would be allowed to spend it on their own retirement, their own food, and all of that? the other thing i wanted to talk about -- host: we will see if our guests want to respond to that. .

talking about the privatization of some of these things instead of relying on the employer? caller: i was talking more about personal responsibility as opposed to government responsibility in people's finances. host: ok. guest: the privatization of benefits is a big political issue. we have seen big discussion about privatization and social security, not in recent years, but both parties have tried to avoid that particular discussion. the terms of talking about medicare, medicaid, there has been a lot of discussion about that. paul ryan came up with a plan for medicare that ended up being a political firestorm for him. a lot of democrats going to be using that.

simpson bowles can up with all kinds of recommendations to what to do about the changes of the costs of entitlement plans. when you see the demographic numbers in the number of people using medicare and medicaid, it becomes a real issue. privatization is always a political gamble for lawmakers to talk about. when you have large numbers of people, they do not want to hear about any benefit cuts. there is an immediate political cost. host: next caller from kentucky. never mind. california, nick. good morning. caller: good morning. i was wondering if a lot of the people, the guests you have on,

have ever heard of the wto in these so-called free trade agreements? i heard it mentioned years ago that the reason the wages for the american people are being pushed it down is because of the world trade organization? free trade does nothing for the united states. we are freely giving these so- called third world countries are manufacturing stuff for free and then we still have to pay higher prices when it comes back. we cannot compete with -- host: i dropped you. i apologize. to his point, there is a chart that looks at wages compared to industries. red line looks at goods. the blue line is services.

they have crossed. guest: the have never been that far apart. there really is not much difference in the way that wages are tracking between the two sectors be it construction, manufacturing, retail, a trade, leisure services, and a whole host of other things. we do not see a great deal of difference these days between the two sectors. host: when it comes to looking at it from your perspective, jodi schneider, those that produce goods and services, are they experiencing the same as far as their wages going up or at least how much they are? guest: i would think the political and other issues that are affecting the industry's are at this point on the same level.

host: virginia? caller: my statement is a little bit tangential and goes back to 1964 when they set up the cola for the military which then get expanded to the federal system and then the social security system. it has been closed to 40- something years and the difference is that the people at the bottom are only stan right at the bottom where as at the top of the scale, there is a substantial difference. that affect our national debt and everything. i think it carries over to the private industries also.

i think this is where the item needs to be checked. cola should be changed to a block increase or a greater increase at the bottom versa that the top. any suggestions? guest: mr. doyle? -- host: mr. doyle? guest: the three segments, military, social security recipients, and federal employees are not included in this data. there is no direct influence from the cost of living systems. the other point may be that the cost of living system uses a similar price index that has been relatively flat these recent years. host: as far as variations go in occupations, what is happening? guest: in some cases, the differences between managers and their employees, as you can see on the chart, but for the most part they are tracking closely.

the blue line are the office employees, the clerical employees, which seems to be fairly constant. you see some variation with the management and financial employees and we attribute some of this to come out difference in it the type of payments. some of them receive commissions. in good times, the commission's tend to be higher and the line will jump up a bit. when you have a recessionary time, there are not as good commissions going in and they drop below. host: jodi schneider, we're still not seeing money. guest: as the economy improves, we are seeing, depending on the industry, bonus payments, commission payments, those types of things coming back as well. the expectation will be that this year we continue to see those types of things. host: richmond, va., good morning.

she also seems to be gone. let's go to oregon. good morning. caller: i discover a question about government wages. you compare all of these, but what are the government wages vs the private sector wages? i see some of those graphs on that tv about the increase in government wages vs the american wages, the police department, the firemen, county workers, city workers, stuff like that. host: government versus public wages? guest: we include state and local government workers. we do not have any slides on that here today, but i can tell you that the rate of change there has slowed as well. it started a little bit later

and, perhaps, not quite as much, but in recent quarters we have seen some fairly substantial declines. typically in september we see a big increase in state and local government wages because that is when the new teacher contracts going to affect. the last two years, the increase has not been there. that line has been very, very low. host: butler, kentucky, good morning. caller: good morning. my question to you is the fact that we do not make anything anymore in this country. our jobs went from manufacturing to selling chinese goods. for the last 25 years, i have been fighting about nafta because i felt it was a big decision maker for the companies to be able to move their jobs to china and be able to get cheaper labor, pollute the air and water.

if you go into a store and turn the product over, they're going to find out that 97% of the merchandise sold in stores today comes from a communist country -- china. china, vietnam, unless your manufacturing things like blenders, microwaves, cameras, everything that we used to make is being made in china. we went from making things and making money to selling chinese goods. naturally, if you do not make them, the money will not be the same period host: jodi schneider, in relation between trade policy and wages in the united states? guest: certainly. when lawmakers support trade agreements, if we are just importing goods it does not help american wages.

we want to be exporting goods and be able to reap the benefits of a trade balance. what it costs to make goods in the ability to benefit from trade is one of the real issues. wages is a part of that issue that congress debates in terms of trade. host: philip doyle, there is a difference between the wages earned by union members and nonunion members. guest: this is the rate of change in those wages and there has not been a great deal of difference. the what -- the lines have been intertwining the last few years. the recession seems to have hit the unionized workers in a little bit later and that is probably because of long-term contracts. the union sector has gotten very small. only 8% of the private sector is

represented by a union. host: for those in unions, what are they experiencing? guest: it sometimes takes a bit to get to them because of the lag the with union contracts. we're still seeing this in consequence, the slower rate in pay increases and growth in paying out to benefits. often the union contracts are known for have a fairly comfortable benefit derangements, more so than a non-union jobs, and that has been a big negotiating points in negotiations for the labor contracts when they come up. that is what some of the numbers are reflecting in the data. host: huntington, new york. caller: i worked a job part-

time. when they go up there on the front-end, to collect my paycheck, depending on whether you are part-time or full-time, many times you have a very different, you know, a lot of -- i do see a lot of, what i call, wage disputes. disputes with the wages, you know? if you were the head of the department, you can get more than certain other people who are like a part-timer.

i get, you know, -- even though i do have subsidised rent. host: what is your question about wages? pretty much, it's that you have -- i think there is -- wages have noew, my gone down, in a way, because the company declared bankruptcy with in the time being. whatt's like, so, like, it is. i'm making $30 less this year than i was last year.

host: we will leave it there. let's get another perspective from kalamazoo. caller: i would like to ask a question. earlier in the year, we heard all the debates about "shared sacrifice." if you're the leader of anything, you served in you have to be responsible by leading in whenever you were expecting by the younger, the middle class, the less educated, however you want to call it. you would lead by example. ok. my main part of the question -- we are always after the people

on medicaid, medicare, and i will not get started on that, but shared sacrifice always it's the $100,000 and under. i have never made that much, but why does the government not start with them? cap their wages. they can get a raise automatically because they do not have to vote on it. why did they not start touching , the high wages in the government? little confused on that. host: we will leave it there. response? guest: the caller is one we will be seeing more and more in the political campaigns as the

election season gets under way. one of the economic fairness and tax fairness, they will both be big issues. the president is working with these so-called buffett rule. there has been talk about people making more than $250,000 for married couples and individuals making more than $200,000. the bush tax cuts will expire at the end of this year and that will be a big point of discussion in terms of tax policy. economic fairness will be an issue on the republican side. a bill just passed yesterday that will give small businesses with fewer than 500 employees a 20% tax reduction. it will not go anywhere in the senate, but these are the issues the caller is talking about.

it is hard to frame it because every situation is different, but economic and tax fairness will become an even bigger issue in the campaign. it will find its way through legislation but this year and after the it election. host: philip doyle, what is the difference between the current dollar and the constant dollar? guest: several have alluded to the prices that prices may be going up when wages are flat. in the data, we look at bought. the current dollar, the bread line, is what we see which is doing. -- the red line. and we show what prices are doing. when you take away the increase in prices from the increase in wages, we are seeing a decline in real wages, the constant

dollar. in 2009, there is very little inflation reported by the consumer price index. those wage increases that people got then really did mean an increase in the amount of money they had to spend. whereas the to go back to 2005- 2006, the rate of the consumer price change was substantially higher. even the you have a wage increase, at the end the day you cannot buy anything extra. host: to go back where we started from, but are we looking at the rate increase in how much a person's wage changes of about 1.5%? guest: that is what we have been facing, and we track this quarter to quarter. we not know what will happen a with the release next week. we will see what happens there. host: jodi schneider, , back to

this in to the strength of the economy as we currently see it. -- factor this in. guest: inflation plays a big role. one reason congress decided to do the payroll tax cut is to say we were giving a "real increase" that has nothing to do with inflation. it was a stimulus measure and will expire at the end of this year's of people would feel that actually had a big raise. consumer spending is a huge driver in the economy. if wages were just keeping up with inflation, were not even, that people would not feel they had money to spend. the question is how does the government continue, or do they continue, some people have more in their paychecks to spend? that will be a whole series of

decisions being made with tax policy and fiscal policy. host: jodi schneider of bloomberg and newsand philip doyle from the bureau of labor statistics, thank you for your time today. that is it for this edition of "washington journal." we will see you again tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> in a few moments, commerce secretary john price and will testify about u.s. manufacturing. on our facebook page, we are asking if you're optimistic about american manufacturing? join the conversation.

the national community reinvestment coalition works to expand access to home mortgages and banking services in low come. -- and low income areas and they are hosting a conference today. national urban league president will be speaking and a former ceo up fannie mae and that is live at 1:00 p.m. eastern. a little later this afternoon at 3:45, the national republican committee will have the state chairman meeting and mitt romney will address that gathering and we will also hear from senator john mccain and reince preibus. >> when i was embedded in eastern afghanistan, the soldiers started telling me the u.s. government was wasting tens of billions of dollars on totally mismanaged development and logistics contract. >> in funding the enemy, douglas wissing follows the money and

fines corruption. >> i was in one meeting where the commander, an incredibly effective guy named colonel mike howard -- this is not long after president obama took office -- the state support was out there saying we will give you a whole bunch of development money for counterinsurgency. colonel coward said do not send me more money. -- colonel coward said do not send me more money. we need people. i don't need more money. >> douglas wissing sunday night at 8:00 eastern on cspan's "q &a." on may 6, look for our "q &a" interview with robert caro and his biography of lyndon johnson. >> the federal reserve reports

that u.s. manufacturing increased 10% in the first three months of the year. manufacturing has dropped slightly this month. commerce secretary john bryson testified before congress yesterday for efforts to boost u.s. manufacturing. >> please come to order, when it comes to the future of manufacturing and united states, will would be a nation where help-wanted signs hangs on factory gates? our subcommittee will talk about if we canortant subject thrive again and the future of our economy will be at stake.

generations of americans cranked out everything from airplanes to toasters. as our nation has moved to be a stomach -- atomic age to the space-age to the information age, manufacturing has not kept up, losing nearly 6 million american jobs since the beginning of the 21st century. aging, rusted, and a benefactor is littered the u.s. landscape and we stand at important crossroads lined by juggling regulatory hurdles, a punitive tax code, and indecisive political leadership will lead to a further erosion of our manufacturing base and lost prosperity for future generations of america. policies and surmise enter set, could lead to a resurgence in u.s.

manufacturing, putting millions of americans back to work again and breathing new life into the beleaguered middle class. secretary bryson is chairman of the subcommittee and i'll look forward to working closely with you on this issue. let's make made america matter again and for the starts which now and get the widgets' moving. we don't have any time to waste. statistics show the manufacturing sector was the hardest hit in terms of job losses during the great recession. manufacturing accounts for 1/10 of our jobs, manufacturing suffered 1/3 of our job losses. in 2009 for the first time ever, the number of unemployed americans actually exited the numbers of americans employed in the year -- manufacturing sector, that remains true today despite a slight uptick in recent tyree. what happened? the u.s. was the undisputed leader in manufacturing for decades with the world's largest manufacturing economy producing nearly 1/4 of all

globally manufactured products but that leadership is in jeopardy so it is vitally important to consider what is at stake. according to a report by the national association of manufacturers, american manufacturing supports nearly one in six u.s. jobs which pay on average over $75,000 with benefits. manufacturing jobs have the highest multiplier in the u.s. economy. every dollar spent produces $1.35 an output endeavor manufacturing jobs eliminated in america results in a loss of two other jobs elsewhere in the economy. as policy makers, we are facing several critically important questions. what is the true state of the manufacturing sector today? what factors are impeding a comeback and most importantly, what policies could help the manufacturing sector's recovery? the good news is historically manufacturing is the hardest hit

during a recession but the quickest to recover. rison numbers from the bureau of labor statistics provide a glimmer of hope that u.s. manufacturing may be rebounding. last year for the second consecutive year, american manufacturers actually added jobs. prior to that, the sector has suffered job losses every year since 1997. according to recent reports, rising wages in china and the rising cost of energy and real estate in china and the rising cost of transporting goods back to america for consumption are beginning to make the united states and much more attractive option once again for many manufacturers. other observers see a real cause for concern buried within the recovery numbers. the u.s. lost 5.7 million manufacturing jobs in 2000, a decline that exceeded the great depression.

