caucus can be proud of his outstanding leadership. and as the daughter of a veteran, i understand very deeply those obligations that our nation has to those men and women who have served. i had the privilege and honor to help in his campaign and i have been in san diego with bob, the love and the affection that his constituents have for congressman filner is just really unparalleled. i want to congratulate him for his magnificent win. it was a tough campaign, but he did an unbelievable job and that's because people in his district really knew him and he had provided the level of services that allowed him to be elected now as -- we will call him very soon, mayor filner. joe baca, congressman baca, has been a voice for the poor and underserved during his entire

career, not only here in congress but in the california legislature. i was privileged to work with joe on many, many issues, and he has been a consistent voice, both in the california legislature and now here in congress, for protecting low-income families from unfair predatory and credit practices. he has used his seat on the house agricultural committee and house financial services committee to help the most vulnerable americans. he has consistently played a role in raising funding levels for food stamps and nutrition programs to feed over 44 million hungry americans. he was a powerful voice against anti-immigrant laws and built bridges on the history of our nation. we will miss his principal leadership and his passion for serving as a voice for the voiceless in congress.

and my fellow congressional black caucus member, laura richardson, she has many accomplishments during her brief time. she has worked hard to improve our nation's infrastructure and been advocate for inclusion of minority and women-owned businesses and opened up economic opportunities and strengthened our schools. i know she is going to move forward to make more contributions in public service because she is focused and dedicated elected official. i have to pay tribute to my sister, lynn woolsey and i can't say what a bittersweet season this is after seeing you work so many issues. lynn woolsey has made sure that this body recognizes that peace is patriotic. and she has spoken 444 times on the floor as it relates to the needs to bring our young men and women home. and i look forward to our continuing work.

she has been a role model for me. and i have to say finally in conclusion, she understands the importance of the safety net and brought the perspective that comes from relying on public assistance during lean times in her life and gave me the courage to talk about my time on public assistance, which was so difficult for me. to all of our departing members, i'm going to miss you, but we'll see you at home and will continue to fight the good fight. mr. miller: i would like to recognize congresswoman matsui. ms. matsui: i would like to thank the gentleman from california, mr. miller, for yielding time to me and bringing us together. mr. speaker, when the 113th congress starts next year, we will be greeting many new colleagues and we'll have to say good-bye to some of our current colleagues both republican and democrat. we are saying good-bye to six

members, representative stark, berman, woolsey, filner, baca and richardson. while in congress, these members served a strong advocates for their constituents for california and for our country. for the many years of service, these six members have ap depth of institutional knowledge that will be missed come next congress. first of all, i want to pay tribute to my good friend, congressman howard berman. howard berman has served for 30 years. i first met howard when he was living in my hometown of sacramento. he was serving in the state legislature at the time. his daughter and my son were in pre-kindergarten together, so we would see each other as we dropped off our kids. little did we know then that we would end up being friends, both serving here in congress. you know, we have all learned a lot from howard. we have learned to depend on

him, his counsel and his advice. his knowledge and leadership, particularly on foreign affairs have been invaluable to congress. his absence from this chamber will be strongly felt and he will be sorely missed, but will forever be a friend. congresswoman lynn woolsey, has been a strong advocate for families during her time in congress. she was also one of the founding members of the out of iraq caucus where she acted as a leading proponent of bringing our brave servicemen and women home from war. she fought for those whose voices were often not heard and for add vow cast si and spirit will be missed. as the dean of the democratic california delegation, congressman pete stark has been a leader and mentor to many

members from california over the years. he has been a chairman on health care issues for a very long time and his work on the affordable care act improved the law and helped ensure all americans access to affordable and quality health care. we will remember his very important contribution. congressman bob filner, ranking member on the committee of veterans affairs and helped to ensure owe returning veterans have the services they need. we'll miss him here in congress, but i know he'll make a mark as mayor in the city of san diego. joe baca has been a strong advocate for california's agricultural industry while in congress. he has worked on behalf of the workers themselves, making sure they received the civil and legal rights they deserved. congresswoman laura richardson has worked hard to keep america

safe as a member of the homeland security committee. her constituents are unwavering and she will be missed next year. california is a large state with many needs and priorities, but our delegation is strong. during the time in office, these members have been esteemed colleagues and it's been an honor to work along side of them. their knowledge, passion and commitment to public service will be greatly missed in these halls. and i wish to thank each of them for their service and wish them the best in the next adventure. i yield back. mr. miller: i recognize congresswoman eshoo. ms. eshoo: i want to thank -- did you want to know how much time you had left first? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 29 minutes.

mr. miller: we're fine. thank you. you're fine. ms. eshoo: thank you. i want to thank the gentleman from california, my dear friend, mr. miller, for organizing this special order tonight. so that we can take some time, which is the most precious thing really that god gives us is time. and pay tribute to our colleagues who have spent their time being giants in terms of representation and fighting on behalf of their constituents, bringing honor to the house of representatives and to our country. some of the best exports of the bay area and of our state of california. i want to start with the dean of our delegation, congressman pete stark.

we salute you, pete. for all that you have given and done. it's an extraordinary record for 40 years in the house of representatives. your name has been synonymous with health care, consistently for all of that period of time. for fighting for a place in that health care system, for people that are unknown to so many in our society and rejected. you made room for them in the emergency room. and wrote a law that no one would be mistreated. in fact they have to be treated before they were asked whether they had health insurance or not. your record is replete with great and good things. on behalf of your constituents, on behalf of those that so much of society has overlooked. and i know that those blessings will come back to you in a very rich and meaningful way as you

depart this place. we will miss you. and i thank you for your personal kindnesses, for all the wonderful things that you have done. and the bay area delegation will miss you enormously. next i want to pay tribute to howard berman. to congressman howard berman. this is really hard to do. congressman berman's name is synonymous with the following, with farm workers and their rights. with human rights around the world. anyone that has met and worked with him respects him. it matters not what side of the aisle they have ever come from or what country they come from or what agency they have worked

in. howard berman is -- has been the indispensable member in this chamber. when he took over the leadership of the foreign relations committee we saw a new and inspired leadership there, demanding a recognition of the armenian genocide. and he served as the original co-sponsor of that legislation. his record is replete with distinction. replete with distinction. and, howard, in our delegation i don't think there's anyone -- we will all miss you in a very, very deep and special way. this house will miss you because you brought honor to it in everything that you have done. so it is bittersweet. no, it's just bitter.

there isn't any sweetness to it. but i know that when i speak of you and really can't bring enough words to one of the most distinguished records over 30 years that any member of congress could ever put together , that the american people thank you, freedomlovers and human rights advocates around the world appreciate and bless your name and i know that together with janice, with lindsay, you haven't seen the last of us. we're going to keep coming after you. and to lynn woolsey, my classmate, we came here, we couldn't even find our way to the credit union. we were so terrified. but together we came and lynn has brought an exceptional voice

to families and to women. so often women heading up those families. and she spoke through the prism of her own experience, which is the most powerful story that anyone can ever tell. no one could ever say to lynn woolsey, you don't know what you're talking about. because they knew that she lived it, that she had experienced it and she came here to change so many women's lives, the lives of families, in terms of education for women and girls, for stronger family benefits. i could go on and on. and she brought great voice and vision to the unfortunate policy , the march to folly, when we invaded iraq. she came to this floor over 100 times to speak against that invasion and we are all -- we

are all in her debt for her conscience, for her integrity, for her wonderful voice, for her friendship and for the -- her love of the environment of the coast of california. which if there is ever the magical touch of almighty god, you see it there. and she has called on the president and the congress to make sure the protections will be there for -- in perpetuity. we will remember you in per pute, lynn, and i -- perpetuity, lynn, and i ask that every bless you brought to your -- blessing you brought to your constituents in this house will come back to you. to our republican colleagues, jerry lewis, elton gallegly, wally herger, mary boneow mack,

dan lungren and david dreier, we thank you. i thank you for your service to the people of this country in this, the house of the people, the magnificent house of representatives. thank you. mr. miller: i'd like now to recognize the leader, the democratic leader, congresswoman nancy pelosi. ms. pelosi: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank you for yielding, mr. miller. i know that we have a time limitation so i will begin by associating myself with the remarks of congresswoman eshoo who speak so -- spoke so beautifully and knowledgeably about our colleagues who are leaving from -- who are from california, who are leaving. i rise today to thank my colleagues who are friends and our partners from the great state of california. the members we honor in this special order, i'm going to just do this because it's way down low. demonstrate the extraordinary divert of our great -- diversity

of our great state. they hail from the greater los angeles area to san diego. they bring california's wide range of interests and aspirations to the floor of the house every day. working side by side with the entire california delegation, their service, our service has been -- has strengthened the golden state, the commitment of our departing members has strengthened the congress, their achievements have advanced the character of our country. each of these members has brought a unique voice to the table, yet each shares the same core values, a devotion to public service, a dedication to opportunity, a belief in a promise of america. congresswoman woolsey spent her career fighting to improve the education of our children, the economic security of their families and the protection of our workers, as well as that coastline. with her departure i won't -- departure, i won't say

retirement, because she's not a retiring person, the bay area loses a powerful advocate in congress and the nation loses a tireless progressive leader. it was i think mr. miller who said 400 times that lynn woolsey came to the floor to speak against the war in -- our involvement in the war in iraq. thank you, congresswoman woolsey. so it's about the patriotism of this congress and of the participation as patriots of our colleagues from california. whether it's the education of our children, whether it is the health of our people as demonstrated by congressman pete stark. we all owe you, pete stark, a great debt of gratitude. he has been a fixture in the fight to build and strengthen the pillars of health and economic security for the american people from his seat on the ways and means committee to the house floor, he always remained a fierce fighter for medicare and for a passionate advocate for the affordable care

act, because he believed that health care is a right for all americans, not a privilege just for the few. his legacy will live long and have stronger support for the well-being of our seniors, our families and middle class. i hope it is a source of pride. i know it is to your family. that so many of your colleagues respect you so much. and honor your leadership and service here. as has been mentioned, congressman filner left us, he's already the mayor of san diego. he was a freedom fighter who fought for civil rights and equality. he was a representative of san diego who never waivered in support of our veterans and he served as the chair of that committee. we wish him well as mayor of san diego. congresswoman richardson has dedicated her time in congress to rebuilding infrastructure, advancing the dream of high speed rail, securing our borders and protecting our environment. we wish her well as she goes forward. congressman berman, we go from b to w.

