numerous studies have examined the effect of alcohol consumption on driving factors like lean deviations, divided attention, vigilance, and reaction time. the study showed alcohol can affect driving performance even at levels as low as a bac of .01. the yellow line depicts the current bac. driverse numerous ways are impaired by the time they reach this level. other studies that have looked at the crash risks associated with alcohol use have shown at risk is significantly elevated. this chart shows results from the study which nearly 5000 drivers and 10,000 control drivers. the researchers determined at .05 there was a 38% higher crash

risk and for drivers with a zero bac. repisk was crash double. the risk was nearly five times as high. another study found the risk of fatal crash involvement between or three to 17 times greater depending on the age of the driver and the type of the crash. because of the known relationship between bac and driver impairment, all states have established bac levels. that means it is illegal for an individual to drive when his or her bac exceeds the legal level, regardless of any outward signs impairment.

between 1983 and 2004, all states established per se limits commercial non- drivers. for commercial drivers, the limit is. 04. in all states, drivers under 21 are limited to levels of .02 or lower. lowering limits has been associated with reductions in. driving crashes and fatalities. 14 independent studies conducted in the united states found .08ring the per se bac to resulted in reductions in fatalities, crushes, and injuries of up to 16%. countries that have lowered the observed .05 also significant reductions in. the crashes. for example, in the australian decreasedtal crashes

8% and 18% respectively after .05.move from 0.08 to research has shown reductions in limits reduce drinking and driving possiblyacross bac, due to changes in awareness or cultural norms about the acceptability of driving after drinking. internationally, more than 100 countries have established maximum bac limits at or below. 05. in this figure, the countries with no limits are shaded. .05 orith limits of lower are depicted in green. with variable limits are in yellow. those with the limit of .08 and 1.0 are in red.

the u.s. is virtually alone among developed countries in ating a bac per se level high as .08. including theons american medical association, the world health organization, and the world medical association have advocated lowerg limits at .05 or because of the crash risks associated with higher levels. like these organizations, recognize driving abilities are significantly impaired at levels well below .08. staff has proposed recommendations in this area. will provide a presentation on high visibility and enforcement. >> good morning. loy pointed out 4

million people drive each year and alcohol and. . year when they are alcohol-impaired. dwi offenders are typically are printed based on an observation of behavior during traffic stops or may result from findings while investigating a traffic collision. in these cases, individual offenders are removed from the highway. to reach more drivers, one effective strategy used by law enforcement is to discourage motorists from driving while intoxicated. law-enforcement influences driver behavior through specific and general deterrence. specific deterrence refers to the effects of the legal consequences experienced by drivers arrested for breaking the law. general deterrence refers to

countermeasures that discourage unlawful behaviors. one well-established countermeasure associated with specific and general deterrence is high-visibility enforcement. high-visibility enforcement is designed to increase driver perception of the presence of law enforcement and their awareness that they will experience negative consequences if caught while driving impaired. it integrates the following increments. well-publicized media campaigns such as the one shown on this side, enforcement efforts such as saturation paroles -- patrols or checkpoints including electronic message boards and road signs, and swift and certain penalties for drivers arrested for the debut live -- for dwi. i have visibility enforcement

programs have been employed across the u.s. and have been effective in deterring individuals from driving after drinking and in reducing alcohol-related crashes. traditional enforcement of dwi laws occurs when an officer observes signs of unsafe driving and conducts a traffic stop or encounters a driver during a sobriety checkpoint. during this context, the officer conducts an interview and subjectively assesses the driver for signs of impairment. these signs may include slurred speech, lack of coordination, or the over of an alcoholic beverage. if the officer suspects the driver is impaired, the officer may request that the driver to undergo a field sobriety test. if the driver's performance indicates an permit, the officer may request a preliminary breath test to confirm the presence of alcohol.

however, because some alcohol- impaired drivers are able to conceal signs of a pyramid, officers employed in traditional methods of determining impairment have been shown to identify less than half of all above theth bac's legal limit. alcohol sensors are one technology that may provide law- enforcement the means of conducting press screening during the early stages of a traffic stop were sobriety checkpoint. passive alcohol sensors are non- invasive devices that may be used to detect alcohol vapor in the ambient environment. the sensors are housed in a hand-held device. as shown on this slide, one sensor is housed in a flashlight. the other is approximately cell phone sized and may be worn on the officer's uniform.

when a police officer holds the device in a driver's vicinity, its samples the exhaled breath. it analyzes it for ethanol and provides qualitative information about the amount of alcohol detected. studies have shown when police used a passive sensors they identified significantly more drivers with elevated bac levels. passive alcohol sensors can be a useful tool for assisting law- enforcement to make an initial determination about whether a driver has been consuming alcohol. these devices are not widely used. staff believes using these devices as an additional assessment tool will a law- enforcement -- aid law enforcement and has made recommendations in this area. dr. price will continue with the presentation concerning in- vehicle technologies.