there is a very sobering fact -- the u.s. lost a staggering 66,000 manufacturing firms, an average of 17 per day over the same time. at the current rate of recovery, it is estimated the manufacturing sector would not levelsto 2000 saa7 until 2020. the national association of manufacturers identified external policy costs such as persistently high corporate tax rate, the high cost of health care, a rising cost of energy, regulatory costs, and tort costs. simply put, there's a prevailing sense that the u.s. is falling even further behind in foster an environment conducive to job creation. when it comes to u.s. manufacturing, is the glass and a half to fall? full?

let's work together to sweep up the glass and set the table for a manufacturing come back. i believe in the greatness of america and made in america should continue to be a shared pride for all of us. with that, i recognize the ranking member of our subcommittee and want to wish him a happy 65th birthday which we will celebrate next week. >> let me thank you. i especially thank you for those kind words in wishing me a good birthday next week. i have been looking forward to it for a long time and it has finally come. let me also think the witnesses for their anticipated testimony today. we know the schedule of this kind of disappointed this morning but thank you so much for your patience. madam chairman, there is no more important issue to working americans than the ability to get and keep a job and provide for their families and insure

that when their children grow up, they, too, can succeed. the causes of the most recent recession are many. they are in the complex and solutions can also be complex. one thing is certain -- creation of jobs benefits the entire economy and in recent monthly implied reports, we have begun to see the proof of that labor. over the past two years, the manufacturing sector as added more than 450,000 jobs. not since the clinton administration have we seen such fast growth. in a one-year period, from january, 2010 to january 2011, the manufacturing sector added 47,000 machinery manufacturing jobs, 74,000 jobs in fabricating metal manufacturing and 24,000 in computer and electronics manufacturing jobs. my state of north carolina is the fifth largest manufacturing

state in the country and the largest in the southeast. the manufacturing sector provides about $80 billion to our gdp or roughly 19.5% of the total. the nearly 11,000 manufacturing companies in north carolina employ almost 15% of the total workforce equating to well over 500,000 jobs that pay $65,000 annually on average. many of these jobs are in advanced manufacturing and produce high-tech goods used and the defense industry. telefonica is a defense and homeland security contractor located in elizabeth city. they design and manufacture sensors that -- and communication equipment and tests and integrates the systems in the u.s. military and the part of a homeland security aircraft. dsm is also located in my congressional district and they

produce all of the revolutionary fibre that is the key component in the new enhanced combat helmet which will better protect our service members in the marine corps and army without increasing the weight of their helmets. aar is another location -- is another company that designs and manufactures a wide range of machines and composite structures for aerospace and defense applications. there is also the north carolina biotechnology center created out of necessity. textile and furniture manufacturing began to disappear. the center is the most experienced organization of its kind in the world. it works to promote the cultivation and development of biotechnology applications throughout north carolina. they might take place for medical, agricultural, or energy purposes. they join us today and i am excited to hear from them.

i may have to leave shortly but hopefully i can be around for that testimony. it is clear that american manufacturing is primed for a renaissance and house democrats provide greater opportunities for success through key policy initiatives. several naked american initiative have become law including bills that cut taxes and create homes for small businesses and setup the patent process, lower costs of laurel materials -- of raw materials of companies are discouraged from the shipping jobs overseas the house also passed make it in america legislation to support clean energy firms and invest in job training partnerships and hold china accountable for the unfair currency manipulation that costs american jobs. and more products are made in america, more families can make it in america. i look forward to the testimony today and thank you to the

witnesses for being here and being so gracious with your time. i will submit my entire written statement for the record. thank you and i yield back them up thank you, mr. butterfield. we have several members on our side who wish to make an opening statement in a total of 5 minutes. keep your remarks as brief as possible and i will yield of five minutes to mr. stern's who will yield accordingly. >> thank you. this is the third hearing we have had in the subcommittee on jobs. it is a concern for all of us. we're also concerned about the high tax rate in america. lowering the corporate tax code and prioritizing the need for a skilled work force would help and other factors like the high cost of health care costs will impact this country and rising energy prices. we need to have a full energy program. we know that legitimate u.s. companies are losing jobs as they are forced to compete with offshore companies that still american technologies.

having the federal trade commission use its narrow section 5 authority to bring targeted cases against these companies will simply demonstrate the access to u.s. markets will not be permitted to companies whose business model is based on theft. we can work together on these things and i look together -- i look forward to our hearing. >> our problem in our economy is unemployment and we know that unemployment is disproportionately focused on blue collar workers. those workers have traditionally been employed in mining, manufacturing, and construction. we are all encouraged that there renaissance in mining with fossil fuel that led to a renaissance of manufacturing. this is fantastic and if we take it as a moral imperative to increase bluecollar prosperity, then i see it as a primary

variable and should take it as a moral imperative to develop our domestic energy resources. my concern is that much of what has happened has happened despite federal efforts which have been inhibitory to bring those north american resources to the benefit of our blue collar workers. mr. secretary, thank you for being here and i look forward to the discussion and ask you to specifically address what appears to be a hostility toward fossil fuels which inevitably will raise interest costs which will inevitably put a damper on this renaissance in blue-collar employment and manufacturing. >> thank you for coming and joining us. i want to think the administration for the enactment of the columbia free trade agreement. i'm concerned with the state of our economy and a state of u.s. manufacturing. the march manufacturing output index slipped .2% from.8% which

is a dangerous sign. when i am home in illinois, manufacturers are asking about a fair and competitive tax code and less interest in from federal agencies and they want a sound supply of affordable energy. they simply want a level playing field to be able to compete with other countries overseas. i hope you can discuss some of the work you are doing to make america competitive again. i guess i will yield back. we will now turn our attention to the panel. we have two panels of witnesses joining us in each of our witnesses has prepared an opening statement that will be placed into the record in each of you will have five minutes to summarize that statement in your remarks we have the hon. john bryson, a secretary from the united states to part of commerce. it has always been a pleasure to work with you. we have had a long history together and i welcome you to our subcommittee and i am

thankful you are here. we look for to working with you close the on this and many other important issues. it will be recognized for five minutes. to help you keep track of time, the timer is in front of you and when it turns yellow, you have one minute to some of. remember to turn the microphone on and bring it close your mouth so the audience at home can hear your remarks. welcome, mr. secretary and you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. can you hear? >> if you are complementing the chairman, it is good at the microphone close. [laughter] >> pull the whole thing closer. >> how's that? >> much better, thanks. >> i said thank you to the

chairwoman and now to the ranking member butterfield end to the members of the subcommittee, we thank you for your support for the incredibly diverse as a ray of manufacturers in your district and throughout the united states. today i am pleased to provide an overview of the administration's efforts to support manufacturing. after a decade in which we lost 6 million manufacturing jobs. as you know, we are now seeing positive momentum in u.s. manufacturing. over the past 25 months, our manufacturers have created nearly half a million jobs. that is the best street in the united states since 1995 and 120,000 of those came just in the last three months.

last week, i traveled widely visiting manufacturers and last week by saw this firsthand in tennessee. i sought a new just constructed 1 million square foot whirlpool facility. it is now the largest cooking products facility in the world and it was extraordinary these examples are important. manufacturing jobs tend to be high-paying jobs with good benefits for middle-class working families. manufacturing is truly keep to american innovation and competitiveness. manufacturing accounts for 70% of our private sector r &d, 90% of our patents, and 60% of our total exports including a

record $1.30 trillion in goods exported last year. today, i think we all agree, we need to build on this momentum. i heard it in your comments. after all, if we lose the ability to turn ideas, american ideas, into american products, our innovation chains would break and we would lose our long-term capacity to compete and create jobs. as you have seen in my written testimony, we are focused on four key areas at the commerce department. i will touch on these quickly. we promote innovation and protect intellectual property and second establishing regional manufacturing partnerships, third promoting investment and trade and forth, providing information and analysis on the

manufacturing sector. on a broader scale, the president has laid out a number of proposals to support u.s. manufacturing. he has proposed that we reform our corporate tax code for the first time since the 1980's. this would lower the effective rate for u.s. manufacturers to 25%. also, through the commerce department and the national institute of standards and technology, the new budget requests $1 billion for a national network of manufacturing innovation. this would help maximize the industry strengths in each of our u.s. regions. i will comment on that later if you want to go into it. overall, our focus at the commerce department is powerful and sharp.

we express it by saying build it here and sell it everywhere. manufacturing -- bill this year and sell it everywhere. i want to close by thanking you for continuing to support the vibrant and dynamic manufacturing base and thank you for pass hr 4105, the gpx legislation which allows manufacturers to challenge and seek relief from unfairly subsidized products entering our market. efforts such as these will help strengthen our recovery, create more jobs, and insure that american manufacturing continues to lead in the 21st century. i am pleased now to take your questions. >> thank you, mr. secretary. i will recognize myself for the first set of questions. i begin with the manufacturing council which was intended to be a strong voice advising the government of the private

sector view on issues that affect manufacturing. if bad boys is not always heard by the regulatory agencies, most notably the epa, what can you do to make sure that other federal agencies pay attention to the needs of american manufacturers? >> let me address the manufacturing council and i will touch on the epa. the u.s. manufacturing policy council which i chair across the entire federal government is a big step to bring cold apartments together so that we operate exactly with the same perspective, the same voice and we reduce redundancy and worker cross federal departments. i think that is a way to reduce the bureaucracy, be more productive, be more efficient. with regard about the epa and regulation, i cannot address

specifically the epa issues but i will touch generally on regulation. i regret i just don't know the specifics of the epa regulations very well. what the president has done and i strongly believe in and i hear all the time and i work with many manufacturers is we have to reduce regulation to the maximum extent we possibly can and the president has repeatedly said will allow regulation only to the extent it is essential to our economy, the growth in the economy, the national security, and to education. those are the criteria. as a consequence, it is pretty widely known that the level of regulation is less than the first three years of this administration than the comparable three years in the prior administration but we have to keep working very hard on

that. >> thank you, mr. secretary. i know we have a time crunch, i may cut my questioning short. we spent a fair amount of time yesterday and you answered many of my questions. i will yield back my time and recognize mr. butterfield for 5 minutes. >> thank you. mr. secretary, the steel industry is a major employer in my district, employing hundreds of our working men and women with solid just that they can support their families with birdie industry is still recovering from the great recession and increased imports of low-priced imports have hampered the recovery. imports ofhot steel from russia have come into the u.s. market, increasing by more than 50% between 2010 and 2011. there is a trade agreement covering these imports and the commerce department and the u.s. international trade commission ruled last year that this remedy should stay in place to prevent

injury to the industry. the remedy is no longer effective in preventing dumping. the pricing mechanism in the agreement is so outdated that literally gives russian producers a license to dump their steel and the u.s. my constituent, -- my constituents brought this to the attention of the commerce department and you may be negotiating with the russian government to update the agreements of it reflects current conditions and is effective in preventing dumping. can you give me and my colleagues an update on those efforts? can you assure me you will hang tough and make sure the agreement is revised in a way that prevents further injury to the industry and workers? >> we have the responsibility and the commerce department to see to it that trade laws are respected, honored, and we

prosecute many, many cases in which it appears there have been countervailing duties we need to impose because subsidies and other means of undermining u.s. manufacturing were being hurt. i don't know the russian case but i will have to get back to you on that later. >> please do that, that is a big deal to the steel industry. we have heard all sorts of reasons why there has been a long-term decline in manufacturing. we have heard it is because of the labor costs and because of currency manipulation and because other countries invest substantially more in that sector. the list goes on and on but after reading " the new york times" article on how the u.s. lost out on iphone were, i am not sure this accurately depicts the role overseas workers and the shift away from u.s. manufacturing. according to the article, there is an ability in china to scale

up and down so easily. in china, a manufacturer was able to hire 3000 people overnight and they could fire them all three weeks later it necessary. they hired 8700 industrial engineers in 15 days which could take about nine months in the u.s. also it was given access to a warehouse filled with glass samples free of charge and the engineers were made available at no cost and were staying at bond sitesdorms to be available 24 hours per day. we can compete on scale and ideas but when we hear this talk about speed and flexibility, are we talking about an overseas work force conditioned to work 12-16 hour shift and live in dorms? of the plant? is that what we have in mind? >> mr. congressman, you raise an extremely important point. we have the responsibility at the commerce department to see

to it that trade laws are honored. we take many, many cases and many cases relative to china in which we go forth with that. to give you a little background on what we do and let me start with a special thanks to this congress, gpx was the action that you took at request of the president and we were deeply involved at the commerce department, to see to it that the tens of thousands of american jobs in 38 states that were being attacked by, we believe, unfairly subsidized imports and not market origin in non-market economy countries like china, and you passed the legislation out there at our request and it puts us in this position. we have done several things plus the protection of those steps.

as of february, 2012, we have 283 anti-dumping and countervailing cbd orders in place which puts tara to on 120 products -- puts tariffs on 120 products. in march, the administration recently filed a motion on china's exports in rare earth. it is a policy designed by china to force manufacturing to relocate to china and limit foreign competition. we have to keep doing that. we do it with a very capable and large bank of people and these things are done under u.s. law and requirements. >> thank you. >> the chair now recognizes mr. stern's for five minutes.