berman to woolsey. and every wonderful thing in between. has spent a -- congressman berman's imprint can be found on legislation across the broad spectrum of issues before the house. many of us knew him long before he came to congress, knew of his work, working with farm workers, working labor law to protect the rights of workers. and two particular areas, his expertise is simply unsurpassed. he's a true expert on international relations, a past chairman of the foreign affairs committee, ranking member now, a champion of aid to israel, a fight against hiv-aids, and the toughest iran sanctions in the history of our country. he is a senior member of the judiciary committee who it's safe to say understands intellectual property, understands their importance, even mentioned in our constitution, and he understands the challenges and the opportunities they present. and every venue and every arena he has been a proud advocate for

los angeles and california. a cherished leader for the entire house. joe baca is a lifelong public servant, a paratrooper in the u.s. army, look at this, the 101st airborne and the 82nd airborne divisions. he served california state legislature. he made his mark standing firm against harmful and an ty immigrant measures and leading -- anti-immigrant measures and leading on food stamps. it's fraught with meaning. a lot of work and leadership he put into it in the farm bill. joe baca came from humble beginnings, yet his accomplishments are truly significant. the list goes on and on of our colleagues that congresswoman eshoo mentioned. all of these members, public service has been a calling, a cause and a core facet of their character. california has been proud to

have them as our representatives in congress. for those of us who served with them, it's an honor for each of us to call you colleagues. for some of us, a very, very special honor to be considered your friend. we all wish you -- we each wish of you much success in the years ahead. we look forward to coming -- continuing our work together on behalf of our great golden state of california. your service in congress added to the luster of our golden state. thank you and congratulations. mr. miller: i thank the leader. if i might inquire of the time available. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 15 minutes remaining. mr. miller: next i'd like to recognize congressman sam far -- farr. mr. farr: thank you very much, mr. speaker. and thank you, george miller, for setting aside this time. you've heard from a lot of my colleagues.

i think what is interesting about this moment in history is this is probably the largest retirement ever of any delegation at any one time. california is losing 25% of its incumbent delegation. seven republicans and seven democratless. that's 14 people that have been here and of the seven democrats, they were here for historical moments of electing nancy pelosi from california, the first woman speaker of the house of representatives, and here to pass the first in history comprehensive health care bill. led by californians, i might add, and led by the dean of our delegation, pete stark. pete stark is one of the oldest, longest serving members of congress, been here 40 years. i think there's only two, three people that have served here longer and he's watched this delegation come and go since 1973. he's here tonight with his beautiful family and it's a wonderful, interesting -- pete, of all the people coming into

congress, is the only one that came just right from the private sector. most of us got elected to local and state governments. but pete came right here right out of, you know, the background at m.i.t., in engineering, and then a degree from berkley in business administration in 1963. he founded the security national bank of walnut creek which became during the war years known as the progressive bank and the bank that was going to loan to people that weren't otherwise getting loans. and he became a very popular leader in his community, built the bank into a $1 billion financial institution. having a background in the air force and other civic activities, he ran for congress and got elected and has been here, as i said, for 40 years and he's here tonight with his children. he also has four daughters and three sons and eight grandchildren and married to deborah rod rick, also of california. . we are going to miss

pete. followed also by howard berman from southern california, background at ucla and law degree from ucla. i was a staff member when he was a california legislator. he came with a background in vista and got elected to the house and has been the leading ranking democrat, probably the most trusted person in congress for foreign affairs. and with his background in labor issues for farmworkers in california and advances they made under federal law. but also as the speaker pointed out, as the leader pointed, one of the few persons that understand patent law, copyright, trademark, all those things important to the entertainment industry and the

manufacturing, electronics industry and information technology industry. he has been a senior member. so we're going to miss him deeply, deeply. i feel like a son of howard berman. he ran for the state assembly. i'm going to miss him. lynn woolsey's 10 terms, senior to me. i got elected six months after lynn got sworn in. i remember how proud i was of her background in local government and roles she played in sonoma and marin county. and she has spoken 440 times speaking for peace. going to be leaving this body known as the lady of peace and will be here in history forever and ever. and i remember bill clinton recognizing the backgrounds of

people and lynn woolsey was the first woman elected to congress who as a single mom had to be on welfare and worked her way out of that and leading role to show that there are opportunities for you -- for all people in this great country. but the lady of peace is the most important of all. bob filner, background in local government. went back to local government after being involved in school districts and now the mayor of san diego and came here as a freedom fighter in the civil rights movement and led the veterans committee here. joe baca will be known as the captain of our baseball team and how he did so well in that, but had a proud background as the speaker said, in the air force and paratrooper and the list goes on and on. laura richardson is leaving us. and before this, early

resignation of dennis cardoza. seven democrats. going to miss them greatly and thank you for allowing me to speak on behalf of their great service to the federal government. mr. miller: thank you, mr. farr. i want to also as congresswoman eshoo and congressman farr acknowledged, there are others from the other side of the aisle who will be leaving after this session of congress. brian bilbray, marry bono mack, david dreier, wally herger, jerry lewis and dan lungren. we have had accomplishments together. jerry lewis and i had the longest floor debate over the creation of desert national parks, mohave desert national parks. when we were done, he was

opposed and i was for it, but he made sure the public had access to it and visitor centers. members of congress do -- this isn't just a working relationship. over time, you get to one another's families and know their children's successes and desires and trouble that befalls american families. people don't think of that when they think of the congress and you build relationships and friendships and depend on one another's expertise to guide us through all of the issues that we will confront in a congressional year. congressman stark and myself, we enentered public policy -- public life together by running against one another in 1969. man against machine. i know who it was, this very popular banker and law school

dropout. other than that, doing well. but it's a long-standing friendship and it's about family and our ability to talk with one another. and i would like to yield to congressman stark for any remarks he would like to have. mr. stark: thank you, one of the previous speakers mentioned -- you forgot to mention this that i probably had one of the best five-minute speeches of any new member of congress and if i could learn a deliberate lesson in 20 minutes, i would have a great career here. george is right, we ran against each other and when you grow up in the bay area and you have people like barbara lee who was the lone vote in one of the most unpopular wars, you learn what courage is and people who fight for children, for minorities,

for all of the people in our area who need help, i'm proud to have worked with them. they have said that i'm the oldest member of congress. that's absolutely wrong. i'm the 430th youngest member of congress. and i just want to make sure you get that straight in the record. thank you, george. i'm honored and i'm particularly honored to be part of this great bay area delegation. and 10 districts surrounding the bay area, we have the finest legislative group in the united states. thank you very much. and i yield back. mr. miller: thank you very much. as we all know in this life, members leave the congress, don't leave public life and i expect we will be hearing from them as they leave the congress in their future endeavors. mr. bilbray wants to clean up

the sea and dan lungren would like to take down -- and i know wally herger is concerned about the watershed of the parks of our state. their advocacy goes on and that is true on both sides of the aisle. ms. woolsey, if you would like to say anything. ms. woolsey: thank you, george, for doing this. thank you for honoring us that have been here and are now leaving. i arrived feeling very green and feeling very good 20 years ago. i had no idea how little i knew about how to get something done in the congress. i know i burned in my belly and knew what issues were important to me and they have stayed important to me for the last 20

years, but i had the advantage of working with some very wonderful senior members who generously helped me along and i had the privilege of having very talented staff who built the stage that i could dance on. you can't do that unless it's team work. and i thank you, everybody that's been part of these last 20 years. it's been quite a ride. and i'm glad i did it. thank you very much, george. mr. miller: mr. speaker, that brings to a conclusion our delegation's honor of those members leaving. this is not news to members of the house that on a bipartisan basis, this is a very, very spirited delegation on both sides of the aisle. and a lot of seniority is leaving the congress with this delegation, a lot of expertise, but i'm very proud to have served with all of them.

and for their contributions and sacrifices they made in public office on behalf of public policy that they strongly believe in and became advocates for. with that, i yield back. i recognize mr. berman who is >> cathy mcmoris rodgers looks at the fiscal cliff and house republicans and democrats can come to an agreement. it talks about republican priorities for the next congress. sunday at 10:00 and 6:00 eastern on c-span. >> my inspiration was the idea i wanted to explain how totalitarianism happened. we do know the story of the cold war. we know the documents. we have seen the archives that describe relationships.

we know the main events from our point of view. we have read them and written them. what i wanted to do was show from the ground up what did it feel like to be one of the people who were subjected to this system and how do people make choices and that system and how did they react in the cave. one of the things that has happened since 1989 is the region we used to call eastern europe has become very differentiated. these companies -- these countries no longer have much and common with each other. >> more with anne applebaum from "iron curtain." sunday night at 8:00 on "q &a." >> president obama talks about friday's shooting in newtown,

connecticut. >> on friday we learned more than two dozen people were killed when a gunman opened fire. most who died were young children with their whole lives ahead of them. every parent has a heart heavy with hurt. among the fallen more also teachers, men and women who devoted their lives to helping their children fulfill their dreams. our hearts are broken today. we grieve for the families of those we lost. we keep in our careers the parents of those who survived. as blessed as they are to have children at home, they know their child's innocence has been torn away it far too early. as a nation we have endured far too many of these tragedies over the past few years. an elementary school, a shopping mall in oregon, a house of worship in wisconsin, a movie

theater in colorado, countless streetcorners. any of these neighborhoods could be our own. we have to come together. we will have to take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this from happening regardless of politics. this weekend, michele and i are doing what i know every parent is doing, holding our children as close as we can and reminding them how much will love them. there are families in conn who cannot do that today. they need all of us right now. while nothing can take the place of a lost child or loved one, all of us can extend a hand to those in need to remind them that we are there for them, that we are praying for them, and the love they felt for those they lost not just in doris in their own memories but in their communities and their country. thank you and god bless you.

>> john boehner sent his prayers and condolences to those in connecticut. there would be no weekly address a president obama could speak to all of those in this time of morning. tomorrow, stan collender and josh gordon have the latest news on the fiscal cliff negotiations and preview the week ahead. mike kibbe discusses freedom works and the organization's fund-raising going forward. what is next for president morsi. live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> the white house was very controversial, as most things in

america were. there was competition, he submitted the design for a palace. americans were not having a palace. it was not particularly awe inspiring. in 1821 a european diplomat said it was neither large nor awe inspiring. the answer the congressman dave was, the building served its purpose. if it were larger perhaps the president would be inclined to become the permanent resident. >> vicki goldberg in "the white house." >> next, scientists, doctors, and former pro football players

testified about human growth hormone testing. the panel told the committee that hgh testing was reliable and should begin immediately. dick butkis also testified. this is one hour and 45 minutes. >> the committee will come to order. it is to secure to the principles. americans have a right to know the washington money -- the money washington tension there is well spent. our duty on the oversight and

government reform committee is to protect these rights. our solemn responsibility is to hold the government accountable to the taxpayer. it is our job to work tirelessly in partnership with citizen watchdogs to deliver the fax to the american people and bring general reform to bureaucracy. our committee's resources are limited, in one area, we have focused for more than six years. and that is taking drugs and dangerous substances out of professional sports. we do some -- we do so for a bipartisan basis. we do so because what professional sports do is what collegiate sports do and it is what children aspire to do. we cannot take professional sports a in isolation, because ultimately it trickles down to

the youngest. when we began our work on a bipartisan basis on steroids in baseball, steroids have become common at the high-school level. today i believe it is dramatically reduced but not eliminated. it in play last season. we are now finishing this season, and no such implementation has occurred. this committee has met on multiple occasions with the parties, encourage them to work out their differences, and supported each of their agreements to try to bring the

the contract into compliance. we are here today because it has not happened. because america is watching, and because the ranking member and myself are personally concerned that the injuries, particularly head injuries, that continue to play professional football and all football played at all levels in no small part is based on the strength of the players hitting each other. human growth hormone can in fact -- we will hear testimony -- be a part of this. it is a tough sport one played honestly by people of good, solid training, and physical conditioning. we need not make it tougher or more dangerous by the use of banned substances. this committee is here to hear from the parties that can help us with the science.