>> i come from this differently than you. you talked about an energy plan. the energy plan i think you and the administration supports is based upon using solar panels, wind panels, thermal, solar- thermal devices and things like that. if we are talking about where the jobs are, if we use our natural resources in this country, fracking of gas, oil and shale, offshore drill an in,war and the keystone pipeline, it would create a plethora of new jobs. i think that is where we come from a different perspective. i have read recently that you support the reauthorization of the export/import bank? is that true? >> yes, it is true. >> when i looked at their annual

report, they gave $10 million loan guarantee is so tolyndra and i found the due diligence of the export/import bank was negligible and the department of energy did not do their due diligence and they went bankrupt. is there any guarantee that the american people would have that the import/n part -- import/export bank that they g will have confidence that they will do due diligence again? >> let me start with solyndra question -- >> it is not so much of that, you just mention that the import/export bank should provide more money. you should be aware that before you ask us to do this, there should be due diligence and

caution the import/export bank to give money without being sure it would be worthwhile. does that make sense? >> the import/export bank plays a big role in exports. >> i understand that. it gavesolyndra $10 million without due diligence. let the ask another question -- your the chairman of bright source of energy? >> for about 10 months. >> developing jobs in this country could be done through natural resources and not starting with solar panels and wind turbines. when you're the ceo, didn't they get one points $6 million from the department of energy? >> when i was the ceo -- i did not get the last part of your question. >> i was told that the loan guarantee to the company where you were ceo was $1.6 billion but i don't think you got all

that. how much of that did you get? >> i'm afraid i don't -- >> i understand. do you remember anything about the loan guarantee that the department of energy gave? >>yes or no? >> i will check but i don't believe -- you are talking about when i was the ceo of >> bright source. >> oh, i was never the ceo. that was after i had stepped down from california edison. >> at the time of your nomination to be secretary of commerce in may of 2011, you're chairman of the board at bread stores energy? >> yes. >> do you remember getting $1.6 billion from the department of energy will ce you wereo?

yes or no? the larger question is, >> the answer is no. >> we are giving money to a lot of companies that are being provided loan guarantees, going bankrupt, the list goes on and yet we're talking about jobs. if we gave jobs to the people were the natural resources were, we would have unemployment down where it i z to ae almostro. when you talk about 16 -- $1.6 billion, that is a lot of money. when i look at these companies, the jobs they create are negligible. when you as a ceo of bright source energy got all this money, how many jobs did you create? >> i was never the ceo of bright source. >> your chairman of the board, excuse me.

how many jobs were created by this $1.6 billion loan guarantee? we are spending all this taxpayer money and they are either going bankrupt or hanging on by a thread and yet we are not creating any jobs. >> i thank the gentleman whose time has expired fired. we recognize mr. sarbanes for five minutes. >> thank you for being here, mr. secretary. it is an important issue for us. i want to commend the administration and you and other cabinet level officials for the commitment and i think a more coordinated commitment to reviving american manufacturing. i am very focused on some of the special initiatives that have been undertaken at nist, which you referenced in your comments and there is a manufacturing

extension partnership which i know you are familiar with and within that within the last five years, there has been a special outreach effort called the supplier is scouting initiative. i don't know if you are familiar with that. the idea there is to work harder to find a match between the contract opportunities with the federal government and domestic manufacturers and suppliers and vendors so that you don't have as many instances where somebody is applying or asserting a waiver that should be granted from a buy american provision. if you look a little harder, you get the word out and you are more affirmative in the out reach, you can, in fact, find american manufacturers and

suppliers that to the judge so you don't have to deploy these waivers. it is better in terms of creating jobs. i wondered if you could speak to the potential of that kind of outrage? it goes to the question of doing better with creating clearing houses of information that can connect these opportunities in the federal government with these suppliers that are out there. you can speak to the supplier scouting initiative if you have knowledge of it or more generally to the efforts we need to make to connect the dots. people if you have a sense of which agencies among the federal agencies are doing the best job, i have been impressed with the department of transportation's efforts and secretary glove would l --ahood has

discretionary authority to step up. maybe you have a impressions of that agency's work and others across the federal platform that are trying to reach out and bring in those american manufacturers. >> i can give you an initial response. i am only slightly informed about the supplier scouting portion of this. that is new. it is down across several departments, as you suggest. let me start with the manufacturing extension partnerships in all 50 states. you are affirming they have made an enormous difference and the development of small and medium- sized manufacturing businesses because they work with those businesses and they work in training programs that are in support of those businesses and

we increase in strength and our manufacturing base for this manufacturing extension partnership. once again, manufacturing, we have this goal - make it here, sell it everywhere. the scouting initiative, as i understand it, is one that has worked, as you are suggesting and i don't know the depart on a transition case, but it has been value in working with other federal agencies and has potential value where we would like to move forward but i will get back to you. we have not done this yet to my knowledge. i believe what is going on at n.i.s.t. is for their work to support that initiative. >> we want to avoid looking back from the future and having

vendors and sub contractors and other american manufacturers out there when they are told that they could not fit anyone to do a certain job and you have a whole bunch of folks who would raise their hands and say they could have done it. i think there are things under way that will bridge that gap. the scouting initiative is one of them. i commend the agencies that are moving forward. i yield back. >> we wanted done here in the u.s. and we want it done at all levels in the u.s. recognize mr.o harper for five that is. i want to remind members that the secretary has to be out of the door by 12:15 to catch a plane. we are sympathetic to the ups so please be judicious which your time in hoselton get every member an opportunity to ask a question. >> thank killed for being here.

-- thank you for being here. thank you for your attendance today. i am very fortunate in my district to have a very aggressive economic development university in my district, the mississippi state university. they realized a long time ago that a major land grant institution can serve as a strong catalyst for a lot of economic development from generating span of advanced manufacturing companies from research but also assisting in attracting major industries into the state by providing that cutting edge research that is available. it benefits not only the university and the state but private industry as well. you mentioned the advanced manufacturing partners am orp. will universities like

mississippi state be able to play a role in that relationship and will amp expand on what other universities are always doing? >> yes, the idea of thisnnmi, which is in our budget this andr, once i'm outn.i.s.t. the idea is to really work hard on the advanced manufacturing of the future, of this year, next year end years beyond this. we are the leader in the world in manufacturing and advanced manufacturing particularly, we are the leader. advanced manufacturing is where the sector is going. what we have to be smart about is the advanced technologies for

applications in manufacturing. the reality is technology will be large part of this and we have to work with these outstanding universities. thie nnmi an initiative is to bring together what you're describing -- the outstanding universities working in this area, the outstanding private sector leaders that are working in this area, working in the labs with n.i.s.t. and the plan is to build as many as 15 of these around the united states. the greater mississippi area is a team you might work with. they would absolutely be a place where there would be special strengths. there are other places around the country so the idea is to do this and want to move as fast as weekend. >> we also are very proud to

have in my district in mississippi, a new plant and they have gone through difficult times when the demand for steel fell below 50% and it did not lay off a single worker. the market has gotten better and a surge of the imports from other countries are starting this recovery in its tracks. my understanding is there are certain countries that do not have made a natural economic advantage to produce steel. some even import steel scraps from the united states to produce their steel products. it seems some of these governments in these countries may be subsidizing their steel industry. you said you believe it is imperative that the department of commerce look into that. we certainly encourage you to do

so and i yield back. >> thank you, yes. >> the chair recognizes mr. dingell for five minutes. >> thank you and i commend you for the hearing. i want to welcome my old friend, secretary bryson, welcome. it is a distinguished record as a public servant and as a very successful businessman who was interested in this community and produced great things. we're delighted you're with us. >> thank you. >> it is clear that manufacturing and innovation are connected. in order to equip future workers with technical skills, it is now important we work hard on this. i have some questions that i think will be useful to understand what the administration is doing. this will require yes or no. is it correct that for every $1 of federal and men inm.e.p.

american manufacturers generate $30 in new sales growth?

american manufacturers purchased software legally but i'm sure many companies overseas pay nothing for pirated software without a license. that puts our people at a tremendous disadvantage. what can the administration do to level the playing field for honest manufacturer's and lawfully purchase software and

other information technology they use? i think, mr. secretary, given our time, you should give me a brief answer. i request you submit further comments for purposes of the record, thank you. >> it is absolutely unfair that our intellectual property be taken from us without compensation. and be used elsewhere as if it was not originated here. we need to stand strong against that and i will not go further but i can submit something. i would like to tell you about instances in which the commerce department in various ways has addressed that issue. i will not take that time rainout. >> we lose twice at this, once, our software people lose significantly and then our manufacturers pay higher prices

to the people that use or buy or acquire other knockoffs software, is that right? >> that's entirely right. >> that hurts us twice. >> it does. >> mr. secretary, it is a pleasure to see you here. i yield back one minute. >> the chair recognizes mr. glantz >> for five >> thank you very much. good morning, it is my honor to meet you here today. the innovative u.s. biopharmaceutical sector generates high quality jobs and enormous economic export and output for the economy of this country. nationwide, the total economic output from the biopharmaceutical sector is direct, indirect, and the induced impact was almost one

trillion dollars. they supported 4 million jobs in 2009 including 700,000 direct jobs. the district reserve in new jersey is arguably the medicine chest of united states. what is the administration doing to retain this country's global leadership position in biopharmaceutical r &d and manufacturing? >> i know generally your district and we are seeking to advance u.s. pharmaceuticals through the international trade administration in many ways. perhaps you are aware of that or i am . >> we stand strong with respect to those pharmaceuticals in country after country. that may be the most important respects in which we work on these things.

it is a very large number of countries around the world in which our commercial foreign services officers are working on this end i believe they work on this daily. i have just come back from india on a trade mission about two weeks ago. i was there for a week and pharmaceuticals came up again and again and we strongly support it. >> thank you and i look forward to working with you in this area. there is a trade agreement, the trans pacific partnership, which the united states is currently negotiating with eight countries in the asia-pacific region. it ensures a i strongt protections abroad -- it insures strongit protection abroad.

astronomers the administration secure strong pharmaceutical it provisions within the trans this of a partnership including 12 years of data protection for biologics so that all american manufacturers can benefit from these agreements. i would invite you to comment on that, sir. >> the trans pacific partnership is a high grade form of free trade. we have these agreements now and what we need to do is bring them to greater specificity and expand the more broadly across the rim and southeast asia and those countries. the president stands for this. by enormous the stand for eds. what we have to have in these agreements is not the kind of agreements that have so many holes in them that, for example, that the pharmaceutical

industry may be left out to some degree. we cannot afford that. this is what we need to do with the talent we have in this country. absolutely, i am supportive of that. >> thank you and i look forward to working with you on this and other issues and i yield back one minute. >> mr.rush, five minutes. >> mr. secretary, i commend you for your leadership and your vision that you are bringing to the agency. you have the difficult task of carrying out the president's manufacturing agenda at a time when u.s. corporations are facing global competition when american corporations are losing market share to a growing export companies -- countries like china and southeast asia and india. your current policies aimed at ensuring the u.s. access to global markets and enable

manufacturing to reach 95% of consumers who live outside our borders. i would add that our industries do not all have to be competitive but they must also be there in terms of market share gain. we have to be innovative, pro- active, and not overlook any market. i am curious to know which particular markets are you targeting in your investment strategy? in other words, which market do you think is right to receive american products? i have another question -- i might be wrong but nowhere in

your statement is that the fastest-growing region in the global economy, you are aware, economists said over the past 10 years, seven of the 10 world's fastest-growing economies were in sub-saharan africa. b onlyric country to know -- the only bric country to make the list is china. the projections are that nigeria, ethiopia and chad and tanzania, the congo, donna and rwanda are projected to increase and the african economy will grow at an average annual rate of 7% over the next 20 years. that a slightly faster than

china. according to another reputable source, the last secretary of commerce who visited africa was secretary evans who visited in 2012. if we double our exports to africa, we can create 315,000 jobs domestically. what regions are you targeting for your export of u.s. products? how do you view the market in africa? do you plan on visiting africa? in the near future? >> thank you very much.

the question of targeting exports, we target all over the world, all over the world. i am just back from india and took 16 u.s. businesses, outstanding businesses -- things will follow very positively and we already have some arrangements. with regard to sub-saharan africa, i have personally been there but i have not been there in this new role. i would like to talk with you a little further. i have been meeting with the senior most leader from sub- saharan africa. i met with the prime minister or the presidential of ghana when he was here and officials from nigeria when they were here and

in my own business, i did a lot in south africa. that was that deserves a focus and i would like to talk to you about any ideas you have about how we would take that further. >> i yield back five seconds. >> the chair recognizes dr. cassidy. >> i have an article which speaks about how the availability of shall gas has been tremendous in terms of just starting in manufacturing. this could help manufacturers reduce natural gas expands by almost $12 billion annually. there could be 1 million more workers added in manufacturing by 2025.

if we take those maxims, the upon the's insistence nine energy companies the same oftax exemptions, does that do not out of this section 199 in peril or potentially harm the manufacturing renaissance we are enjoying because of the work these energy companies are doing? >> let me address the energy and i will do what i can on the tax. i'm not an expert. tax gone out of treasury and not commerce -- tax is done out of treasury. >> i have indicated what the president has set out for a

factoring companies. i agree that your point about the incredible value to the united states of this natural gas find said that we become more dependent on u.s. sources of all forms of energy which is the position we most want to be in. it is the risk -- >> i except that. if you raise the cost of the company which increases the cost to the manufacturing companies which depend upon that energy, don't shoot decrease the competitiveness of our -- imperiling the our ability to compete? >> getting taxes right in our

country for business is very important. i cannot give the response on the specifics. i do not know in the case you are describing. >> you said build it here and send it everywhere. should this apply to the export of natural gas products? >> i certainly -- what i'm trying to puzzle through in my mind -- regard to manufacturing in every respect, i am in favor of build it here and selling everywhere. if you take the deeper into the manufacturing component, i will say if it is manufacturing, that is what i'm supporting. you'll find have been supportive

with the u.s. will companies -- oil companies in supporting their overseas positions. >> some are our great we should not export natural gas. you would accept if we have an abundance of natural gas that it could be exported? >> i would, yes. >> i yield back to my colleagues. >> mr. mckinley for five minutes. >> i have a question. back in pittsburgh in 2008, the president was aggressive in contending that china was manipulating its currency. is china still manipulating its

currency? he said they were. are they still? >> i believe that china is still manipulating its currency. >> if that is the case -- if they are, we will start shutting off access to our markets. what market have would shut off -- what market have week shut o shut off? >> say it to me again. >> we will start shutting off access to our markets. which markets has he shut off? >> the department of treasury deals with taxes issues and current issues.

we're responsible is seeing to it that there is no violation of trade laws. anything that is done out of china or any other -- >> you are saying it is not in your department. >> the reason we have right now the large number of orders that make it such that we impose heavy tariffs on goods become to these countries as an offset to the fact that they are subsidizing. >> if you could get back to west and maybe explain because we have short time on this -- if you could get back to us. you made and adjusting remark -- >> we can refer that to the u.s. department of treasury. that is where the judgment is

reached. >> the second issue that you made an interesting remark about, how they are reining in some of the regulatory effects. we are seeing the epa is now caused to approaching 20 megawatts of power and they will shut down the coal plan ts. you have over 10% of our plants closing. is that likely to increase the cost of utilities? >> you have to give me a little more on this specific case in point.

what the president has stood for a very strongly is limiting -- >> i hear what stands for. i'm asking a question. does commerce recognized that decreasing electric generating facilities is likely to increase the cost of electricity? yes or no? >> let me addressed regulation. regulation is the only thing that is allowed in this and administration with regard to regulation is things that bear strictly on health, safety, and security. that is thit. that is all. the present has not allowed those to go forward -- the president has not allow those to go forward.

new forms of a generation are less expensive than old forms of a generation. >> if they are subsidized. the comments that the congressman from new jersey mentioned about the letter and russia. this was sent in february and there was a letter directed to your attention. perhaps they need to communicate that to you. thank you very much. >> the chair recognizes mr. five mintues. >> the president has talked about -- we have one of the last

thet manufacturing juewels like to have your supervisor stopped talking down this incredibly important industry. can you walk me through how customers for these engineers that live in the heartland of america are talking down that industry has anything to do with job creation in america. >> take me a little further. what industry? >> general aviation. bowling and learjet and hundreds of suppliers that make their living -- boeing and learjet. it hurts the industry when he flies around in a business

tool. the job creation rationale for talking down the aviation industry could possibly be. >> i know this directly. i was a member of the boeing board of directors. the president has been very supportive of u.s. aviation. when i do the tours that i do around the world, i am espousing u.s. aviation -- component parts -- that is what i do. >> i appreciate that. he may be supportive of it, the things he says when he speaks shouldis notion we increase user fees are inconsistent with the statement. anything you can do to help.

we make them here in the united states of america. he said if you go up to a lot manufacturers. when you ask them the things that restrict their ability to grow jobs and the list the top 3 or four, to leave them talk about receiving federal grants? do they say, the most important think you could do would be to provide a federal grant to my business? >> in principle, yes because the focus there in a globally competitive world to retain the smarts, the best technologies, the most outstanding means of retaining and enhancing our competitive position.

technology will be a significant part of that. the role the federal government plays by way of a stimulus by the kind of work that is done at nist right here in the dc area where we're doing this work on nano technology right now. that is open right now. the only thing i know in the united states as a manufacturer, folks can go and use the lab and work with the best people and so on. >> the grant programs are going to old line industries.

do they talk about grants? i hear, "get regulation out of my way." the president said we need to cut back waste. his words in september of 2008. i have not seen that. >> the federal government is involved in manufactured in multiple ways. the work of the manufacturing extension partnership works what so many of these small and medium-sized manufacturers and in the communities and in the community colleges and so forth that work with them. there are dollars associated

with that. we try to use those dollars really, really well. >> i'm sorry. my time -- >> small agency, a modest budget, very tight control over cost. it is the only development across the entire government and it does things and we can provide you -- >> i welcome that. thank you. i just wish he would spend less time trying to redistribute wealth. thank you for your time. >> do you have time for one last question? a quick question for you. >> ok, yes, we can do one more. >> we have one last question.

>> thank you. you have been patient with us today and we're appreciative. congressman dingell asked you about information technology. in tennessee, we have a lot of performers as well as having a lot of small business manufacturers who purchased information technology in order to try to get a competitive edge. then it turns around that they are competing with companies in china or russia that has stolen that information technology. what i want to know from you this, what can you do and can the federal government do anything about the competitive harms that are caused by the facts of information technology that drives the deficiencies. and about other u.s. intellectual properties that is

stolen and are you going to put any strong ip protections and trade agreements like the trans -pacific partnership? >> intellectual property that we don't get compensated for that is taken in other countries and there is no compensation and no recognition of where that came from is flat out lost to people in our country who deserve the right to be compensated for what they provide and with that those people would only make better products rather than not getting the composition they should have. that is our responsibility at the commerce department, to see to it that those obligations are honored. if we file these many proceedings against them to see to it that it is done and that

is a nonstop shop at the commerce department. >> are you going to insert stronger protections with trade agreements like the trans specific? >> yes. >> thank you. i yield back. >> you have been very gracious with a time. help make if for any wanted signs for business booming in america. >> if i could put one thing on the record. with regard to the question about the manipulation of currency in china and what i answered is that is the u.s. treasury's role. we believe that china must allow its currency to appreciate.

that is critical. thank you very much. i apologize for putting this last word in. >> safe travels to and from california. we'll take a brief recess before we see the second panel. >> thank you. >> the second panel included several representatives from business and industry. this is about 40 minutes.

>> we are ready to begin with our second panel. joining us is alfonso lubrano, .ice chairman of the craig giffi, anad dr. kenneth tindall from the north carolina biotechnology center. good afternoon and think you for being with us today. you'll be recognized for five minutes. please watch the tires in front of you. -- please watch the timers in front of you. bring the microphone close to your mouth. speak clearly into the

microphone. you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. we lost a larger share of our manufacturing jobs in the last decade then we did in the great depression. it's a reflection of a superior performance. that is only partially true. companies get more efficient and they don't have to hire as many workers and that is good for the economy. u.s. companies were not able to be competitive in global marketplaces. my testimony goes into more detail on that.

13 of 19 manufacturing sectors are producing less today than they were doing in 2000 in inflation-adjusted terms. every decade before this with that expansion of manufacturing. u.s. manufacturing output declined 11% in the last decade in inflation-adjusted terms. look at the amount of capital investment. as measured -- this is measured and in most decades, capital stock is growing about 30% a decade, sometimes 50% a decade. we think there's a big challenge and we have to respond to that challenge. there are a number of areas that

are important. there are some trends in the right direction. we heard about natural gas and the reduction of input cost to certain industries like chemicals. that is a new benefit. some costs are going up in countries like china. using full cost calculus. there are some good things happening. on the tax side. we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. that is close to on the effective rate. we have a high effective rate. we have to do something on the

corporate tax side. we have to focus on reducing the effective rate, i would argue. we should do that in a way that keeps keep incentives that are critical to manufacturing. being able to write off equipment sooner than you would otherwise. that is a critical incentive. these are critical tax incentives that help manufacturers become more competitive. we should be focusing on a new kind of regulatory review so that major regulations have to go through a competitiveness screen. when you focus on impact on sectors that are globally traded, we need to look at that more carefully.

i think it is not enough to focus on cost reduction. highermans' wages are than our. there is rampant innovation mercantilism in countries like china, brazil, india, russia. we simply have to get a lot tougher. that is about defending the free trade system which they are systemically of violating. the last point is the technology. i do not think we can win this without doing all three things. this new national institute --

still network of institution. these kind of corporate partnerships that helped develop advanced technology and get it out to companies and i think we could do a better job there, as well. >> mr. lubrano, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you for allowing me this opportunity to testify. this is an extremely exciting time for our country and for manufacturing. i'm president of the company in rhode island, is headquartered in ohio. we have all visits throughout north america, europe, and asia.

the company is the world's leading resource for engineered specialty strip products and offers a wide range of products and expertise in numerous markets. it is my privilege to serve on the board of directors. and on the board and i served as chairman of the rhode island manufacturing's association. i would like to make a quick statement about what creates jobs. a critical component for sustained economic recovery is job growth. with 95% of the potential consumers out of the united states, manufacturers and other work have to compete globally. we go out and we have to compete

for the global business. if we book the business, we have to make things. if we make things, we hire people. very simple. increased productivity, renewed investment, employment, exports, and innovation. we are the top manufacturing economy in the world, accounting for 21% of global manufacturing. we remain extremely concerned about the challenges facing us in the united states. it is 20% more expensive to manufacture a product here. we come out of the box at a 60% disadvantage, not to mention the trade barriers they are putting up.

i deal directly with these costs on a daily basis. a small company called apple and that is two to five jobs that i'm not able to get potentially . the uncertainty hurts our ability to create jobs. we created roughly 150,000 jobs in manufacturing over the past four months. you could be talking about 600,000. to create these jobs, we need congress to help us get more competitive. it is all about global competition. there are four goals thenam put together -- the nam has put

together. the united states needs access to global markets to enable us to get and reach 95% of these consumers who live outside our borders. we need a factor tax policy, energy policy. we need to stop these in st. regulations. -- these insane regulation. over regulating is going to hurt the global environment. we're driving business into other countries that are not as careful with the environment that we are. over regulation will hurt the global economy. loraine the tax rate is important -- loring the tax rate -- lowering the tax rate is

important. we have a cumulative trade surplus of $120 billion. that equates 32 jobto jobs. i have three technology jobs i cannot fill right now. will supply that by all kinds of small companies and which could be talking 600,000 jobs unfilled. this is a time for great optimism in manufacturing. we asked for your help. help us more competitive. please. i'm begging you. we need your help.

>> mr. giffi. >> good afternoon. thank you for inviting me to testify. the work of this committee and this committee is essential to this country and well appreciated. we have worked in collaboration with the world economic forum and the manufacturing institute to better understand the capabilities necessary to drive superior manufacturing competitiveness. americans remain steadfast in their commitment to creating a strong, healthy, globally competitive manufacturing sector in the united states. 85% believe the manufacturing sector is important to our standard of living.

americans indicate they would want those jobs to be in the manufacturing sector more so than any other industry choice. we uncovered compelling research which indicates the advancement of manufacturing capabilities is directly linked to our nation's economic prosperity and to the prosperity of its middle class. the capabilities of the nation's manufacturing sector is the best predictor of economic growth and prosperity over the long term. the more advanced the capabilities it possesses, the greater the prosperity. a great competition is under way between most nations for the benefits that their citizens can derive.

an increasing emphasis on advanced capabilities and products. ceo's to survey of gain their perspective on the drivers of competitiveness as well as their view of the ranking of nations in terms of competitiveness. we conducted a series of interviews on behalf of the council with university presidents and directors of some of america's national laboratories. many of the leaders describe the critical relationship between manufacturing and innovation in an ecosystem that extends to include committee colleges, national libraries, and the private and public sectors.

strong capabilities in manufacturing. all of these participants identified innovation as the key country's a competitiveness. according to a recent survey, 67% of executives reported shortages for open positions, it translates to more than 600,000 available jobs that cannot be filled today. there must be it work force where all levels is equipped with the technology and math background necessary to compete with the very best. a common theme across all this

research, input from the is that the u.s. needs a comprehensive competitiveness strategy for the 21st century. we will need an effective public-private collaboration. actions that facilitate that collaboration's will enable the u.s. to drive high-minute job creation and economic prosperity for generations to come. thank you for this opportunity. >> thank you. mr. tindall, five minutes.