from one well-known player who knows the science personally as it impacted on him time and time again. it is our hope that this hearing will move the parties closer together, or at least have the american people clearly understand that in fact it needs to happen, much of the science has been not just done but redone in support of it happening, and if we are to have the kind of clean game that americans love, this has to be an element of the testing. with that, i want to thank all of our witnesses. i particularly want to thank the ranking member. there has been completely non- partisan behavior. never have we had a closer tie then in the ranking member and i have on this issue. >> i want to thank you for your words. i agree with you totally.

i want to make sure the league it understands that our players understand this, that the union understands this. there is no daylight between his position and mine. this is a bipartisan effort. i am very delighted that it is because i think it is very important. thank you, mr. chairman, and thanks to all the wood as for being here. it is not only about the nfl, it is not only about human growth hormone, this hearing is about millions of young people throughout this country and high-school and college who look up to professional athletes and the blanks the young people go to emulate their role models. -- and the lengths young people go to to emulate their role models.

they have dreams about being lawyers, teachers, or a congressman. i have seen their smiling faces at graduation. i see them at the bus stops at 6:00 in the morning trying to get to practice. i see them coming home later from practice. they tell me about burning the late hours doing homework, dead tired. they are dedicated, they are smart, and they have amazing potential. that word potential is a very significant word. i have often said that our children are the living messages they send it to a future we will never see. the question is, whether we will send them there with diabetes, will we send them there with heart disease, will we send them there with mental problems? some of these young people

dreamed about becoming ballplayers, even beyond their wildest expectations. when they see a freshmen become the highest -- the heisman trophy winner, they feel it is within reach. i share the same advice my parents gave me. there are no shortcuts and life. if it went to become an entrepreneur or, a best-selling author, and for a linebacker for the baltimore ravens, they have to put in the work to reach their goals. when they see their role models using illegal drugs to try to get an edge, and when they see the professional league looking the other way refusing to test and going easy on abusers, they start thinking they need to use these substances to compete. i must credit commissioner for not for his efforts

only protecting players but for pushing to make sure this happens. i want to make sure that is clear. he has been very adamant about this. these young people start thinking and have high expectations -- and they are reaching. hgh is a dangerous drug with short-term and long-term risks. let me read you a few of the negative health effects. hypertension, diabetes, arthritis, bone spurs, disfigurement, cardiac dysfunction. these come directly from a scientific article journal published in april of this year. i ask this study be placed into the record. there is no serious dispute in the scientific community that the test to detect hgh abuse is the fact of it.

this test is actually designed to be conservative in order to avoid false positives. as one of our witnesses will testify, you are more likely to be struck by lightning and get a false positive on an hgh test. there is no dispute that on august 4, the chairman said, more than one year ago, the nfl players association entered into a contract to begin testing nfl players for hgh by the first week of the 2011 regular season. that season passed without any testing. now, the 2012 season will also pass without it. despite their commitment, lawyers for the players association say they do not trust the hgh tests, although it has been used for years on olympic athletes, major-league best -- baseball players, they argue the nfl players are different. they say their bodies are not

the same as wrestlers, runners, weightlifters, and other athletes that are tested regularly. they say they need more time to study the issue before doing the what they agreed to do. to me it seems obvious the players association is route -- running out the clock. although they agree to testing, they are trying to back out of the contract. today we will have the opportunity to hear directly from medical experts. we will examine the claims under the bright light of science. finally, let me address one point that has been raised, which is what congress is involved in this issue. i am sure the chairman agrees this dispute should be solved between the nfl and the players association. we wish it would be. they have a contract, and they should honor it. when they refuse to do so, that sends the wrong message to the kids we have sworn to protect.

that is when it becomes our business. finally on a personal level, i have worked on this issue for most of my life of in public service. i have helped with a formation of a group in baltimore called "power by me. that has reached 30,000 coaches and parents warning about the dangers of the substances. the director has spearheaded young athletes from being brainwashed from the mantra of "winning at all costs." i cannot tell you how grateful i am to you and the cooperation we have had on this issue. i am looking forward to moving forward. another thing that keeps coming up, i keep being asked the question, "why are you just having the experts? one of the nfl and the players?"

this may be very well the first of several hearings. we wanted to get the science out and the effect it has on young people. i yield back. >> i might note i am not recognizing the only football player here today, but that is because my understanding is they flew a flag any time he was hit it. >> i was a place-kicker, not an actual football player. all the more reason not to recognize. >> since we are being bipartisan, i want to remind the ranking member, we share the baltimore ravens. i was born and raised in cleveland. that was cold. we now welcome our witnesses. mr. dick butkus who leads the organization "i play clean."

welcome. dr. larry bowers is the chief science officer of the anti- dumping agency. very important to today's hearing. larry tabak is an expert in his field. mike gimbell is from st. joseph medical center. and dr. limberg is director of the human performance laboratory at the oregon health and science university. pursuant to our committee rules and because we absolutely want people to know that we treat everybody equally, would you please all rise to take the oath. raise your right hands.

this is the photo moment you have always stood for. do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? please be seated. let the record reflect all witnesses answered in the affirmative. today really is about the science and a lead into what will, if necessary, be a series of hearings until the issue is resolved. i would ask since your entire opening statement has been placed in the record, if he ran short of time, as the former chairman is to say, and green means go, yellow means go real fast through the intersection, and stop means to not run any more. if you come as close to the five minutes as possible, we would appreciate it.

>> good morning, chairman, ranking member -- >> the other thing is, these microphones, you have to get to them as close as possible. >> again, good morning. i am here today to describe our understanding of the state of science pertaining to the nonmedical use of recumbent human growth hormone, which i will refer to as hgh, including its adverse effects and to discuss prevailing methods for detecting illicit use of hgh in professional sports. hgh is a natural product of the pituitary gland, much of our current understanding about the physiological and psychological effects of hgh on the human body comes from decades of studying and treating patience suffering

from growth hormone disorders. we have a long history of breakthrough research. human growth hormone therapies became a mainstay of modern medicine, particularly after development in 1985 of a safe and reliable source of hgh, a synthetic protein produced by dna technology that has a sequence identical to that of the primary pituitary devised hgh. it can stimulate tissue growth, linear growth, and metabolism. it promotes fat loss and increases lynn body mass. the fda has approved hgh for a number of clinical situations including growth deficiency in adults and children.

it improves aspects of exercise capacity, and some suggest -- some athletes began abusing the hgh and an attempt to enhance their performance, further increasing the appeal for competitive athletes is the fact it also stimulates the production of another hormone, insulin like growth factor 1, that inhibits the breakdown of proteins. there are claims it can help prevent some of the muscle and tendon damage that results from the chronic abuse of anabolic steroids. this is unproven, but it might explain why it is often used in combination with anabolic steroids that high dosage for several months. it is a phenomenon that will bound to confuse our understanding of the nonmedical use of hgh.

studies performed has found no -- little or no evidence that it has any effect on boosting strength, and aerobic, or aerobic capacity and healthy individuals. it might actually decrease performance by a buildup of lactic acid and muscles which promotes muscle fatigue, cramps, and soreness. the side effects of a minister did to adults with growth hormone deficiency, athletes are putting themselves at serious risk. although much of what we know with the adverse effects is derived from individual case reports, anecdotal evidence, but we know about the biology and the long-term clinical history

of treating patience with it. to a worrisome risk of adverse consequences including development of some of the features of risks for developing hypoglycemia, diabetes, cardiomyopathy, a drug induced hepatitis, soft tissue of the month, a joint -- joint pain carpal tunnel syndrome. athletes are taking serious risks with their health and may not realize there is no scientific evidence that the practice will improve their performance or resilience in competition. knowledge of the potentially adverse effects and consequences associated with hgh has prompted efforts to develop and deploy is sensitive reliable method for testing of the illicit use, the development of its tests provided some formidable challenge.

these technical obstacles have been overcome with the development of several testing approaches. i see time is up. i will stop at this point. >> thank you, and to work for being a good steward of time. -- thank you for being a good steward of time. >> good morning. my name is larry bowers. i want to thank you for the opportunity to testify behind the signs of growth hormone testing. i have been involved in the testing since 1999. i was the director of the athletic drug testing toxicology lab at indiana university, one of only two a lentic testing laboratories in the united states. as the independent anti doping agency for olympic this port in

the united states. the mission is to protect and preserve the integrity of competition and the well-being of sports through the elimination of doping. you saw it has been an advocate for clean athletes. when congress approved the medical use of growth hormone, a law stated it was only to be distributed for conditions authorized by the secretary of health and human services making potentially dangerous uses illegal. yes a form growth hormone test has been developed by researchers in the growth hormone community. it is a blood test to detect the prohibited use of hormone on aid limited basis and on a worldwide basis since 2008. the test measures the ratio of the form of growth hormone found

in synthetic products to another form of hormones that are naturally released by the pituitary gland. the ratio is independent of the amount of growth hormone in the blood. you are just as likely to have a ratio of all. eight at low concentrations as you are to have a ratio of 0.8 at high concentrations. when you take recombinant, the ratio increases dramatically. the method has been the subject of four publications and numerous conferences and working group meetings involving growth hormone experts. by the world doping and type code and the convention approved by congress.

a very conservative threshold was established for this test. the chances of an athlete who has not used synthetic growth hormone testing positive are comparable to the chance the same athlete has of being struck by lightning. mr. chairman, the conservative nature of the threshold has been borne out by 13,000 tests that have been performed globally. there have been 11 positive tests and eight of those individuals it demanded use. the remaining three cases are in various stages of arbitration. in addition, major league baseball has conducted 1700 tests in its minor league players during the season and for the major league players during spring training. one minor league player tested

positive and admitted use. since 2008, there have been 1387 tests. of these, 99% or below this image -- the decision limit. it has been suggested nfl players are different from other athletes with regard to size and ethnicity that an additional population study be done. in my scientific opinion, an additional study is unnecessary because each of the concerns expressed have already been raised and answered by the experts. does the current test take the size into account? yes. it was determined the size has no relation to the ratio measured by the test. does it take into account ratio

differences that may be attributed to race or ethnicity? yes. the approach to describe it reflects that consideration. does it take into consideration the effect of strenuous exercise? yes. to the extent they are affected by exercise has been determined it is minor and disappears within 30 minutes. in conclusion, i would like to point out the only people questioning the methodology of the test are lawyers, not scientists. the test has been put into use the olympic sport in major league baseball. the experts who work in the field every day inside and outside of the anti-dumping community have accepted and recognized the test is reliable

and appropriate for the detection of abuse in sport. i would like to express my thanks and appreciation to the committee for send a message that performance enhancing drugs have no place in sport. especially the nfl. as a sports enthusiast, and in -- you need a great offense and defense to win. the defense is cracked down on drug suppliers, the offenses education and practical guidance.

for the last seven years, my son and i have been playing offense. we have reached out across the country, is encouraging them to play queen. that means eating well, pulling with attitude, instead of -- instead of using performance enhancing drugs. our work is far from over. today we have 400,000 teams that have experimented with performance enhancing drugs. many in middle school and one- third him women. five of six teenagers have never received education about performance enhancing drugs. once they hear they are illegal, to mess up body development and ruin a chance to plant the next level, they make smart decisions. the work is too quick athletes and their parents and coaches

with programs making it easier to train and eat well. we need to make it easier to do the right thing. we have another million or so that need to be educated along with their parents and coaches. none of our work will matter without a strong defense. the nfl and player agreement is a great play book. let's get on the field and execute. the well-being of our most active use his writing on it. they are paying attention to what happens. thank you. >> thank you. doctor goldberg. >> thank you for inviting me to this hearing. i am a professor of medicine and have been researching drug use among athletes since 1987. my team of researchers found reasons yemen and women use drugs -- young command and women

are not the same. we developed two high school programs entitled at less for the males. both have reduced the use of and a lot of back -- anabolic steroids and have received international attention for effectiveness. iss the effectiveness of drug testing for high school athletes because others contested fis to the accuracy of the hormone test. i will focus my testimony under athletes and the potential messages a robust hgh might send. 2% of high school students participate in sports in male and female athletes in use performance enhancing drugs. there are no estimates as to the

prevalence of use among adolescents. the potential harmful effects of high doses are not known are the of the disease may mimic -- where excess hormone is produced by a tumor. it is not clear if the hormone by itself is in hansard but many believe it works and use it in comminations with anabolic steroids. if the nfl as their reliable program and the analysis is accurate, testing could make professional football health here. the message in automation of the nfl does not tolerate drug use but other messages in the present as well. that hgh enhances athletic performance and there is a need to test because so many are

users. teenagers to not always respond as intended. over half a million high school students report steroid use. this means there are more high- school steroid users then total number of athletes in the nfl, baseball, the nba, and nhl combined, multiplied by 100. the most profound problem by numbers of users is among high- school students, not the professionals. while it may weed out users, for young athletes it is critical to prevent drug use and our study there was no deterrent effect. if testing in school does not deter his or her use, why would testing in professional sports to tear high school drug use? the way to produce it is to implement programs proven to

work. recognizing this, the nfl is doing that, the football fund has sponsored 40,000 athletes throughout the united states. it provided funds to other foundations to inform students and parents about the drugs. it is important to stress congress passed the control act from 2004 authorizing $50 million for six years to enable science based education programs in elementary and secondary schools to prevent steroid use. funds for authorized. in 2009, the nfl, mlb, and the national federation of high school sent a letter requesting appropriations of funds to educate children about steroids.

not one penny was appropriated. instead, there were court cases costing the government tens of millions of dollars in attempts to convict two major league baseball players. over $1 billion was wasted on the anti-drug campaign and appeared to make things worse. drug testing may be needed to keep professional sports more drug fiend protesting athletes will not prevent it among teenagers. if congress thinks adolescents use is a problem, do something about it. the notion that testing is -- will trickle down to young athletes without strong science based education is not only naive, it sends a message you need to use trucks to succeed. programs that work are

available. congress approved -- we would like to give our programs back to the federal government so schools can use them. >> mr. gimbel. >> thank you for inviting us, congressman cummings. my name is mike gimbel. we have been around five years. i come from a different place today. i am also a recovering addict, a clean 40 years. i am also a competitive marathon runner. i work with kids every day. i love sports, i love working with kids, and i hate what drugs are doing to these kids. we are addicted. we have an addiction to winning. winning at all costs.

the kids their work with tell me they will do anything to win. that means playing injured, a cheat, and taking drugs because the addiction is to win. we have an obsession in our nation to win. the children are starting at an early age following the same pattern of addiction the sea with other drugs. we have 910 year olds better drinking energy drinks to get an edge. " for 13 spending thousands of dollars on unregulated supplements, muscle supplements, diet supplements to get bigger and stronger and faster and then when they get to high school where winning is really important, they go to the hard stuff. that is when they start looking for anabolic steroids, anything

they can get their hands on because they have to win. we have enablers, coaches, parents, who support this, watch this, who needs to get involved. we are in denial. because we love winners. the message to our kids is that you have to win. we have seen with other addiction we have to have an attack of education, treatment, and enforcement. the education you have heard. there are programs that work. we have not talked about treatment. people may use the supplements will get a ticket, whether psychologically or physically as well. we have to get them help. in enforcement, what we have found, drug-testing is

important. drug testing helps to deter some athletes from using and it helps us identify those who are chronic users who we can identify and get help. testing is critical, not just for hgh, but any substance we can identify that will help us make our sports be safer and drug-free. that is the message. " we look at the message these kids get from their role models, we know they are role models. they know they are role models. in the last couple of weeks we have watched tragedy after tragedy in the nfl. there are a lot of other people that have died in car crashes, domestic violence, and carry weapons. it was not on the news the way

it was with the nfl and professional sports. that is how powerful it is. that is the message that goes to our children. we need to attack this the way we have attacked every other addiction. because winning cannot be everything. there are not all winners all the time. sometimes you lose. we have to teach that. what you heard, everyone agrees we have to work with parents, coaches, and we have to send a message, a new message they play safe, fair, a drug free. you do the best you can. if you win, great. if you lose, great. you tried. you did your best. that is the message we need to send. we think our congressman who has helped us in davis a guidance

for five years. we have reached 30,000 kids that there is a lot we need to reach. i think what mr. butkus said is true, we have to get to as many kids as possible. >> i will now ask consent the gentle lady from wyoming to allowed to attend and participate in this hearing. so ordered. by the way, she will be joining the committee in the next congress. this may be the only time i have to waive her on. i will recognize myself. doctor goldberg, i share with you your concern we have to do all of these other things. i hope today we can focus on this portion of it. it is not uncommon congress

authorizes and does not appropriate. hopefully butkus and others can illuminate us on players and owners are doing, spending money and hopefully that makes up for the stinginess of congress come which is not famous right now, but with the deficit by become famous. doctor bowers, you looked at the decade's of human growth hormones, and other substances. when people say it is like being struck by lightning, i want to understand. is there a chance we will get a false positive on a football player if we begin testing all of them? >> noda test is perfect but in 1400 we have done, there has not

been a single false positive. the odds are low. >> my understanding of the contract is there is an appeal process and union protection if somebody claims to have a false positive. you have looked at others, are they sufficient if there is an accusation? >> yes. i think the adjudication process is the appropriate place to discuss a particular test results and deal with the issues. >> mr. butkus, a lot has changed since your time but i s -- suspect you are aware of all of the physicians, and trainers, people who would minister on and off the field. in your opinion, is that well regulated and already creating

environment in which there is an enhancement of the players? this committee is concerned about the injuries at the professional and collegiate level. is it true that without human growth hormones, a greek eradicate it, can we also have the greatest trouble of legal enhancement anyone could possibly imagine, fluid or the actual training or any of the assignments -- science? >> i would hope so. i can only go back to the years i was playing. >> you were pretty enhanced. we have to know how. >> the thing inside my chest, i think it was. you would think the owners and the nfl with cement of money

they're playing band -- would have the best doctors available. unfortunately -- that was a lot of friendships. i would go as hard to say if i was maybe going to a different doctor, i might have played a couple more years. you have to understand what they are doing today. with all of the advancements, you would think the nfl teams would make the effort to get the best possible. when i was playing, we could never go to another doctor. players today can go anywhere they want. and specialists they want and they usually do. i would think to avoid injuries

and everything else, it is going to happen. i play clean. you can get just as much out of the sport. >> doctor goldberg baited opening statement that is worth asking you to respond to. if the nfl lives up to its contract, do we send a powerful message that could reduce or eliminate the pretense at the college level and high school level for using these kinds of drugs in knowing that the testing will prevent it when they get to the pros? >> absolutely. the nfl is a very powerful group. i am in front of the public a

lot this past couple of years. why would a kid to come to me and ask for an autograph or talk about the bears? i am 70 years old. are you telling me it does not have an effect on the kids today? come on. what they do in the nfl by testing, and i believe a lot of them want it. nobody wants to have that shadow hanging over. did he or didn't he take the juice? the majority of them want to do the test. why is held up, i do not know. >> i would make a comment. the valley of of graduating from high school and going to college, if there is testing,

and you get cut because you cannot perform the way you did before, is pretty minimal. one year in college is nine k you there. the same is true if you get to the pros and suddenly you're being tested in cannot perform. can you comment on the disincentive if you know you will be tested to try to get that one year? >> i testified in texas for high school testing and a lot of the results were there was 100,000 kits tested and only too positive. it could have been more. because of the testing. i believe it is good for high school kids to be tested. it is a deterrent. i have to be educated, and that is what we try to do. you want to try this stuff?

and up with a mustache and talking like a gang? think about it. the guys, you want to play at the next level tax they will now healing college. -- level? they will nab you in college. if i were a player back then, this is going to give me an edge, i would not do it. i hear about it all the time. they do it to have a great year, lo and behold, it happens to be their last year of the contract. they go into the toilet. i think it is a deterrent factor for high schools. >> recognize the ranking member. >> i want to follow upon the chairman's questions. first of all i want to thank

you. he said your 70 years old? there are so many things you could be doing. but you decided to touch the future. i want you to know, we all appreciate that. that leads me to this -- you know, in my district, i live in the inner city of baltimore. most of the kids in my neighborhood, they will never get to an nfl game. it cannot afford it. when you hear about these players, more power to them. making millions upon millions of dollars. they agree to take a test. two years later, no testing

complaining about the science and you just heard the doctors, what they said, what to you think? you're trying to convince kids not to go that route but what message does that sent to those kids you're trying to help? >> the message is that it is in the hands of lawyers and said of scientists. i believe the majority of the players walk on the test. i would. i want to know i am planning on an even field. because there is big rewards, like you say. with the money and endorsements and everything else. when i see a mother talking

about her kid and a mother is saying, ask him what to eat. i turned to her and i say, little johnny has one chance in a million of making it. let him play for fun. you have to educate, not only the kids and players, the coaches and parents. we all know that. getting back to your question, i think the majority of them want to be tested. they agreed to the agreement. whatever the ramifications, i think the sentiment have certainly made it clear. other than that, i do not know. i think they want to play on an even field. >> our goal is to ensure the

health and safety of professional athletes. we are also concerned about the human people in middle school, high school, college athletics. what message does is send when the nfl players do not get tested? what does that say? he talked about being addicted to winning. from what you know and listening to the doctors, do you have any doubts about the accuracy of the test? >> i do not have any doubts. we have done our homework. the same with other testing. i think the importance, when dick was saying the attitude of parents who believe every child is going to be a star, and the

reality is kids have lost to the fun of playing sports because it is about winning. these kids are looking for an edge. the skinny kid is looking for an edge because he has been told, you had better bulk up. they look up the colleges in the pros and macy their role models getting busted. getting into trouble. getting injured over and over. they look at that and that has an impact. they also look at the fact their way of getting their might be through drugs. that is going to get them to scholarship, that is going to get them out of the ghetto, the neighborhood. that will give them a chance. they are willing. if winning is everything, and they will do anything to win.

that is the scary part. >> doctor bowers, i keep going back to what you said about lightning and the chances of being -- what did you say? the chances of an athlete who does not use synthetic hormone comparable to the chance of that same athlete been struck by lightning? >> correct. >> that is incredible. -- you said alive and have been found? >> that is correct. 11 positive tests out of 13,000. >> are there any other tests? i know there are today now. are there any others in the pipeline that could be more accurate? >> i would not make the distinction of accurate.

all of them are accurate. the test i described, the limitation is it has a shortage detection window, two days after you take the drug. the other test and development, probably to tax the use of growth hormone afterward. so they are both accurate. a test for different times after the person takes the drug. >> by the way, you have not looked at george at the end of the season. you are always on the roster. >> we never lost a game by the margin of my missed kicks. otherwise would be in arizona or california. it was a great experience.