>> thank you for the invitation. my answer to your question is a strong yes. my organization was mentioned in congressman butterfield's opening remarks. critical to the biotechnology industry is manufacturing. they make some of our most advanced therapies. they may have associates or bachelor's degrees in virtually all the facilities. these are great jobs. salaries began around $30,000 for a high school graduate and go on to top six figures.

how did north carolina creek these joate these jobs? our economy evolved around industries in decline. supporting biotechnology research and education across the state. north carolina has taken a systematic approach to biotech job creation. we fund researchers. we work with partners and industry. 50,000 people work at about 500 north carolina biotech companies. the companies showed modest growth since 2002 and a

projected 6.2% annual growth between 2011 and 2014. the training consortium was established and combines it resources of university and community college systems to form a unique industry and government cooperative. multiple companies have located their buyout manufacturing facilities in the state. managers from companies like merck are able to fill almost every entry level vacancy from within north carolina. we need a strong pipeline of products to increase manufacturing jobs.

we must recognize that other countries are beginning to affect our competitiveness in this sector. more ideas in the pipeline provide more chances for a product to be developed to the point of manufacture. this can be applied to many of the new-knowledge and to produce new products for the industry's. these jobs require a different skill set then the jobs at the turn out the previous century. success in these jobs requires strong stem education as early as possible. the pressures for this industry are global.

everyone wants these high- impact jobs. all of our states are competing against a growing international contingent of about technology clusters. i believe manufacturing can continue to create jobs in the u.s. to develop new products, not just biotech products. linking workforce training programs with industry and supporting innovation will continue to improve the environment necessary for the creation of a specialized biotechnology and other technology-based products here in the u.s. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. >> thank you, mr. tindall.

i believe that people who are most hardest hit by the economic downturn are women in the workforce. i have met a bunch of women who are now in manufactured and they are optimistic and i an extent you've done a study of women in manufacturing and wonder if you could share some thoughts about women and manufacturing. >> women and re manufacturing represent a huge talent source. american manufacturers are pursuing the best talent in the world and they are pressed to fill their management ranks and job openings with outstanding talent. ,oday's education system counseling approaches often

result in women not pursuing careers in science technology, math, engineering degrees, a technical degrees that are necessary, and often opt out of a potential career in manufacturing much early in their lives than would be necessary. results and manufacturers not getting access to the talented workforce. more can be done to encourage women in our primary and secondary schools and our universities to pursue the careers that can lead to a productive career in manufacturing and the contribution to this country. it would help u.s. manufacturers solve a large issue which is getting enough talent into their organizations to drive their competitive capabilities. >> thank you. does anyone else care to comment/

>> i would agree with that. i think the problem is we cannot find anybody with the backgrounds and technology expertise that we need. there will be no hesitation on hiring women if we could find qualified women to come into the company. >> thank you. it seems the women our entrepreneurial and they are recognizing their opportunities in bring their great ideas into the sectors. i will move to dr. atkinson. say the country can restore its competitiveness if we adopted the right set of policies. why do believe the change will restore our competitiveness? have they been proven elsewhere? >> i think they have.

a change of real manufacturing output. worst quarter countries are at the nine states, spain, great britain, and italy -- the united states. lots of countries have not lost manufacturing -- sweden and germany. they have been able to perform quite well. the overall tax rate is now 10 percentage points lower than the united states. these countries have high tax credits. look at france. tax credit is six times more generous than that of the united states. germany can compete against the chinese. they have a great appreciative

program. they take workers and train them. they have a wonderful system of -- 59 centers that are co- founded by the government and located at or near universities that work with middle-size companies like the kind of company that mr. lubrano is with. high-wage countries can be successful. >> thank you. we carry trade surpluses with countries that we have a trade agreement in place. >> we would have those trade surpluses in areas where we primarily technology driven. what has kept our company surviving and competitive in places is the intellectual

property we have in the technology we have. we're doing things today with materials. the hard-drive industry. that was considered a possible two or three years ago. we have broken the box and are doing things with metals, process technologies, that three years ago, people would say, you cannot do that, including and other products for storage, with thelithium ion. it is patented. intellectual property is a huge driver that gets us to those. >> a recognize mr. sarbanes for five minutes. >> thank you, madame chair.

i was looking at these reports. there was one from ceo's. there is another one from labor. .here's a third i was looking at some of the recommendations that were included. says theyom the ceo's conveyed opinion overall that u.s. have the resources capabilities and will to be the most competitive manufacturing nation in the world in the 21st century. the first recommendation here are the first principle was from the ceo's was policymakers should strive less to create a single

specific concrete industrial policy for the future of u.s. manufacturing. then i was looking at the one from labor. their first recommendation on developing a strategy was to form a council on manufacturing policy to lead the development of a strategy to construct a dialogue between management, labor, and policy-makers. if anybody could comment on whether there is tension on whether we should set a focused strategy and policy on u.s. manufacturing and have real structure to that over time, or whether we should strive last to create a single specific policy for the future of u.s.

manufacturing. we could go down the line. mr. atkinson. >> think it is dangerous to have a policy without a coherent strategy. whenever you want to call it. we don't have a coherent strategy. we cannot expect companies to do the right thing leaving them alone. there is a skill shortage right now. companies themselves are investing in training the workers, half. you'll end up with a skill shortage. i think the challenges we need to form real public-private partnerships and form a national industrial strategy. that will include things from both sides of the aisle. include realo

strategies. >> i don't think what you mentioned any of those things are mutually exclusive. the game is changed. what is needed is a partnership between government, labor, and manufacturing. 2009 was probably the toughest year of my career. i have been doing this for about 40 years now. you're supposed to say that i do not look it. the cooperation with our labor force, our ability to move people around, the understanding from all sides about how important it was that we get through this thing together, and the government help. rhode island has a work sharing

program. it took all the resources we had and the corporation we could get -- government, management, employees -- to get to that period. that's the kind of thing we're looking for going forward. >> i was fortunate enough to do all those interviews and benefit from being able to have those conversations with those labor leaders and university presidents. i think they very much believe that the united states needs to come up with a comprehensive strategy. they believe industrial policy and the notion of picking winners and losers on a regular basis through government policy actions is not something that

they believe makes sense. create a broad strategy that has tenets under it that allows a business climate that creates jobs. they are very much in agreement on. >> the chair recognizes ms. blackburn for questions. >> thank you, madam chairman. we have a vote so we're going to do this quickly. i'm going to give each of you a question that i would like to hear from you and you can said net it in writing -- you can in writing. we have talked about information technology.

what i would like to know is from each of you, when you look at the bottom line and you've had some tough years and we're learning to do things differently. when you look your efficiency, what percentage of your product project of your profits are you attributing to the use of new information technologies? as we look at spectrum and we are trying to get more spectrum auctioned so that you can use more of these technologies, how important is it to you to have more spectrum available for use of these new technologies in the marketplace? i will yield back my time so mr.

cassidy can respond and you correspond to me in writing. thank you for your participation with us. >> response is in right thiwrit. we are crunched for time. >> give me the hook. in how natural gas lower input costs and improving the robustness of our manufacturing, contributing to tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs. president almost demagogued the issues. suggests we can replace the energy with renewals and not

have a downside. let me give some statistics. the federal electric subsidies in 2010 for natural-gas is 64 cents. nuclear, $3.14. for sor megawatt power fohour lar. you have the same expansion in manufacturing that we're currently having now. would you challenged that? >> i would agree with you. manufacturers use about 1/3 of the energy in this country. we have to process metal and it

is critical to our process. we need a comprehensive energy strategy which includes oil, gas, coal, and you can throw in some of the others, so lar. >> the input costs would be too high. >> there would be way too high. if we had to pay that, we would be less competitive. >> you can use it at an affordable cost. >> i think that's a bad idea. i would like to see xl pipeline. i like to see more development of natural gas.

>> let me cut you off. one analyst said that the director -- the price waterhouse or the other thing -- the low cost of natural gas may increase our gdp by 1% in 2013. >> i would agree with that. >> ok. well, i think we need to go. thank you. >> i apologize that our time is so assurshort. i would like to thank our distinguished panel. more and more companies are beginning to rethink their strategies. i hope our subcommittee can give them a reason to make "made in

america" matter again. four report on various aspects of manufacturing to which was referred to in tests by. tent business days -- please respond promptly to any questions that they receive. with that, the hearing is adjourned. thank you, a gentleman. >> we invite you to watch our "washington journal" segment on the same topic. you can see that on c-span.org. this is what we are asking on our facebook page. we have two live event coming up

today on c-span. the national committee reinvestment coalition is hosting a conference looking at ways to reduce home foreclosures. that is coming up live beginning at 1:00 p.m. eastern. the transfer of the space shuttle discovery to the smithsonian yesterday. the space shuttle flew 39 space missions before being retired. it received an hour-long welcoming ceremony outside the airport in dulles, virginia.

♪ ♪

[applause] ♪

[applause]

[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please

welcome our distinguished panel of presenters. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please

rise for the presentation of the colors and the singing of our national anthem. ♪

see o, say, can you by the dawn's early light what so proudly we hailed gleamingilight's last

whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight watched ramparts we were so gallantly streaming and the rockets' red glare the bombs bursting in air gave proof through the night that our flag was still there o, say, does that star-spangled

banner yet wave freethe land of the and the home of the brave ♪ [applause] >> the marine corps color guard before you is unique, flanked by two marine riflemen, the color sergeant of the marine corps carries our national flag, while the non-commissioned officer to his left carries the official battle colors of the marine corps. the 54 streamers and silver bands displayed with the battle

color commemorate the military campaigns in which marines have participated. they span the entire nation of our -- the entire history of our nation from the revolutionary war to the present. they represent over 400 awards and campaigns of the united states marines. it is the privilege of marine camp -- marine barracks washington, d.c., to be entrusted with the custody of this battle color. ♪

ladies and gentlemen, please be seated. historicof today's event, we would like to recognize the dedication and patriotism of all branches of our armed services. once your service song is played, please feel free to stand and be recognized. we are proud to present "armed forces salute." we're proud to present the

united states marine drum and bugle corps. ♪ [applause]

[applause]

[applause] ♪

[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the commandants on the united states marine drum and bugle corps -- the commandant's own, the united states marine drum and bugle corps. [applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the director of the smithsonian's national air and space museum, general jack daley. [applause] >>i if your blood is not moving now, let me know, and i will send a gurney for you. [laughter] let's give a big round of applause to the color guard of the united states marine corps. [applause] well, good morning. it is my honor to welcome you. we are going to say that a lot today because we want you to

learn how to pronounce the center appeared at his the most mispronounce name of any smithsonian facility, but we are delighted to have you here today to transfer the space shuttle discovery into america's collection of aviation and space treasures. it is great to see such a large, enthusiastic crowd. many of you have been standing for several hours, and we realize that, so we will keep this program moving. i took the memories you take with you today will make it all worthwhile. this center opened in 2003 for recognition of the wright brothers' history-making accomplishments a century before. today, we will welcome another treasure, one that represents 30 years of history of the shuttle program and a symbol of the

triumph of human space flight. achievements in space flight are the result of determination, ingenuity, courage, creativity, skill, and that unique quality that we all share -- the american spirit. for every major milestone in space history, americans have participated in the excitement, pride, and optimism of the occasion, and today is no different. since 1960, nasa and the smithsonian have worked together to make space objects accessible to the public. discovery is the latest example of this collaboration. on behalf of the national air and space museum and the american people, i am grateful to nasa for its continuing generosity. it is ok to applaud their, folks -- there, folks. [applause] without private support, the museum would not be able to present exhibitions and programs.

today's ceremony was made possible through the generous support of the boeing company and lockheed martin corp. -- another opportunity. [applause] to set the stage for the celebration, i would like to introduce a short video produced by nasa. please turn your attention to the screens for highlights of discovery -- 4 "highlights of discovery -- for "highlights of discovery." >> the space shuttle discovery, named for past ships of exploration, was delivered from its palmdale shuttle factory to nasa's kennedy space center in november 1953. since then, discovery has lived up to the historic legacy of its name -- it flew to space more times than any other spacecraft. in orbit, it released a telescope to probe the universe

and a spacecraft to explore the sun. it carried laboratories to discover weightlessness -- to study weightlessness and instruments to study the atmosphere. discovery became the first spacecraft to bring and satellite back to earth. but perhaps even more compelling than the discovery that -- the discoveries it enabled in space is the spirit it helped people discover on the earth. it's missions include flights that showcase how one time cold war adversaries can become long- term friends for exploration. its flights further expanded space travel beyond boundaries of age, gender, and race, counting among those who flew on it the oldest astronauts, the first female shuttle pilot, and the first african-american space walker. above all, discovery twice

proved that america had the will and determination to persevere and succeed in the face of devastating grief and tragedy, returning america to space after the challenger and columbia accidents. discovery is the most accomplished space shuttle ever, amounting to over 5000 trips around the earth and more than 300 days in space. [applause] >> although it is impossible to recognize the thousands of people by name contributed to discovery's achievements, we are honored to have 15 of the 32 commanders of discovery here on stage. the 1985 mission delivered two communications satellites into orbit. joe, whose crude delivered three

satellites and retrieve and repair it and another. if you are going to chair for one, you have to cheer for all. ready? ok. mike coats, once as a pilot, twice as director, now director of the johnson space center. fred gregory, commander of a classified mission. back up. you can tell an astronaut, but you cannot tell the much -- tell them much. [laughter] bob cabana, now director of nasa up as the kennedy space center. ken cameron and group conducted a scientific mission to earth to