it is a great sport. they're a lot of kids of look up to mr. butkus and the others who have gone through a lot of pain in playing one of the roughest sports around. we have to send the right message. ranking member, and to the five members here today, i appreciate your passion and your willingness to testify, that we make sure our youth and others do not go down the wrong correction. i want to make sure that we inform the public of the distinction between the synthetic recombinant human growth hormone injections that keeps them unnaturally elevated verses a dietary supplement to produce optimum levels of

natural release. i think that testimony today does reflect in part the distinction between the synthetic human growth hormone and some of the other natural levels. i would ask them -- there is a company in my state of utah that wants to make sure we're distinguishing the differences and i ask consent to insert that into the record. doctor bowers, in your testimony you said an additional population study is needed. they have agreed to do this study cited not think that is applicable. the test you're performing, by

who have they been peer reviewed and how? >> peer review takes a number of forms. one of the ways can be publication. there have been four publications in the literature. that is one form of peer review. another is to get a group of experts together around a table, present data and have a recommendation. that also has been done over the last, since 1999. >> specific to the test you're doing? >> yes. all of those things have happened. >> have you given all that to the nfl? did they have access? >> yes, they do. >> my understanding is perhaps they don't. you will provide all of that information to the players'

association? >> we offered to go to talk to the player representatives and show them all of the data, answer any questions, and they never took us up on it. >> is there anything you would not show them? >> no. >> i appreciate this. i hope they continue to execute. >> would the gentleman yield? i want to come back to what mr. cummings started on. if you were to look below the current levels, the conservative threshold, is unlikely some of those would not test positive

and are doping tax not only the lightning question but in some cases, because it is such a short window, some the dopes three days before, you are seeing it but you're not considering it defaults? >> that is correct. the threshold has been set very high. when you do that, you are accepting a number of false negatives. people are using it but you are willing to exclude that's who we do not get anyone having a false positive. >> it also means that under the current testing, and they could juice in the off-season and get away with it. this is a testing period during the playing season. not year-round testing.

>> i am not totally familiar with what the nfl does. 90% of our tests have been no notice, out of competition. >> this one is less aggressive. there we go. >> thank you for conducting. the nfl players association raised questions about the science that underlies the test. arguing it should not be applied to nfl athletes. this test has been used at the olympics since 2004. he ist me if i'm wrong,

the leader in the field. despite the variations that exist among nfl players, there are a limp equivalence the span the full range. for example, six pro bowl randy moss. gold medalist usain bolt is 6' 5''. in fact, the sports reporters in this room may remember that bolt was flirting with the idea of trying out for the nfl. mr. butkus, i do not see any conceivable difference between these two athletes. do you t? >> not really. >> what are the nfl players

talking about? they say the size and body types are different. >> i really do not know. i am saying that they are being represented by the union. one false positive can mean a guy's reputation. but like i say, all of them want to be tested. >> another example is 2012 bronze medalist who at 324 pounds is the same size as larry allen, who is 324 pence. doctor bowers, i do not see any

relevant difference. what do you think? >> i agree. i can even add a little more to that. if i look at the top 1%, the highest results we have seen, the three sports involved were bobsled, cycling, and three track and field sprinters. none of them are particularly big. the highest test is not correlated to body size. >> can you talk about the test for growth hormone that went into development? >> i can. the search for a test for abuse started in 1996. it split into two paths, one of which is the test we are discussing today, and that test

was based on the fact that when people were given growth hormone, it can discriminate people correctly into users and non users. the other test, recognized a today when there was not going to be the best solution, the other test is a bio markers. an effect of the growth hormone on the party. since they last longer than the hormone is actually there, the window of detection is much broader. those are the tests under development. >> did that include a wide range of individuals? >> yes, it did. >> has it also gone through the peer review process? what were the results? >> says unmentioned, the test

has had four publications related to the test. they are published in the literature. kumbaya markers test has had 33 publications. lange the back and for the test and again, those are all in the peer review literature. quite a bit of research has been honed over the past 15 years. >> mr. chairman, yesterday the committee received a letter from scott black income of the sea of the u.s. olympic committee stating "given the stringent review process, we have the utmost confidence in the testing methods to detect hgh and i ask unanimous consent to into this letter. so ordered. >> thank you for joining us

today. i want to take us in a different direction than we have gotten to so far. as a practicing physician before coming to congress, i think we are overlooking the source of the problem. to my knowledge, hgh is not something you can go down yougnc and get -- down to gnc and get. you need a physician. i remember those discussions whether appropriate to use this hormone. generally, that is referred to an endocrinologist. what is confusing to me is why of this so readily accessible and who are the doctors better providing this for the wrong reason and why is the punishment not starting their and then maybe we do not have to worry

about it? i know that things will happen. can anyone in my knee and with the punishment history has been? -- enlighten me with the punishment history? >> they get them from the internet. you put in "buy hgh," you can get thousands and thousands of hits and you can send away for vials of steriods, whether they are human growth hormone or steroids is questionable. they have been looked at. many of them are phony. from eastern europe, you can get them. >> without a prescription? >> without a doctor's prescription. >> mr. gimbel.

>> many athletes, professional, college, are going to gnc buying tons of muscle supplements, which are not regulated. the fda does not regulate the industry. in surveys, many of them have had hgh and anabolic steroids. we just to not know. the fact is these products are working for and they're working so well, my assessment is something is not right. it needs to be regulated. we have a whole industry from energy drinks to you by in the stores or on the internet, it is not regulated. it is a russian roulette crapshoot when it comes to what the kids are buying, which probably getting more from the internet than they are from their doctors.

>> you cannot get it from a pill. you can get anabolic steroids. we did a study of supplements in 2003 at 18% of supplements had a true anabolic steroid in them. that was not on the label. because they're not regulated, they can put them in to make them work. >> i know creatine has become a problem. i have a son who played as a linebacker in his senior year, 140 pounds. he is not going to the next level. as much as he and his teammates wanted to continue, i told them the perils of this. at halftime they are on the sideline getting their cramps stretched out. college football, bc players going into the locker room to get i.v. fluid.

it shows even as a physician and father, i cannot influence my own son from taking them. that is a big challenge. how do we do a better job? >> we have to keep on pounding the pavement and educating them. the parents -- and come across it kochis says i finally had have been meeting with my parents of my nine year-old. about what? but before the game, the parents make them chug down energy drinks. at nine years old. you mean to tell me i have to go to grammar school? were telling the story to another coach became line and he said that is nothing. i caught a mother giving in nine year-old a laxative so he could make weight. nine years old.

>> as a point of personal privilege, i have gone over my grudge of your growing up in south dakota. i was not upset when you retired in 1973 but that has been 40 years ago. >> that is probably why you have been so successful. [laughter] >> 40 years, that is all it takes. i have not gone over losing the browns to baltimore. 40 years might do it. now go tto we now kno mr. quiqley. >> i appreciate your having this hearing. those watching this know the house has a history of hearings about performance enhancing drugs in sports. some of them famous, some of

them intimist. what struck me in looking at this meeting was that he used to be major league baseball was behind. now it is the only major sport testing for hgh . if the mlb can agree, it makes no sense to me that the nfl can't as well. i want to go in the weeds a little bit, but when you take hgh is in a sequence. you are on it for a while and in your office for a while. i would like a little nuance what that means as to why one is preferred given there is a gap. >> well, there is not a preference for one versus the other.

they are complementary. when we get them validated, we will use both of them. a good example was we had the bile markers test used at the games in london this summer. two athletes tested positive by the buyer markers test and did not test positive by the other test. the reason was they admitted to using growth hormone eight days before. one of the companies supplying the kits has taken it off the market. until we can validate another procedure for that particular test, we cannot use it. >> that was the -- is anyone doing the by markers test? >> the only lab that was

approved to do it was the london lamp for the olympics. best of my knowledge, there are no other labs. >> back to what i mentioned before, the sequence in which an athlete would take human growth hormone. it would go one and go off? how does that affect the timing of the testing? >> both of the test are best used in "no advanced notice" testing. testing on game day does not make sense to me. i would be doing my testing away from that when people are training and at a time they do not know they're going to be tested. >> but they take this for how long and how long are they off of it? >> the answer is it depends.

they would take a cycle that might be everyday for several weeks and then stop. anytime you got them why they're taking it, the test would be positive. there are some athletes that we have interviewed that say they take it for weight loss. they use it differently than what i described. it would be more difficult to find them, if you want to schedule a test and advance. >> who advises them? how did they find the athletes or vice versa? at least some sophistication in understanding how to take this safely and in what sequence. >> one of the things we have found, there is a lot of money involved. a lot of companies are interested in getting to

athletes and selling products and teaching them how to do it. years ago, we were into a cycle where every time the government would ban a certain chemical and a steroid, they would go back and change it. supply and demand. there was a market for the product. there was an underground, trainers, people who will teach athletes have to do things the wrong way because this their goal is to play as long as they can, strong as they can, fast as they can, recover from their injury. there's a lot of money at stake. there were people that will teach them. a trainer or a coach. there are people will teach the other side as much as a year trying to teach the right way. -- as much as we are trying to teach the right way.

>> he did not have to be a fan of the bears are the vikings to appreciate what mr. butkus did on that field to make this game great. thank you for participating. >> we recognize the gentleman from south carolina. >> science is the reason some of us went to moscow. i am not going to be asking questions in science. >> the gentleman is not that kind of lawyer. >> i was not. i am not any kind now. but i want to ask concerning reliability. if memory serves me, you can be suspended from the nfl for certain chemical defenses. i am wondering if there is a study that the players association insists on before you can suspend some 14 suffering a criminal conviction?

hearing no response, i think you can also be suspended, mr. butkus, for certain conduct on the field. which requires either mr. gidell to ascertain intent, whether they had a melissa ash -- malicious intent. a wonder if they're insisting on a test studding the reliability of ascertaining malice. >> that was not going on when i was playing. there were no rules. >> i'm not aware of any test where they have scientistic the tested the ability to look at someone's intent. here's the issue. you can be suspended for trafficking hgh.

that would be a crime. you can be suspended. what test with the use in court? if you can be suspended for the that samen, why can't test be good enough here? not all at once. is there a different test if you reduce the for trafficking hgh? the could be suspended for suffering that conviction? how would it be used in court to determine if it was hgh any different than now? >> there is a slight conference but i agree with your comments added is inconsistent and seems appropriate you do the test tube agreed to do.

>> mr. chairman, i think there was a clause in the cba, the parties would develop arrangements to implement hgh testing by the first report of 2011. has anyone been able to determine what the intent of the players association was when they great? was there a test they had in mind? is the chairman where? is there any test that would find excess of -- acceptable? >> we had a proposed deal in which they would simply collect the samples so that when they agreed to this it would have a collection of retroactive evidence. we had an agreement, and they laughed, the agreement fell

apart. -- they left, the agreement fell apart. it would not even agree to eventually have the test once they agree to it. that has been one of the frustrations. the ranking member and i met him thought we had an agreement.

[standby]

advis advisers. with that i will turn it over to alex and look forward to a great discussion. >> thank you very much. thank you everyone for being here this morning. especially tse who traveled to be with us. it's nice to close the doors from the rest of wasngton, and the fiscal cliff debate for a little while and talk about fiscal challenges elsewhere. whether it's a good news or bad news, at least it gives us an opportunity to talk about something a little bit different than the news of the day in this final two weeks, i ink, before hopefully congress finds an opportunity to either avoid or move or solve some of the fiscal cliff issues and fiscal challenges that we face. and thank you for dick ravitch

for his remarks earlier, and the work of the panel, the commission that he co-led. there are copies of that report that werel. to help us understand. and i fully agree, dick, with your comments earlier about the disconnect. here in washington, obviously, we're facing our own serious challenges, and sometimes those challenges seem so overwhelming that the notion of adding in the layer of complexity to think about the consequences outside of washington and the state legislatures and the governor's offices, and in the states themselves, may seem overwhelming. we're all fortunate to some extent, there is some of that work that gets done by the congressional budget office as legislation moves through the process. but a degree that it's often

inadequate. it often comes too late in the game. and doesn't weigh on policymakers' minds sufficiently. we're fortunate this morning to be able to talk not only in theory but to hear really specifics from the practitioners. from folks who are on the ground. who do know what it's like, both in the political context, and in the policy context of what it's like in the different states. and so lete just briefly outline how we'll spend the next hour. i'll stop in about a minute talking. i'm going to give each of the chief -- i'll introduce each of the chief of staffs for five seconds each, give them a few minutes to share their views, three or four minutes, and the floor will be yours to talk about whatever the issues are that you think are most important in your states to describe your own successes and your own challenges. and then i'd like to ask dick to

respond. having studied so many states in addition to these three, to compare and contrast the comment that he's heard with the research that he conducted, and then we'll have a brief discussion for a little while. i'll pose a few questions, then we can open it up to the floor for broader conversation. so with that let me just note who's here with us. to my right martin kent came up from richmond, he's the chief of staff to governor bob mcdonnell. dennis northrup, came from state of oklahoma. where she is chief of staff to governor mary fallin. and at the end, roxane white is joining us from the great state of colorado where she's chief of staff to governor john hickenlooper. and so, their full bios are in the pam threats that are on your table. they're all very accomplished professionals in their careers.

i'm going to ask roxane to start. we can come down this way. >> great. well, first, thank you for the report. i think that it provides a good framework for all of us as states to continue to look at the challenges facing us. we have been engaged in pension reform in colorado. our pension fund is about 69% solvent. we did major reform in the last administration, and we are now in court trying to defend that reform. our pension costs by 2020 will go to 22%, and so to give you a sense of how far behind we were as a state, if we lose in court and the battle is whether or not we as a state have a right to ratchet down the c.o.l.a.s for our state employees, then we could see a need to go to 25% of compensation by 2020. so it's fairly important that we are able toet through the litigation in terms of the ratchet down owhat we ar trying to do. we are also very concerned about

medicaid costs. our medicaid costs are about 20% of our budget. growing at a rate of 8% per year. we are very engaged in putting everyone in medicaid into affordable care collaboratives and starting to see some significant cost savings from those efforts. we are also one of the six states that is moving full speed ahead on the exchange. we believe that the exchange offers the opportunity for two things. one, it was largely supported by our small businesses in colorado, as a way to help them actually be able to afford insurance for their employees. and we had a very bipartisan effort to move forward with our exchange. so we're looking at cost ntainment there, and how we really get everyone in to a managed care type situation. we have 17% of our population that drives 67% of our medicaid costs. and it is almost exclusively our aging population and our disabled population. so really focusing in on,

because we have such a disproportionate number of small number of percentage of people who are driving our costs, really how doe contain costs, we're moving all of our payment system to out of a payment per service, to a payment overall for clients. and really bringing down our costs that way. final thing we are doing in terms of local government. our department of local affairs is working with our local municipalities on consolidations. trying to get our fire departments to consolidate. our police departments to consolidate at the local level. not forcing localities to do that, but prior to becoming governor, mayor hickenlooperas able to consolidate in the metro denver region our fire department and our pieces of our police departments and pieces of our road improvement. and so really saying to our local municipalities, one of the first executive orders we did was a no unfunded mandate to the municipalities. so we're doing our part of not trying to pass on additional

costs, but you have to do your part of really trying to control your costs and think about working with your neighbors at the same time. because we think our municipalities are in serious trouble. last thing that we have really been doing is we have had over the last two years a 22.7% increase in personal income. we believe a great deal of that is one-time money. and so we've been working with our legislature. we've gone from zero percent reserves in 2011 in colorado to 8% reserves overall in our budget, of 5% unrestricted reserve as a state. and really working with our legislature that what we see as one-time money must only be spent on one-time costs. and we are engaged in that fight on a daily basis with trying to create a better sense of how do we fund things. and how d we look at when revenue's returning not just, you know, throwing the barn doors wide open and spending everything, but having a state start to have some reserves.

so that's where we're at in colorado. >> why is that money one-time money? where is that money coming from? >> we're see capital gainsthat we believe very strongly is one time. so looking at things like we do water quality improvemen we can do deferred maintenance. we can do local municipality projects, but we really don't think it's sustainable revenue yet. >> okay. >> when governor fallin took office we didn't have the shortfall that some other states did but we still didn't have the best budget picture. but her promise as governor during the campaign was to create the best business environment possible, create more and better jobs, and to make government smaller, smarter and more efficient. and we jumped right in and did that with things like tort reform and workers' comp reform, agency consolidation, i.t. consolidation. some of those commonsense approaches that you wish washington would do more often, that we don't see.

but those are things that are saving us millions of dollars. our i.d. consolidation alone is estimated to save $180 million over the course of the governor's term and potentially next term. we also, in the same situation as colorado, had $2 in our rainy day fund, and in just two short years we've moved that to over $500 million. when we took office the governor liked to say that we were operating an eight-track bureaucracy in an ipod world. so it really is just thinking about how we do things smarter, more efficiently, and using the technology and the resources at we have to make things more efficient, and more cost effective for state governments. in terms of pension reform, we also had a $16 billion unfunded liability that we reduced by $5 billion just by simply passing a law that says we couldn't actually pass a c.o.l.a. that

was not funded. ours wasn't a coal ib not funded. we are looking at more pension reform. we have seven systems, operated by independent pension boards that have different rules and structures, looking at the potential of having them under one board that monitors all of the pensions, so you have unanimity in those. governor fallin and hickenlooper are looking at things states are doing are the ways you glean some of the most innovative ways to use our resources. we talked about infrastructure earlier. one of the things we have done in the state of oklahoma is our

transportation secretary and o dot ok down 9,000 foot bridge in oklahoma city. over 1900 steel beams were then repurposed and recycled for local counties to get rid of structural deficient, object sol eat bridges. we will go from the bottom in the country in terms of structurally deficient, obsolete privileges to the top in terms of creating that infrastructure in our state and we're literally recycling beams and saving millions of dollars by something that would have just been thrown out under normal circumstances, and it is the only project like that of its kind in the country that we're pretty proud of. the other thing we're doing with roxane's governor, governor hickenlooper, governor fallin and hickenlooper have an initiative to convert fleets to

cng. we went to detroit with a group of 13 governors signed on to an mou, had 22 represented in terms of putting an rfp out there, we said we want to convert state fleets to cng, produce us a fleet vehicle, give us that ability to do that efficiently, we'll give you the market. we will putp 5,000 cars that we commit to buying, and we're going to save our states dollars by the fuel efficiency, but also have the added bonus of creating jobs in our state and cng producing state as well as energy independence. doesn't make a lot of sense to buy energy from countries that aren't necessarily favorable us and not stable as well. and we have all of the energy that we need. we've seen the reports that could be energy independent by 2020 in this country and we need to be doing everything we can to boost that ergy production. my state, in colorado, and in

several other energy producing states, the innovation is coming from our business owners in this state and across the country, and the more we can do to use and find ways to expand that energy, we are going to be better off for it. and so all of that being said, oklahoma has been second in job growth since governor fallin is in office. 2.7% increase, one of the lowest states in unemployment. had the fourth highest increase in per capita income. and third in job growth. things we are doing in office we feel are producing those results. the fiscal cliff will have devastating effects on us. we have rejected medicaid expansion. it would cost our state $475 million through 2020. it was just unsustainable for us to carry on those costs without

facing major cuts in education, infrastructure, transportation, public safety. and the aerospace and defense industry in our state looking at the potential of losing 16,000 jobs if we go off the clf and sequestration occurs. we have some good things that are happening but some other things that are potentially not so good. >> one quick foll-up. on the fleet issue, is that going forward? what did detroit say? >> absolutely. we put the rfp out there. we have, i am not expert, we have a half ton truck out there, looking for a three-quarter ton truck, there are fleet vehicles, looking for more different size fleet vehicles that are under production, but we actually are purchasing, our entire department of transportation will be all cng i think over the

course of the next year. >> thanks. >> well, governor mcdonnell, thank you for the opportunity to hear you speak. much like roxane talked about, doing a lot of those things in virginia as well. we had an incoming governor -- when governor mcdonnell came into office in 2010, we inherited a budget shortfall of $6 billion. part of that 1.8 billion was in the last six months of fiscal 201$2010. and the other four plus billion of that associated with the next biennium. so the first thing we did after he was inaugurated, we figured out how to fill the hole without outgoing taxes. he had a personal income tax increase to offset part of that,

and requested state roll back car tax relief implemend years prior. our mandate from the governor working with finance secretary to do it, balance the budget, required to in virginia by the constitution and without raising taxes. proud to say governor mcdonnell's leadership in that six month time period, not only did we erase the deficit, without raising taxes, but wound up with a $400 million surplus in july of 2010. now, we have hadurpluses for ea of the years after that. we had one in 2011 and again in 2012. they've averaged anywhere from $550 million to the lowest was in 2010 $400 million. average $450 million over that time period. one of the biggest things we did, we came in, obviously

health care costs are escalated like they are in every stat governor mcdonnell put forth policies, private sector policies to encourage, incentivize state government to not operate as usual. couple examples. we came in. the governor put in what was in 2010 somewhat controversial, particularly some of his friends in the legislature, a paid performance 3% bonus plan. what we said is state employees, figure out how we save money year end, break the cycle of spending down to the last nickel at the end of the fiscal year like many states in the federal government do, figure out how to save that money, and we'll return up to 3% of that to you as a bonus. we save three times the cost of the bonus. it was a success. in 2011, somewhat different. the governor told state agency heads you find ways toave money, return it to us for use in the general fund.