study the atmosphere. have to get these pages here. well, the rest of you guys just stand up, and i will -- [laughter] frank commanded a mission that delivered a communications satellite. charlie bolden commanded a mission delivered a scientific satellite. kurt brown, the only person to command three discovery missions, including one to service the hubble space telescope. charlie precourt led the ninth and final docking with russia's space station. doc completed the first docking crew exchange with the

international space station. eileen collins flew two missions, first as pilot and then as flight commander to return to the space station. steve lindsay, who commanded discovery twice on missions to the space station and brought it home to its final unassisted flight -- get it? c.j. and crude delivered a massive amount of equipment to the space station. alan poindexter and crew on the space station became the largest contingent ever in space at one time. 13 people. also with us, 13 more shuttle

astronauts. we welcome pilots bill reedy, don william, doe allen -- joe allen, chris ferguson, patrick forrester, john grunsville, tom jones, janet combante, leland melvin, hollow nespoli, ken wrightman, steve robinson, casey thornton, and now last but

not least, payload specialist, too, john glenn. [applause] thank you. ok. [laughter] this is one of the greatest gatherings of astronauts probably in the history of nasa. [applause] the things that they have tended to become an astronaut are incredible, but when you are commander -- this is harder than i thought it was going to be. when our commander, you are at the top of the clutch, but this is only a handful of people

that missed their lives every day in space and developing new capabilities to get there. you are experiencing something that is not only this -- you are not going to see this again, either. 2012 is the 100 anniversary of aviation, and we are going to celebrate that here in this entire year. you will see at the evidence by this group, and you will see more of it right now. prior to becoming an astronaut, he was a distinguished aviator who served in the marine corps 35 years. it is my pleasure to introduce the administrator of the national air and space administration, major-general u.s. since he retired, charlie bolden -- major-general usmc retired. >> thank you all very much. general dailey, thank you for

that kind introduction. to my amazing colleagues who flew this incredible machine and others in this incredible fleet, thank you so much for the accomplishments you have given to our country. let me take a moment -- there's a group of people standing to my left, your right. see them waving the flag. you may not see it, but they will put it on the screen, hopefully. they are wearing these iridescent green safety jackets and stuff. they are part of the incredible crew of people who make it possible for us to do what we do. they represent united states alliance, boeing, lockheed -- you know, you name it. it is the entire nasa family. please give them a hand. [applause] and i will tell you, if you want to meet some incredible people

and shake their hands and get some stories about where the skeletons are hid, you can talk to that crowd. it is my pleasure to be here today to welcome discovery to her new home and open the next chapter of her story's life. i welcome all of you here today to share in the accomplishments of discovery and the fleet of which she was a part as we look forward to the future to which she has led us. the special program gave this country many firsts and many proud moments -- the space shuttle program. it drew the nation together in times of tragedy and triumph. we are happy to share this legacy with millions of visitors in this fantastic thing you. alongside other historic air and space craft that had changed our world and help us change science fiction into science fact and realize that what seems to many impossible dreams. from her first flight in 1984, discovery flew 39 missions, spent 369 days in space, orbited

earth 330 tons and travel -- get this -- 148,221,675 miles -- yes, we do keep track of that stuff precisely. i was privileged to fly aboard discovery twice peer first on the hubble space telescope deployment mission. finally as commander when we flew for the first time a russian crew member in 1994. discovery also visited the mere space station twice, conducting two servicing missions to hubbell and on her last mission, delivered the first robotic crewmember to the international space station. speaking of the international space station, when the coast guard song was played, the person listed highest but was unable to see -- to be seen with you -- to be seen by you, dan,

was with us in spirit [applause] as we look back on discovery's amazing legacy, i want to share with you. we are embarked on an exciting new space exploration journey. relying on american ingenuity and know-how, nasa is partnering with private industry to provide crew and cargo transportation to the international space station while developing the most powerful rocket ever built to take the nation farther than ever before into the solar system. the shuttles were extraordinary vehicles, and throughout their lives, we constantly learn from them and refine them, making them safer and more capable with each flight. what we learn will be applied to the next generation of space transportation systems. even now, the shuttle's main engines have been transferred to the space center for testing the heavy launch vehicle that will take humans father into space than ever before, to an asteroid

and ever before. every time humans set off for space, leave the planet -- think about it. that is what is significant about being here with this vehicle behind me. we can describe it as white, but notice it is charged a little bit. try going through 3000 degrees and see if you do not get a little chart. shuttles' showed us that the earth orbit could be an extension of our biosphere, a place where we could live and work. ultimately, they helped us construct the international space station where astronauts have lived and worked continuously for more than 11 years, performing hundreds of experiments that help improve life on earth and set the stage for exploration to father destinations. without the shuttle, there would bestationed, and now, that unique orbiting laboratory would be our gate to the rest of the

universe -- without the shuttle, there would bestationed -- there would be no space station. today, we turned over the discovery with great expectation nasa will continue to inspire the young people of today and tomorrow to dream of space, to dream of uncovering the secrets of the universe, and to pursue the careers that will make in the exploration leaders of tomorrow. the hope that we leave with you today is that this magnificent flying machine that carry more people to space then any vehicle ever before will be a testament not only to overcoming the human and technical obstacles of today, but a tangible example that our dreams of exploration, of reaching our higher potential are always within reach if we stretch for them. to the smithsonian institution and to its national air and

space museum, i know -- i know you will take care of discovery, as you have the many other space artifacts that you have so wonderfully displayed to tell the story of america's leadership in space for more than five decades now. i know my granddaughters, and perhaps someday, their children will be able to stand in awe beneath this great white bird and be reminded again of the bold dreams our nation right now is continuing to pursue. to innovate, create, and to travel beyond the next horizon. thanks to all of you for coming out. we have a very quick clip that will talk about the incredible life of discovery. >> space shuttle discovery was the shuttle fleet leader, having flown 39 missions beginning with its maiden voyage in august of 1984 through its final flight in february and march of 2011, during which it delivered to permit a multipurpose module to the international space station

along with critical logistics and supplies. >> discovery logged a year in space during 39 flights over 27 years of service and traveled more than 148 million miles during 5834 books of verse -- earth. all told, the five space shuttles log 500 million miles in space over 30 years of space flight and 135 missions and conducted scientific research. >> those missions included the delivery of interplanetary probes, the deployment, servicing, and upgrade of the hubble space telescope, and the lasting achievement of the international space station aboard which we now live and work today. we remember discovery fondly and wish her well at her new home at the udvar-hazy center in

virginia. [applause] >> thank you, general bolden. overseeing the smithsonian with its 19 museums and nine research centers and extensive global research activities is a big job, especially considering the 137 million objects in the institution's collections. nasa is not the only one that can use numbers. when it comes to adding another important artifact to the national collection, the secretary is an enthusiastic supporter. it is my honor to introduce the secretary of the smithsonian institution. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. good morning. thank you very much. it is a pleasure to be here. now you know why i have one of the best jobs in the world. i even have a general that reports to me. he did not mention that when he introduced me.

but two of the most magnificent museums in the smithsonian are here, so we are so proud of jack and his staff. let's give them a big hand. are so proud of jack and his we're certainly pleased to be here. we value our great partnership led nasa. i am proud to be here with our smithsonian chair. i would ask the members of the board to stand up, please. of course, it is always an honor to see our friends senator john glenn. he is certainly a supporter of the smithsonian and a legendary pioneer of space travel. [applause] discovery is just one of the many types of artifacts that

senator glenn used on his personal explorations. you can see the fiberglass couch that he was strapped in or a drug store camera he bought a modified for his historic flight from ships 7. -- friendship 7. now, discovery, which will be a centerpiece here at the udvar- hazy center. e are no second acts in american canada is there are no second acts in american life. now this discovery begins its second act as an inspiration. ray lahood said on tuesday that was a wild moment in american history. they stood and cheered.

as discovery made its final flight. in 2009,i had the great pleasure of introducing a senator glenn we were there to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the apollo program. he said something that struck me then. keynoted people all over the world said we landed on the moon. that united all cultures across our planet. many, of course, if not most of us have some personal connection to the shuttle program and the discovery. my own brother was a mass that employee. he worked on the discovery program. as president of georgia tech, i was touched when four georgia tech alum's brought back flags from space. we were presented flags

two of them were commanders. this is from russia, europe, japan, canada. this still resonates. no matter where you are from, with hard work and dedication, by learning math, science, and engineering, you to my travel to the stars. the discovery embarks on its new mission. we will continue to teach that lesson. although millions of people will have a chance to see discovery here in person, we can reach many more worldwide. as we are doing at this moment through nasa and smithsonian websites. all this week, people are sharing discovery photos, comments, using flickr, twitter,

and facebook, and on tuesday, people were using something called instagram, and the results were remarkable. 3000 tweets generated to million people -- generated 10 million people talking about the discovery. amazing. this has helped us and nasa bring our science and education program to the people of the world. we are especially excited about the potential to reach and inspire young people everywhere. young people in the audience today,we are glad you're with us today. our scientists discovered the hospitable world. today represents the best of that. maybe one of our visitors to be the first to set foot on such a universe. discovery is not simply a reminder of the power of ingenuity to sell grain

problems. -- solve great problems. it is a challenge to keep the wisdom of the " exploration is be existence of the american." let discovery rekindle the spirit so remember what we did before and thatwe can do again. thank you. >> thank you. our next speaker is an american icon. at 90 years of age,he served our country in many capacities and has contributed to the space program in many ways. in november, he received the highest civilian award bestowed by congress --the congressional gold medal for his pioneering contributions to space exploration. it is my great privilege to introduce another marine aviator who made his historic first fight to orbit in 1962

and return to space aboard discovery 36 later. please welcome senator john glenn. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. perhaps this started with a pioneer sippers landed on this new land that americans have always had a curious nature that has served us well. what is over the next hill? what is around the next bend? if we could just learn how to separate out of this chemical, it could use it to do whatever? explore they did.

it paid out beyond their wildest dreams. they sent out scouts followed by wagon trains over insurmountable obstacles of forests, mountains, rivers, does it. sometimes there were -- deserts. sometimes there were losses but they moved on. a good trip was about 10 miles as they made the six month journey to oregon or california. discovery in the travel that 10 miles in just two seconds. albeit at a little higher altitude. new science breakthroughs were changing our nation. railroad replaced wagon trains. gasoline engines brought on automobiles. 23 years after the last wagon train, the wright brothers flew

at kittyhawk in 1903. for tens of thousands of years, people looked up at the blue sky by day and the stars and moon by night. they wondered what was up there. could we ever go of their? where to go if we could go up their attacks there seem to be insurmountable odds against that ever happening. we must count ourselves among the most fortunate people of all time when we could realize that ages old dream can finely go. as we made sub orbital and orbital flights in 1962, just 50 years after kittyhawk.

mercury and gemini i developed our abilities followed by apollo and neil armstrong's never to be forgotten first footprint on someplace other than the earth. we transition from apollo to a new vehicle, the space shuttle but was intended to broaden opportunities for orbital activities. it certainly did. it is the star. it has the most extensive record of all the fleet. the missions included a wild bunch of things. it became a science platform for nine flight, a telescope repair station. which charlie already mentioned, and he was the commander of putting it up there on discovery. this has literally written the astronomy books for all time. it is a flat out truck. it was the first space station delivery truck, at 13 flight it made to put together the space station that goes over us even today.

discovery westerly a heavy haller any space station. that station is now doing continuing research with 15 international partners for us and the most unique scientific laboratory ever conceived. the unfortunate decision made a 0.5 years ago to terminate the fleet prematurely grounded our discovery. we recovered and now we move on with new programs and possibilities unlimited. [applause] today we also honor those who may discover possible. the work force kept if flightworthy.

they were represented here today by 15 former flight commanders. today they take on a new mission. it is important. it will be on display not only as a testament to the events of our time, but also as an inspiration to future generations. adobe symbol for our nation a space flight and hope unchallenged and leadership and aspiration to explore and to excel. that is a big mission. we recently celebrated its 50th anniversary of our first orbital flight in a speech to congress. i closed with a statement that i

would repeat today. as our knowledge of the universe in which we live increases, may god grant as the wisdom and guidance to use it wisely. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. an internationally known physicist, our next speaker is also helping to shape the future of the smithsonian. it is an honor to introduce the chair of board of regents, dr. france cordiva. [applause] >> thank you. i would like to add my welcome to senator glenn.

our colleagues from nasa and all our guests here today thank you for your support at the smithsonian. your support of nassau, and your support of our american values of freedom, exploration, and, yes, discovery. i would like to congratulate the staff of the national air and space museum. i do not know about you, but i will never forget those two big birds touching each other like that. wasn't that extraordinary? i am particularly pleased to be here today not only in my

capacity as chair of the board of regents but also as the former chief scientist for nasa. and as president of perdue university where one of our goals is launching tomorrow's leaders. at perdue, we have had 22 of our alumni go into space including the first and last astronauts on the moon. following senator glenn's remarks, hundreds of engineers and scientists who have helped ensure that the shuttle program makes a tremendous impact for us all. since before senator glenn first orbited the earth in 1962, at nasa and the smithsonian have recognized the need to preserve and make it accessible artifacts that can best tell the story of american in space. as a result, millions of

americans annually visit the national air and space museum including this, the hockey center. -- the udvar-hazy center, to learn about and be inspired by the thousands of objects nasa has entrusted to the smithsonian's care. historic objects that have interested. some of these are iconic. some of these are iconic. but there is maybe less so. parachutes, engine parts. all of them help us understand the unique flight that the space program holds in our imagination. before discovery can officially joined them and the national collection, we have a little bit of paper work to complete.

the agreement transferring discovery from nasa to the smithsonian. i will now like to ask the general bouldin and general dailey as representatives to step forward. -- general bolden. senator glenn, would you please join them as the witness? >> i am a witness. [laughter] [applause]

>> no. >> thank you. >> the space shuttle discovery is not officially part of the national collection. >> thank you. we appreciate your presiding over the ceremony. of these guys are? -- how disrespectful of these guys are? we can learn a lesson. can you notice how the suspect of these guys are? -- how disrespectful of these guys are? their boss stands up, and they

laugh at him. but that is what they are. they are disrespectful, but they are good. or let them get away with it one more time. starting with boeing and lockheed martin. the washington dulles airport is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year. [applause] the federal aviation in ministration and apartment homeland security, which work in cooperation with nasa to a range the extraordinary shuttle flight on tuesday. [applause] signature flight support provided of the support for the unloading of the shuttle, the telling to and from, and getting it done here for our ceremony today. we appreciate that very much.