we will in turn allow you to keep a small percentage to cover some one time costs to upgrade services for the constituents. we were very successful in doing that. significant, hundreds of millions of dollars were returned to the state that year in savings. this past yr, once again, the governor redid the 3% performance bonus plan. it cost about $70 million and we returned again well over twice that cost in savings to the state. the governor ramped up use of public, private partnerships in virginia, whether to build infrastructure, such as highways, or to outsource some of the functions in state government that have quinssentially been known to be state functions. we believed we saved hundreds of millions of dollars doing so, and we are returning that money to the bottom line. much like denise talked about, we came into office, rainy day

fund was about $300 million. projected including what the governor will announce in the next budt announcement monday, we will be well over $700 million in the rainy day fund. in addition to that we put about $250 million prior to the governor's announcement, there will be additional funds going in higher education into higher education, and really the effort is to bring down tuition costs. they have been escalating in virginia like every other state. we're very honored in virginia to have a great higher education system. buthe schools were becoming unaffordable for virginia resints. the governor tried to find ways to bring down the costs. once again, a public-private solution was in place. what the governor told college esidents, the state will put in additional money. you need to find ways to cut costs and reallocate up to a percentage of what you currently get to reallocate tat back and put it into students in the schools, not into building more

buildings, but to put an end to the school and students. governor mcdnell's mantra the last three years is hold state government accountable for our expenditures, to expect more, to implement private sector solutions. we have been very fortunate to bring down the unemployment rate to 5.7% in virginia. we came into office, it was about 7.3%. but we are very concerned with what's going on in d.c. we will be disproportionally impacted. we know in virginia by what has to occur in d.c., and that's cuts. one, we are obviously connected to d.c., have a huge defense sector in virginia, hampton roads, private contractors in northern virginia, we know that. there are estimates out there of job loss of over 150,000 jobs lost potentially as a result of sequestration. we are putting into place a couple of measures to address that. last year with some excess funds, the governor created

what's called a fact fund, federal action contingency trust fund. in addition to the rainy day fund, putting money in a fund where the governor has broad discretion. consults with legislature. unlike the rainy day fund, based on a drop in revenue, the fact fund is to address areas to put nds into particular sectors of northern virginia or hampton roads to offset costs, to incentivize private sector to come in, replace those jobs. we are trying to work with ivate sector solutions in virginia to address the challenges that we have. they're great, but we're ready for the challenge. we're going to do our part obviously with the balanced budget. we must balance the budget, if it requires cutting, that's what will happen. we tried to be conservative in revenue estimates, knowing these things loom out there. with uncertainty in d.c., it is difficult. the governor will announce next week his budget for next year,

but we talked to leadership in general assembly, said we go into session, january, guys, we could come back in late january early february, depending what happens in d.c. and may have to make significant changes. one of the last things we did prr completing the budget, the governor had me send a request to all agency heads saying submit plans for 4% reduction of your state agencies. the governor is implementing some in the budget to be announced, candidly, holding some in abeyance, may need it in january and february. trying to have things on the shelf, ready to do if we need to do it. >> dick, if you want to take a minute, are these representative states or not. one othe great things about this country, i don't think any state is the same as every other state. i think these states are smaller states, more rural states, states in which public employee unions have less leverage in politics, which makes a big

difference. and i think where infrastructure needs are nowhe near as great as in the states that have several cities which requir massive public transportation mechanisms. but the fact that those analogies aren't there doesn't minish in any way the quite prudent and proper steps the states have taken to keep their own fiscal house in order. rtainly having rainy day funds, which many of the big northern states haven't had, is absolutely critical. to take care of the enormous variations that occur in budgets in the economy. i think you can't lose sight of the fact that one of the reasons you have smaller medicaid expenditure is because of the

federal formula which favors some states because it isn't based on the actual need, it is based on a median income calculation. and as a result of at, states like new york or california has a lot more poor people and also has a lot of rich people, so it doesn't get the same break. you get over 60% reimbursement from the feds. you get 50, you get -- i think it i you get 60. i can't remember everybody's numbers. i tried to educate myself. whereas new york, we only get 50. makes a big difference. pat moynihan who always tried to change the formulas ended up saying it is all james madison's fault. but i think that there are a

couple of ings that are terribly, terribly important and don't contradict anything that you all said, weon't have a very good way of measuring adequacy of our infrastructure. we know that the chinese spend eight times a higher percentage of their gdp in infrastructure as we do in this country, and we know that that's got to make us less competitive. i think i learned from the people at the chamber here that cost of moving goods in the united states is greater in absolute dollars than it is in europer asia. therefore adding to our lack of competitiveness. and i don't know personally how you grow a real economy without being able to produce goods in a

competitive way. i think that it's important to also understand there e so many factors go into the adequacy of the educational system. and you referred to consolidation. absolutely critical. new york state, there are 650 school districts. a lot of them, each of whom by the way has one school bus or some of whom have one school bus and a commissioner of transptation. >> telling you oklahoma as tiny as we are, have 521 school districts. >> that's a tough nut politically because education is always local. sadie wants to be sure her kid gets on the football team. hard to change that.

but there's enormous redundancy in expenditures there. and that has to be addressed. also, the nature of e population varies, and that has an impact on quality of education and the ability of schools toeach. and at the same time, we have to recognize that 50 years ago we had -- there weren't many opportunities for women, weren't very many women running state of these unit states 50 years ago. the greate opportunity professionally the women had were in the teaching profession. now there outdoing us males in many cases. that has changed as well. but there isn't a national solution to that. at is a situation that's totally local. last of all, let me say that one

of the reasons states are in trouble is because they borrod against the future to pay for the present. when i was in albany, i watched one major financial institution after another come to albany and say we'll solve your budget problems for you, we'll discount your future revenues. and a politician said that's great, if we can borrow against the future, then we don't have to tax. i would spectfully submit to you that there are tens o billions of dollars around this

country where future revenues have been hi po they indicated to solve today's revenue problems. that could be stopped, could be stopped statutoril could be stopped with self-discipline in the financial services world, it could be stopped by the rating agencies, they could be significant distinctions created. last of all somebody raised the question about what happens, i think tom did, if his state runs out of money. should the federal government do anything? well, if you'll permit me, i did all of the negotiations on behalf of new york in 1975 with president ford and bill simon to get federal help. it was a good thing ford waited

as long as he did before he stepped in. he was able to make a difference without iposing any risk on the federal government whatsoever. and because he waited until the last moment to impe discipline onhe state in consideration for having provided something that wasn't even cash, provided a line of credit, the interest rate which was higher than what treasury normally followed, and they had a lien, they took back a lien on every dollar that the federal government transferred to state and local governments, under all programs, education, infrastructure, anything else, so it would have been so bloody painful for any state to fail to help that the facts never came about. i am not advocating that the federal government extend credit or write a check.

i am saying that there are ways in which the federal governmen can politically impose some discipline on the process if every politician in new york, the unions, banks -- everybody did what they swore they wouldn't do because the alternative was so much worse. so, whether the discipline comes from laws or the ability of somebody else to take something away if you don't behave in a responsible fashion, these problems and dollars we are talking about is a sufficient consequence to require a careful examination of all ways of trying to keep this society together. sufficient consequence to require careful examination of all ways trying to keep this society together. >> let me interrupt you there so we can do a little conversation, allow a chance to bring everybody in as well.

i want to thank everyone for their remarks. just listening to what folks said in their opening remarks, want to throw a few questions to each of you. in particular, given dick's comment about the match and how it varies and what i didn't know, it is relatively high in colora, roxane, what you described on the health care front is really quite innovative, right? and we're talking about the problems we're having on the federal level with finding innovative ways to deliver health care, that the federal government is responsible for exclusively and the medicare system, and one of those approaches that's talked about and the affordable care act to experiment with, episodic payments, the ability to say to a physician you don't get paid more just by doing more, you are

going to get paid for treating the patient in the way that that patient needs to be treated. you're doing that in colorado, despite the fact you have a fairly generous f map. take a minute, tell us where that came from, how that's going, is iton its way? >> well, just because we have a more generous than some states f map doesn't mean that costs aren't a primary issue for us, they are very much. so having a little more generous allowed us to move forward with some expansion, allowed us to move forward with the exchange we believe in ways some states have not been able to do, but it doesn't mean we can ignore the cost containment issues or the fraud issues or, you know, we are also really working aggressively with the federal government on return visits, when a hospital releases, how we take away dollars if, you know, people leave the hospital and

have to return, so really looking at thathole arena of patient care. the other thing we did 18 months ago was we went to all medicaid patients also having co-payment on every visit, and it is not a significant co-payment, but we have significantly changed medicaid emergency room visits by using co-payments and higher co-payment, and it is really not that significant, but for income it is significant. so it is a mere $5. and we have reversed the overuse of emergency room visits by simply charging the $5. and we have been able to drive behavior change. so we are starting to see it doesn't take that big of a carrot or that big of a stick to change behavior. so really going to a place of just like everybody pays a portion for their health care, so does medicaid. so really tryingo drive

behavior, and driving behavior on the physician side. >> in the state of oklahoma and state of virginia, the unemployment situation is favorable at the ment. both states are by my count, virginia 5.7%, oklahoma 5.3%. i think those are at least in oklahoma i believe it is a state that traditionally had unemployment rate lower -- this is sort of an odd fact when you look at what the average unemployment, typical rate is in a given state, varies across states. north dakota, always 4. anotherstat are often having standard equal librium rateslibrium rates that are higher. it has fallen in all three states, particularly oklahoma and virginia. obviously as more go back to work, more people pay taxes.

sometimes it is just good luck, right? sometimes it is factors outside the state policy arena. to what extent do you attribute the successes on the state level to the policies that have been put in place versus the natural business cycle going on. >> i think one of the biggest distinctions that we're quick to point out is certainty. one of the biggest problems with businesses, fear and uncertainty with the federal system. and businesses are unwilling to expand, invest and do that because they don't know what the situation is going to be with the federal system and the economy and what we're doing with taxes, et cetera. the difference in oklahoma is that when people locate their --

people are confident they know what path we're on. they know the governor's plan is to continue to ruce red tape and regulations on businesses. we had a court appointed tax cut first year she was in office. we will advocate for continued lower tas in oklahoma and we'll have another proposal this year. we weren't successful last year, but our mission is to be successful this year reducing taxes, so businesses know that the environment there we're creating is going to be one that will be conducive to their expansion. i think that's why we have had success, that it is attributable to our policies locally that on a national level you may not see because of some of the hesitancy with the national environment. >> as far as virginia, there are obviously some factors which make virginia some god given things and make virginia unique. proximity on the east coast, the fact we have a lot of major interstates run through virginia certainly benefit us. but in going to denise's point,

a lot of it is certainty, we are also the northernmost right to work state on the east coast. that's a tremendous benefit as far as attracting businesses. in addition to that, hampton roads, we have the largest deepwater port on the east coast. we are planning to take full advantage of the panama canal, changes there are coming soon, which gives us the ability to bring commerce into virginia. we are aggressively building a rail system going from the port of virginia west to try to get that traffic out west. we just announced we are building another highway. toll access highway. one of the purposes to bring truck traffic from port of virginia inland and connect it directly with interstate 95. so that will help us again through the commerce side of the equation, bring in new commerce to virginia. i want to mention something that's taboo of late, the

governor is not -- incentives to business. the governor put significant additional resources into the virginia economic development partnership, both funds he has at his disposal to incentivize, encourage business to virginia but resources to build infrastructure we need to do in virginia. i know there was a piece in "the new york times" recently that criticized use of that. in virginia, some things pointed out as concerns, the fact that states nlected to invest in higher education, we're doing that in virginia, the fact states aren't keeping an eye on where resrces are going, we're not doing that in virginia. we're pursuing claw back revions to incentivize them to come to virginia, enforce that aggressively. and looking to build infrastructure in virginia. we're not neglecting those priorities that helps to bring business to virginia. sure, we're fortunate to be where we are on the east coast, have right to work laws, have

proximity with the port. but i think it is combination of certainty, a combination of a little good luck, if you want to call it that, proximity, but an aggressive governor, really, and to give t general assembly credit. they have been supportive in that effort to use incentives, but to hold business acuntable when they take advantage of incentives and come to virginia. i think it is a combination of all those. >> last question, then open it to the floor. in my rol at american enterprise initute, i am a tax guy. on the federal level primarily. dick, i was struck by your comments earlier when we think about tax reform, you know, the mantra is broaden the base. and there's a lot of interest that was key to this bowles-simpson commission and other proposals having a broader definition of income uld allow the federal government to lower rates or collect more revenues.