[applause] welcome the discovery family weekend this saturday and sunday made possible by the mcdonald corporation. our official ceremony is about to end but our welcome discovery festival is just beginning. these two shuttles will remain on display this afternoon until 4:00 p.m. all of you who have been held back will have a chance to come up, take your family photos, but there are rules. we ask that you -- we will have some educational programs at 1:30 p.m. and 3:30 so we aske do not move the chairs please and do not come up on the stairs -- on the stage. leave the chair is when you go. we want you to feel free to stay here and enjoy the day because this is an extraordinary opportunity that we have. our finale for this ceremony is

video scenes that were filmed in the last three--- three days ended his discovery's last trip. i wanted to enjoy that and then , if you will stand by and let us get organized with the equipment, we will turn you loose for your photo opportunity. thank you for being here. we appreciate the support you have given us, not only today, but every day and we hope to see you out here often. as we now introduce the latest in our treasures of america at the national air and space exhibit. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] ♪

>> we have been covering the national reinvestment community collation booking at expanding banking services in low-income areas. we are having technical issues. we are planning to record it and show it to you later on c-span. coming up a little letter -- a little later, the state chairman meeting. mitt romney will address the gathering at 4:00 eastern. before, we hear from john mccain and rnc chair right spree this.

the u.s. house has racked up for the week and the house reconvenes tuesday at 2:00 eastern for legislative business. live coverage on c-span. the bill to improve information sharing between the government and business when it comes december security next week. the house takes up the motion to work on conference legislation with the senate on highway and mass-transit programs. the senate is back in session monday at noon eastern and they are expected to work on the violence against women act. that will be live2 on live. -- live on c-span2. >> this is such a complicated conflict that we have never, ever fought a war like this but for. the second thing is that what is referred to here in washington as nation-building, really is very, very targeted were fighting. >> david would cover as u.s. military operations for various

news organizations. he won a pulitzer prize for his series "beyond the battlefield." he is one of the many winners named this week. you can watch them on line at the c-span video library. fight over a quarter century of american politics and public affairs on your computer. >> a discussion now on the latest round in the secret service investigation and ethical misconduct in colombia. host: he served as their national security correspondent. good morning. we have two names out there connected with what happened in colombia. what is the message behind the release of the names? guest: the secret service is trying to be transparent about

this. ordinarily, -- this has gone so high profile. normally, they would be concerned about the privacy of these individuals. the names are out. there was a facebook page talking about standing behind sarah palin. she has arctic commented on that. host: what happens to those in question? guest: two are going to retire. these are two supervisors. a third person is in some kind of the minister is a process where he is to have a lawyer. there is another aide. they go through an adjudication kind of process. it is not clear -- not all 02 of

them may be implicated. they may not be fired. they may not be disciplined. the issue is, will they lose their security clearances? will the upper them from being able to do their job? the chief of secret service is getting good reviews for acting quickly. to address this scandal and bring some accountability. a lot of people are talking about there being a larger culture and i think they will have some work to do looking at the culture and people talking about whether there should be more female agents and that kind of thing. host: is this a specific incident or a cultural thing? >> -- guest: i have talked a lot of retired agents who insist that prostitution is out of bounds. we're talking about 21 women. there is definitely culture wheels.

there have been investigative stories in the past, one in u.s. news 10 years ago that talked about extramarital affairs. they're people who say there is a management issue. there have been a series elapses and not enough accountability. that remains to be seen. there will be an outside body that will look at this. that will make the answer questions host: is there an inspector general? guest: i am not sure. for the part of homeland security has jurisdiction. i have heard talk of an outside panel of advisers being appointed to look at the cultures. host: does anyone see this as a security concern? guest: the retired agents insist -- this hotel was not the hotel the president stayed at. there was no security perimeter here. no guns. o equipment. there is a potential security concern.

born intelligent services could be targeting with prostitutes. one agent said, this brings women into the rooms of the hotel'd. they will not leave things lying around. it should not have been a security issue. guest: are there rules about how an agent -- host: are there rules about how an agent has to act? guest: in the military, there is provision -- prohibition of prostitutes. the secret service -- that is an interesting question because prostitution is legal in some parts. that may be a defense by some of the agents. we're also hearing that some of them are saying investigators did not know these women were

prostitutes. >> -- guest: -- host: 6800 employees, special agents, at 3500. administration, 1800. uniform, 1300. will the actions of 11 men over shuttle everybody in this agency as far as the eighth year? guest: it is right now. of course. the agents i have talked to are in a giddy over the embarrassment -- are in agony over the embarrassment here. they're willing to table it for their protectees. right now, it is overshadowing their image and the question is, can the rebuild this? host: the latest. joining us to talk about. if you want to ask questions, the numbers are on the screen.

for those who want to join us on twitter, it is c-spanwj or send us an email. minnesota. independent. go ahead. caller: good morning. i am sitting here as a retired person. i can remember my younger days. they are young men. they had their natural desires and wants and needs or whatever. if they are married, that is between their wives and themselves and it does not have anything to do with the public scrutiny of what they have done or what they did down there. they were down there having a good time. i know they were down there on business but they were still down there to have a good time. that is my comment. thank you for c-span. guest: i have heard that

perspective, not quite that starkly. the counter argument is that this was before the presidential visit. they were down here to ensure security for the presidential visit. it is viewed within the service as unacceptable to have gone this far. to have gone this far before the president got there when they were supposed to be working. they are down on the taxpayer's dime. the publicans' harassment -- embarrassment is an issue. nobody would have wanted that to happen with the service. everyone agrees that it was bad judgment. host: maryland. hi. caller: 11 guys? a 11.

11 of me and my friends could not spend $1 million in one evening having a party if we tried to. when we have a drink or do what we have to do, we do not send our bills to the u.s. taxpayers. that is my comment. host: that is a good comment. we take guest: that is a good comment. there is no evidence that taxpayers were playing for -- paying for prostitutes. these guys were down traveling on the taxpayers' dime because they were working for the government, but there is no evidence that the taxpayer subsidized. host: greg stokes and dave chaney. the woman is looking to take legal action because she said a

host: guest: -- he seems to be implying because she was called a name, she has a legal action. who knows, i am not familiar with columbia law. host: oregon. hello. caller: i am tired of people calling these scandals. -- caller: this is a total abuse of power. everything that we do, we consider a scandal. it is not a scandal. it is an abuse of power. host: how so? caller: you are using our resources and for your personal gain. that is an abuse of power.

it starts with your city level, to the state level, all the way up to the federal level. it is an absolute abuse of power. guest: we covered the fact we do not believe taxpayer money was used, but he is speaking to a larger issue. this scandal and the gsa thing has a chance to undermine government when it is at an all- time low. the secret service has a reputation -- they have had problems, but they had a reputation of quiet professionalism and were well regarded by other law- enforcement agencies.

host: so we had this incident back in 2009. how much of that carries over? guest: nobody covers the secret service without watching a few -- i have been learning about this. they mentioned a litany of incidents. a guy threw a shoe at president bush. there was a grenade incident. an author wrote a book about the secret service, arguing there is a resource issue, that there is not enough money. there is definitely a cadre of retired agents and outside observers who say there is a problem here. that is usually arguing something is going to happen, and we are going to look back and say they were under- resourced. he talked about agents out of shape unable to open the president's limousine.

host: as far as concerns within the ranks itself, do you see that? guest: it is hard to tell. many have said it is not a big deal. host: if this happened after the president left, would this be a story? guest: the prostitution sting would probably make it a story. they would not have evacuated -- if these agents were forced to leave in the middle of their job -- a special agent in miami ordered this action. it would not have happened if the president already left. i think things will have been different. host: david on the republican line. caller: good morning. when are we ever, ever going to

get rid of this insane phobia of sex? who was harmed? who was endangered? it seems to me these people did their job the way they were supposed to. if it had been something -- maybe it was not even illegal. we make such a to-do about anything that has to do with sex. it is utterly ridiculous. the media frenzy over something like this. hey, guys, the world is coming down around our heads and this is what we have to talk about. it is stupid. guest: i think it is a really valid perspective. the frenzy over this story has

to do with there is a huge public interest in it. there is huge readership for these stories. people are fascinated. they are fascinated by it. i have heard that perspective from retired agents including a female veteran. she said agents are people, too. what if they had met these women at a bar and they were not prostitutes? would that have been an issue? prostitution was legal in this part of the city. i think most people can agree at this point that it has been bad for the agency and the country, the embarrassment that this thing has caused. that is a reason that refutes what the guy is saying.

host: an independent from oregon, hello. caller: hello. i am a retired postal worker. there is a clause in the contract that i signed that says all i have to do is have the appearance of doing something wrong. i wondered if it was the same with their contracts. guest: i am not familiar with their code of conduct. they do not have a union. there is some kind of due process that agents would get before being fired. it would seem common sense that there would have to be something more substantive. host: like a moral clause. guest: there may be a moral clause. i have heard it called the code of conduct. host: kentucky, joe is on the line. caller: i agree with the

previous caller that it is an abuse of power. if you use your position to have a sexual relationship with anybody, maybe you work with or outside of work, one of the people coming in for your services, you can get fired for that. i believe these people have done something wrong. they make the whole country of the united states look really bad. guest: there have been allegations and histories of infidelities in the service in the workplace, and that is an issue. i do not know if that applies here as an abuse of power. prostitution is legal in parts of colombia. there is a huge trafficking

issue. some of these women are not there by their own volition. that is an issue. the woman interviewed said she was doing it voluntarily for money. the fact there are trafficking of women in these situations, that is another thing that reflects poorly on this conduct. one issue is the military has not said that any of these guys or expected of patronizing prostitutes. they are investigating. there is something about -- i feel like the secret service -- no one would be shocked if military members patronized prostitutes. there is something about the secret service on a protective detail on the presidential visit that i think captured the

public's imagination. host: is that because they are so close to the president? guest: i think they have the perception of being straight laced guys in suits with earpieces who are monks. host: new york, good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to make a comment. it is really not the taxpayers' money. everybody is paying taxes. these guys are working. they are at a hotel. they probably got a couple of beers. they did whatever they did. how many guys are on business going out and doing this type of thing? people saying they are on the taxpayers' money. they had some girl in the room. big deal. host: so it does not bother you? caller: it never bothered me at

all. i never done something like that but we are all human. big deal. that is like saying let's go out and have a couple be used together in our hotel room and everybody turns around and -- let's go out and have a couple of years together in our hotel room -- a couple of beers to gather in our hotel room. guest: if this was one or two people accused of doing this, it would be a much smaller story. 21 women allegedly brought to the hotel. the allegations that these guys went to these sex clubs in a back alley in advance of a presidential visit distracted from the presidential visit. one guy tried to offer a woman

$30, and it was actually $250 to $300. of the guy tried to staff the woman and she ended up going to police. -- he tried to stiff the woman and she ended up going to the police. all of these guys are being asked to take polygraph tests. one has agreed to do so. all security agencies use the polygraph as a part of their investigation. host: north carolina, good morning, on the republican line. caller: good morning. i cannot believe the comments i am hearing this morning. first of all, this man, sullivan, needs to go. a 30-year veteran. he needs to go.

he has been there too long. these people i really do not think should be out partying and drinking before the president gets there. they need to be at their post. i do not know if any of them are sharpshooters. i am not talking about paying for the prostitutes or anything like that. this is not party time for men in our government. i cannot believe i am hearing all of this. thank you, president clinton. if you are in a position of authority and something that means something to this country, people need to wake up. host: lisa, before you go, lay out your reasoning why mark

sullivan needs to go. caller: because it had been under his watch. -- because it had been under his watch. -- because it happened under his watch. he has been there too long. we need better representation for our country than this man. have a good day. host: she put a lot out t here. guest: i have heard the other view is that he has responded quickly to this end has been trent. . -- has been a transparent. we will see. host: public perception of this? is it reflective of what we have heard this morning? guest: yes, i think it is. this is a very divisive issue and there is a lot of

perspective on it. host: hello to the democrats' line. caller: good morning. our government and morality is just lost in this country. from the congress, fbi, gsa, you name it. it is all morality. voting party lines. our leaders are showing no leadership whatsoever. what do you expect from fellow citizens in america when you are not showing leadership yourself? guest: that is a tough one. which leadership are you talking about? what is on display here is human frailty. people have been pointing out

that this has happened, will have been in every agency of the government. not to this scale obviously. there is a series of events that has made this a huge story for obvious reasons. host: what kind of activity goes on when the president arrives pre his arrival when it comes to the secret service? guest: a couple hundred people will advance. the secret service jump team -- there were apparently two members of the secret server counter assault team. -- secret service counterassault team. former military, former swat. some of these guys would have been involved in security sweeps.