those can have other consuences. the consequences in my view are mixed. you talk about state and local deductions, state and local tax deduction, which obviously in my view is a subsidy, regardless how you term it, policy of benefit to states, particularly states with high income tax rates, but there are other offsetting factors, too. for one, mortgage interest deduction, which is also one of our largest tax expendires. manystates have coupled their income tax system into the federal income tax system. as the federal government were to broaden the tax base, so, too, would the states, and they would have a benefit. so let me ask two questions on the tax front. and dick, actually you alluded to both in your opening remarks. the youth tax issue, out of state sales tax collection issue. big effort on the state's part to advocate for federal

legislation to facilitate collection of those use taxes. are these your states are working for, do you see it as a large revenue opportunity in terms of offsetting collections and to what exte are there opportunities and risks from base broadening reform. >> i think your point is correct, there are some tax expenditures if eminated states would benefit as well. each of these stand on their own hook so to speak. you have a series, if you look at a chart of what states follow the tax code, a lot of them follow some parts of tax law and

not all. some differ on estate taxes. i guess i feel that spending money, whether a tax expenditure or appropriation, to get someone from one jurisdiction to another, given the problems that the united states of america faces today is not a useful expenditure and unlimited public resource. i know that flies in the face of a lot of states who wish to bring jobs in. but if you bring jobs in by offering all kinds of tax abatements and exemptions as new jersey recently, zero sub gain because the pension fund is so

underfunded in jersey, there's no way they can meet the obligations they're constitutionally obligated to make. so what's the net accomplishment. i remember years ago was a silly program in carter years where states got an appropriation from the congress and used it to bribe a business to move from on state to another. >> let me bring in everybody else to have a chance to comment on your views on the tax front. >> on the tax front, small businesses certainly asked for equity with the amazons of the world. we have been doing some of that. we have been clear with taxpayers we would not ask for tax increases unless we had a lease on two thin. one, significant personnel reform last year with voters. after 11 times of voters turning down the ability to take personnel rules out of our constitution, finally did that,

and got rid of things like public employee bumping rights and really moved to more of an at will employee state. and we said that was the first thing that had to happen. the second thing we had been able to do, we have been in the process of leaning all aspects of government. required our departments that when revenue started coming back, they could not ask for any money that had been cut before from consolidations, could not replace any leaning efforts so we were able to then take dollars returning and invest in higher education and do those sorts of things instead. what we said to our taxpayers, we hen't cleaned our own house yet, so we would not be asking for any additional revenue. >> we've been able to have that initial quarter point, look for other cuts this year. on a federal level, if bush tax cuts expire, our gdp would slow down, estimates of a point and a

half percent, at the rate we're going now, that would be significant for us, so we are keeping a very watchful eye. my governor along with other governors were up here last week, meeting with the president and speaker and harry reid. what they do here will have significant impacts on our states. i think the states offer a lot of good ideas and a lot of things that i think the guys in d.c. need to listen to, because they lose sight of the impact all those things will have on the state. it is very easy to advocate for mortgage tax deduction or charitables, a lot of things won't have a lot of advocates and things that impact the states. those are more than likely things on the chopping block because they won't have a lot of constituencies other than governors fighting for them. >> a lot of things roxane and

deni said are true as well. we are a conformity state in virginia, traditionally have been. will likely continue to be. last year we addressed, the governor had me address this directly. the so-called amazon issue in virginia. we had like many states just gotten a large infusion of new jobs from amazon, and we addressed the issue inirginia and began to collect sales and use taxes, had them remit it to the commonwealth. obviously with the marketplace equity and fairness act in congress, a lot of states are waiting to see what happens there. but we have positioned ourselves we believe as well as possible to deal with that. one thing i didn't point out that i think goes to something we said a few minutes ago, we like the other states came into office, had significant challenges with our pension system. still have significant challenges. buthe govern has done a couple of things this past year. we reformed the pension system, have gone from defined benefit

plan to a hybrid plan effective '14. that's for new employees. so we think we eliminated or minimized the legal challenges we know will probably come. we will see in 2014 ether that happens. secondly, the governor with some savings i mentioned earlier put significant, hundreds of millions back into our pension system to buy down liabilities that accrued over time. they are a serious problem. we have to continue to watch that closely. in virginia, by and large we feel like we're as prepared as we're going to be. we know cuts and changes will take place in d.c., wait and see where the chips fall. we're going to be prepared through things like the fact fund, extra reserves to try to have as much liquidity as possible to deal with those. >> i would like to open ito the floor. heard about pension, unemployment, education, a lot of issues. there may be other topics that haven't come up here or maybe people want to dig deeper. i don't know if there's a

microphone. there's one here and if you raise your hand, i'll take a question at the front table. please state your name and make the question brief. we're short on time. >> sam gilbert, a member of the chamber's employee benefits committee. one of our last meetings, had a representative from medicaid. we talkedabout whether or not medicaid is even fact ringing long-term care costs, they're not. medicaid costs are going to significantly increase. the question i have, however, is it seems with all of the unfunded promises on health care and retirement, municipal financing has seen its brighter days, and is there any efforts and what are the efforts of alternative public, private investment partnerships to invest in infrastructure and job

creation? >> let me take two questions together, then we'll get people to mix it together. this woman here. >> i am a representative from nonprofit america. i have a two part question. what are the partnerships that you're having with say department of labor, department of energy, the epa, and the sba with regard to helping small businesses, primarily in th regulatory issues, with the use of it. and number two, what are your states doing for nonprofits with regard to pilot programs, paying of taxes. >>rivate partnerships, federal partnerships, and partnerships with nonprofits in the states >> let me try to answer the first question. it's a very appeali concept, but the truth of the matter is that if you want to build something, it is going to cost x dollars, you really want to be

able to service the money you borrow to pay for, you borrow x dollars, want to borrow as inexpensively as you can, particularly if the revenue u're going to use to pay the debt service on x dollars is going to come from user charges. even more compellingly important, if it is coming out of general tax revenues. and it is not coming from any her place. so the fact that you have private enterprise, private infrastructure funds is perfectly sound for projects that are optional in my view. but it's not a solution for an essential mass transit subway system or bus system. i remember when i ran the mta in new york, people would ask me all of the time why is it open

24 hours a day, and the answer is so all the people who clean your homes and offices can get to and from their own residences. you cannot run most of these public facilities on the basis of purely economic soundness when they serve a public function. so if you are a governor or mayor, you want to borrow that money as inexpensively as you possibly can. as i said, at the risk o repeating it, if you were using general revenue dollars to pay the debt service, or if you were charging people a fare, tuition, or fee, a use fee to get into a state park or whatever, would you want those as low as possible. therefore, i don't think the p 3 concept has much in the way of sustainability, or it will never amount to a significant part of

any major infrastructure endeavor in the united states. >> do you want to take issue with that or just the other question? >> as i said a few minutes ago, we are aggressively using them in virginia. our laws are ppta laws, transportation side of the equation to put on the books a little over a decade ago, and so we are aggressively using them. we are using them now, mentioned a few moments ago, used ppta to build a new interstate, 460 in virginia, and it is primarily designed for truck traffic, can be used also for vehicles, to get transport vehicles, goods and services quickly to other access points to be taken out by rail or to go on interstate systems. we are using it also in the education arena, ppea, education facilities act used i virginia to build schools, being used to build municipal garages, being used for a lot of different

purposes in virginia. we find we cannot do it alone, even if we bring in additional revenue on the transportation side, governor firmly believes we cannotdo it alone without partnerships. there are some issues that come along with that. dick's point is well taken. for example, some of the pptas we are doing, announced 495 express lanes in northern virginia, built with the ppta, they will continue to be responsible for maintenance on that, long after it is complete. maintenance costs alone in transportation have skyrocketed, petroleum is a major factor in asphalt. i believe in the last 20 years, increased by 350%. there are costs that you can contract with private sector to take off the books. yes, there's expense associated with that, but again, it takes that issueff the books for the state, allows it to put those funds in other places.

>> there was anoth question. unfortunately we are well over time. i encourage you to corner these guys off stage and ask your questions to them directly. with that, we're going to conclude this >> next we will continue with another panel hosted by the u.s. chamber of commerce looking at the negotiations of the fiscal cliff they include david walker and rudy penner. this is just over an hour. today we are going to talk about three issues. unfortunately those issues get convoluted in this town. they are distinct.

they impact each other but they are distinct. the fiscal cliff is an artificial date, ok? congress came in and said this law expires this date and extended it once and said it expires a second time. they put in a sequestration and said it expires this date. it is a date. all they have to do is extend the date and allow themselves the time to discuss the issues. instead they are cramming all the issues into a lame duck session where the congress gets to let the people they have unelected make the decisions that should be made by the policeman that were just -- people that were just elected. >> i point out that in 1993 when the taxes were first put in many

said they will cause a recession. they did not. the economy is improving on its own right now and getting somewhat stronger. so, the impact of the fiscal cliff, while not something to be encourag encouraged, may not be as bad as many had thought. and certainly it isn't worth making bad policy that will have much longer-range implications. the didn't ceiling, the second issue, another kind of artificial date. it has been in law for decades and congress periodically, as a partisan debate over whether to extend it. it is an interesting debate since there is no option. you either extend it or default and default really shouldn't be an option and is something that should be avoided at all costs.

but we put this critical date in there so that we can have the deba debate, have a vote, and then extend the death ceiling as we know we have to. finally, we have the issue of the debt and deficit in the long run. the issues of real importance. because, one, we don't account for our expenditures the way businesses do, the way individuals have to. we get to account for them and ignore many of the long-term implications. if we were to put them in, it would increase the amount of the debt that we owe and have promised dramatically. also, on the big deal, we know that there has to be taxes, revenues, and expenditures all have to be on the table. we kaefpbt do it -- can't do it with any one of them.

we need a comprehensive approach that includes all of these. and doing that takes some time. and what we do in the short run on the fiscal cliff may impact our ability to achieve the greater goal and get some real fundamental improvement in our debt and deficit situation. tax increases that occur now will probably not be debated again in the context of fundamental and comprehensive tax reform. it will make it harder to do that and achieve that. so, i think as we go through these three problems we have to recognize that, one, it is a very short run problem with an artificial deadline. two is something we debated many times and probably should be fundamentally changed. if we are going to raise and talk about debt ceilings we ought to do it prospectively but we haven't will pwupblgbudgets e

a while. then how much can we spend and how much did we have to tax going forward over the next few decades in order to keep our fiscal accounts in balance and move them in the right direction so that we don't become greece? it is interesting that we talk about the -- the previous panel talked about state government and one big problem in europe is there is no fiscal coordination among the independent countries analogous somewhat to our states and who has to bail them out when they haven't done what they are supposed to do? i don't know that we are all that much different. so, we have a great panel. people that are far smarter than i am. i'm going to introduce them now and i will introduce them all and i will sit down and i get to ask some questions. i will ask the panel to keep i will ask the panel to keep their answers