not in the protective detail but working with local law enforcement and creating parameters to secure the president's visit. host: the secret service -- do they decide where they stay? guest: i do not know the answer to that question. i believe it has to do with security. host: because that is where the activity took place. guest: i did read this morning that the hilton is now the subject of further inquiries. they are looking at whether any women were brought to that location and basically interviewing everybody. host: frank is from falls church, virginia. toler: the guy didn't want pay the girl.

simple. number one. number two, it clearly shows these guys in the secret service have no street savvy whatsoever. you do not have a couple group leaders who could give these guys some pointers? there is no coordination or anything. i have traveled overseas. tourists, sports teams, secret service -- come on. they are out of touch. there is no scandal here whatsoever. you have one guy who messed up. thank you.

guest: the implication of sand was not paying the prostitute enough. that is one -- the implication of sin was not paying the prostitute enough. that is one view. i am sure they are deeply regretting that moment. host: the democrats' line. caller: yes. first of all, all of this stuff going on about secret service. so far, the whole conversation this morning -- i have not heard why the president was actually going down there. this was a very important conference. you have a good many of the countries down there in south

america wanting to decriminalize drugs or legalize marijuana. i think they need to look into how this involvement sets it up because i think it is a cover- up to distract from the president's actual visit down there. we have service members on down to where prostitution is not that big of a deal. i think it is pretty much kind of a set up. a conspiracy theory or whenever, basically to draw away

from what the president was going down there for. i have listened to a half hour of what happened to the secret service and not a minute of why the president was down there. guest: it is certainly true it distracted from the visit. there was an important development of the u.s. allowing latin american countries to air the issue of decriminalizing drugs that completely got obliterated by this thing. that is why the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff was so apologetic. host: has there been any indication from the secret service that policy changes are forthcoming? guest: no. host: philadelphia, pennsylvania. caller: i have three questions. when where they are off duty? was this a drunken orgy with

many people in one room? thirdly, if they were drunk, do they ever reveal secrets of the first family? this is very much more important than just a few people having individual indiscretions. thank you very much. guest: those are good questions which i think we do not know the answers to. there have been reports that some of them went to a club. there were initial reports that the whole dispute with the woman took place at a club which does not appear to be the case. we believe we know that a number of women were brought back to the hotel. we do not know if this was one group that happened or whether

it was individual agents meeting individual women. you can meet women on the street there. all that is unclear. apparently some of the agents saying i did not even know they were prostitutes. the question of when they are off duty is a good one. i think it seems by judging from the conduct, their work was done and they were off the clock and able to relax. the security perimeter had not been created. host: and the individual files and equipment that they use? guest: yes, the itineraries were in a safe and there was no sensitive equipment in the hotel rooms. host: jeff is on a republican line. caller: listen, i was down there with george bush during his term. air force one has their own

personnel. you are going to work throughout the day to wherever the president is going to go. at night time, they're done. if they want to go to a bar and drank, that is what they do. however, if any one of those military members gets to a point where they do something to lose their clearance, that is the point where they are no longer with the presidential detail. marines and air force knows that. the secret service personnel -- they are on the clock the same as the military, but all of us on those details, if you lose your clearance, you are done. period.

host: secret service agents to protect the president, vice- president, and there at immediate families. -- and their immediate families. and anyone designated by the president as well as national security events. from twitter -- guest: the question is worth day on the job. the perception is if they were not on the job in the sense that it was in the middle of the visit. there were no protectees. some people think maybe the president was there when this happened. that is not the case. host: illinois, good morning to

bill on the democrats' line. caller: i am appalled that this guy did a story and he does not know what the moral clause is. number two, that one agent who made comments that he was checking out sarah palin should be appalling. if any of these guys are married, you do not think that any of these women could have blackmailed them? come on. what is your problem? this is a moral issue. this is what is wrong with the government today. there is not enough people taking responsibility for this type of action? host: a picture from the posting of a gin david chaney when he was -- of agent david chaney when he was covering sarah palin. guest: i have been asked about the specific rules on

prostitution and we are not getting a clear answer from the secret service. what i think what we are seeing is a divide between the view of the morality of prostitution with this behavior. others think it is perfectly fine. host: good morning to john on the republican line. caller: to me, it does not matter whether you are republican, democrat, or independent. these men and women that work for the secret service are supposed to be professionals. they take an oath. i cannot see how in any way that anybody could find this acceptable. they are protecting our president, senators, congressman and women -- men and women. how can we say this is

acceptable at all? i do not understand. these people are professionals. they were hired on to do something. when you are working in that high of a position, you have to take everything serious. i do not understand. it is not acceptable in any way, shape, or form. guest: i spoke to one former agent who was married and said if it came to that -- he was suggesting to me that he did not have a problem with prostitution when it is legal. he said he would tell his wife because he would not want to compromise national security. there is an issue here. former intelligence service agents have used these tactics for decades. people with security clearances

are required to report this conduct. to what extent is that honored? they get five-year security clearance reviews where they are asked about significant contact with -- what i have been told is basically you will report it if you think you are being targeted about your job. host: what has been the stance from officials at the secret service? guest: they have been fairly transparent. i was not sure what i was going to get. host: georgia. good morning, steve. caller: the last guy sort of stole my thunder.

i have been really appalled by some of the comments i have heard this morning. you know, i think the president of the united states -- i cannot think of a more important individual of protecting. for an advanced team to have drink and sex on their mind when they should be making sure the president is safe -- we are in the midst of a very contested election. there have been presidential assassinations in this country. secret service individuals saying i will tell my wife if i am ever blackmailed, that is nonsense. with your wife leaving with your property in a divorce, you can not be blackmailed to reveal certain secrets when you are supposed to protect the president of the united states. for these individuals to have

sex and drink on their minds when they should be concentrating on their work that they are supposed to be out there doing, it is ridiculous. guest: i agree with everything he is saying. the potential is there. that is what members of congress are concerned about. of the reality is there is a pretty remote possibility. who would do it in colombia? there is this issue of the potential. you never want to allow that to be a possibility. host: we heard additional reaction from the white house. has there been further reaction? guest: they are staying away from this question of whether there is a cultural problem with the secret service.

they have expressed confidence in mark sullivan. host: one more call from massachusetts. caller: i am compelled to say somebody said there was a superiority complex in government in all agencies. i feel that is true. bill clinton said i did what i did because i could. all of those guys did it because they could and there was no one to stop them. what is $30? these guys are making huge salaries and they are quibbling over $30. that is my point. host: tell us what is next in this story. guest: i do not think they are making huge salaries. we have been told that more resignations are expected. there is a question about whether others were involved. you have reporters calling around. host: ken dilanian is with the "los angeles times" and serves

as a national security reporter. coming up later, we take a look at mitt romney addressing the troop -- the group at 4:00. we will hear from senator john mccain before he speaks. live coverage starting at 3:45 p.m. here on c-span. >> this weekend, live coverage from the los angeles times festival of books. coverage starts at 2:00 p.m. eastern saturday and sunday. saturday at 3:30, biographer says. call in for steven ross. sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern watch for the take on liberals

and the cause. at 5:00, a panel on surveillance in sequence with lori andrews and lamichael schirmer. -- michael shermer. >> the u.s. house gaveled out for the week yesterday and will reconvene tuesday for legislative business. next week, a bill to improve information sharing between the government and business when it comes to cyber security -- a motion to go to work with the senate. the senate is back on monday at noon for more work on the violence against women act and overhauling the postal service. you can see the senate live on c-span2. >> this is such a complicated concept that we have never ever fought a war like this before. it is really complicated. what is referred to in

washington as nation-building really is very, very targeted were fighting. >> he has been decades covering u.s. military operations for various news organizations. this week he won a pulitzer prize for his series. he is one of the many pulitzer prize winners named this week. you can watch him on line at the c-span video library. fight over a quarter century of american politics and public affairs on your computer. studentcam asked what part of the constitution is important and why. the second press when selected the second amendment. >> my favorite class is history. >> my favorite class is art. >> my favorite class is what studies or my business finance class. >> it will have to be on our

systems electronics. >> i am doing that if i have an a or ap. >> i am doing pretty well. that and science are not my strong suit. >> not as well as i should be. i do not put in a lot of effort into my other classis. it is because i feel it is a waste of time. i am motivated to work for its. >> it is not something i am interested in, i do not feel it is applicable to license -- >> i do not see a point to learning that when i could be dancing. >> it is because i am not a mathematical person. and >> i like them so i work hard. in others, i take naps. >> i do my homework. [laughter]

>> we often find ourselves asking, how does this apply? especially things like calculus. teachers say we learn what we learned so we can be more successful. sometimes, it seems like the only reason this can help us is because of the things the state requires. the 10th amendment of the constitution states that the powers not delegated to the united states by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. the education system is included in those rights. >> the writers of the constitution does find that something should be governed by an international -- a national level by the constitution and some things are better served through the states. and the government of individual states. >> the debate is that the government should take even more control over education. from the perspectives of many students, a standard curriculum does not leave them motivated.

i do not get me wrong, as a student, i think there are many benefits to having a standard us curriculum. >> the benefits of status curriculum or cut bait encourages your forces you to take class is that -- classis that encourages students to expand out and try different things such as art or theater and music and then they can pursue that in college. >> the benefits are many. one of them is that again, students are learning the same thing. influences on today curriculum are a round of federal assessments. the implication by the federal- state mandates. we are holding ourselves more accountable to that. i think all courses should be required. i think we need to focus on the whole child. kids need to have arts, graphic arts, visual arts, band, music,

choir. at least a taste of all of those. they need to have math, science, english, social studies. if we fall short by giving them less courses and focusing only on what people think are the main things, we will lose them. they need to be able to make choices. be able to make decisions within disciplines. as educators, we are responsible to provide the resources that are good for them. >> the movement toward standardization of the curriculum began in 1983. the u.s. department of education released a report that was very controversial called a nation at risk. it stated that the public's education system was being eroded by rising tide of mediocrity. >> we have a tradition of local control of the schools. that is a tradition that has served us well. but, i do think that is important for the federal

government to step up and help local school districts do some of the things they need to do. >> i have to agree. it is important for the educators to have control over the students. however, i think the problem would stand up for a lot of students at the government were to step up and take more control at a national level. >> the current system is based more any time when society needed mariscal -- unloads of people to run factories. with more specialization is, i feel like the u.s. could have more room to expand and refined in areas in which they excel. we took a survey out of 100 high school students and 76 of them said they would rather work under non standardized education systems. that meant that 76 out of these 100 high-school students are not feeling motivated to work under the current circumstances. >> motivation plays a big part for students.

as a student, it is hard to be motivated. if they do not see some pretty rapid motivations in for being in the class, they get tired of it quickly. they give up easier. >> approximately 69% of high- school dropout said they dropped out because they were not motivated. >> one of the benefits of a non standardized curriculum is that it allows for individuality and as an educator, my responsibility is to make as much relevance to my subject to the kids as possible. i think if we got kids more motivated where they have academics and vocational and

they get a chance to do that and get excited about it and the basic math and english and their courses like that apply to that particular job, if they see that, that is the answer. >> again, the debate is that the government should have more control over the content in schools. this is contradicting the 10th amendment here the 10th amendment holds with individuality means to education. to the educators who might be watching this, i have a question for you -- would you not rather students in america be the most successful they can be? the 10th amendment mentions that the rights should be installed to the state, or to the people. i am speaking for the students of america when i say, do not standardized curriculum any further. keep what variety we have because variety is what makes us individuals. it is our individuality that motivates us. believe me, you'd be surprised what students can do when we are motivated.

>> was that good? >> cool. all right. thank you. >> studencam.org to watch out the meaning the -- of the winning videos. continue following us on facebook and twitter. coming up at 3:45 eastern, the national committee's steve timmons meeting. mitt romney address the gathering at 4:20 p.m.. we hear from john mccain and the rnc chair. >> from the colonial era, prohibition, to today, drinking for better or worse has always been a part of the american landscape. saturday night, a history of alcohol in america. watch out or simulcast of back story with the american history dies. -- guys.

saturday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern, part of "american history tv/" ." sunday is the 100th anniversary of the u.s. chamber of commerce. on "newsmakers" we talk with the chabert's president and ceo. that is sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern. now, treasury secretary timothy geithner on the u.s. economic recovery. he spoke for about one hour at the brookings institution looking ahead to this week's imf-world bank and g-20 finance ministers' meetings.