>> thank you. i will discuss two the go-based countermeasures. vehicle- discuss two based countermeasures that could have a significant impact by preventing impaired drivers from operating vehicles. both technologies were discussed in december of 2012 as part of the ntsb's special investigative report on wrong way driving. recommendations were issued in that report. i will provide a brief review of the technologies and recommendations the board made in december 2012. of motor8, a group vehicle manufacturers has been to look ath nitsa the benefits and public policy issues associated with developing a passive detection system. is intended to

estimate bac levels quickly, reliably, and unobtrusively and prevent the vehicle from starting if the driver is impaired. prototypes for two systems are currently being developed. one is a breast-based device that will use multiple sensors to measure the alcohol content of the exhaled breath. a touch-based device is also being developed. when the prototypes are developed, testing will commence. in december of 2012, the board concluded it is a promising program to prevent impaired theing and recommended automotive coalition for traffic safety excel with implementation by defining usability testing to guide design and implement a communication program to direct

driver evaluation and promote public acceptance. although it will likely be several years before the systems will be available to consumers, technologies are currently available that can prevent the cooperation by an alcohol- impaired driver. alcohol ignition interlocks are connected to the vehicle that prevent the engine from starting until the driver provides a breath sample. each sample is analyzed for alcohol content. the vehicle will start only if the sample is lower than the prescribed limits. many systems have anti- circumvention features such as additional samples provided at intervals to ensure the driver remains on an. during the trip. all states have some form of an dwirlock program for offenders. only 17 states require

installation for all offenders. the 2012 pact a --ct -- act included special grants for states that included interlock laws. most studies have shown they are effective in reducing recidivism among dwi offenders. it has been estimated if all offenders were required to use them, over 1000 deaths per year could be prevented. in december of 2012 in the wrong way driving report, ntsb recommended all states enact laws to require interlocks for all convicted dwi offenders. one of the most significant challenges to the success of the loss is the low rates of compliance among those offenders order to use them. for example, one recent study found only about 1/4 of

offenders ordered to install interlocks ultimately do so. they may avoid installing them by stating they will not drive during the license suspension or by claiming they do not own a vehicle. to improve the success of the programs, we have published two reports describing the best practices for establishing and managing the programs. states that have adopted the best practices have shown improvements in installation and compliance rates. among the best practices are presenting the interlock as an alternative to a more restrictive penalties such as house arrest, providing financial assistance, documenting interlock status on licenses, establishing a protocol for tracking the use of the " vehicles and setting criteria for removal based on a driving. alcohol-free

states has shown improvement in installation and compliance rates. not all states have done so. states that wish to obtain grant funding for all programs are currently eligible, even if they have a minimum interlock. as short as 30 days and without any compliance goals. staff believes states could increase the effectiveness of their programs by employing best thoseces such as shown here. will discusser repeat offender countermeasures. >> today i will discuss two additional measures for the address and alcohol-impaired driving. optionsrative license and countermeasures that target repeat offenders. the ntsb has a long history of

he emphasized how consequences increase deterrence. laws that allow the police to confiscate a driver's license at the time of an arrest if the driver exceeds the bac limits or refuses to take a chemical test for alcohol. the driver is given a suspension of the time of the rest. if the driver does not challenge the suspension or is not successful, it is upheld. research has shown the laws are more effective when post- conviction license suspension and revocation. they are associated with reductions and precautions. ntsb has recommended these laws as far back as 1984. laws have beenr successful, studies have shown confiscating licenses does not

eliminate driving by the suspended population. if they continue to drive after drinking, they pose a crash risk to others on the road. for this reason, more should be done to ensure drivers whose licenses have been suspended do not continue to drive in. . one alternative would be for states to incorporate into their laws provisions requiring drivers to install interlocks prior to license reinstatement. studies of two pilot programs in maryland found participants required to get an interlocked before license reinstatement experienced reductions in recidivism compared to a control group. staff believes these are an effective means of reducing fatalities. such laws could be strengthened by requiring individuals install the interlock as a condition of license reinstatement.

staff has proposed recommendations in this area. many of the countermeasures we have discussed today can be expected to have a substantial deterrent effect on impaired driving. for some drivers, traditional countermeasures have limited effect. these individuals may persist in choosing to drive while impaired, even after multiple convictions. repeat offenders are disproportionately represented in the alcohol impaired fatal crash populations. in 2011, it was estimated drivers in fatal crashes with .08 or higher were more likely to have a prior conviction than those without any alcohol in their system. in 1984, ntsb published a study identifying repeat offenders as a serious problem. in 2,000, it published as a report on hard-core drinking drivers. taken many positive steps over the last decade to

address problems associated with repeat offenders. however, repeat offenders continue to pose an undue risk. effective new approaches are needed. represent one approach communities have taken for a tailored approach to addressing repeat and high-risk offenders. holdourts are designed to offenders accountable through intensive monitoring while providing treatment for underlying addictions or mental health conditions. judges, prosecutors, treatment professionals, community service providers, and law-enforcement work together to tailor a program that may include intensive treatment, alcohol and drug testing, and graduated sanctions. these courts are designed specifically to address dwi offenders. they allow more sanctioning and tracking of the offender population. according to the national

association, as of june of 2012, united states had 208 designated dwi courts. a recent study found a lower recidivism rate for corporation participants. in 2012, it was announced they would collect information from courts using an online survey. the survey is an initial step in a program to evaluate the effectiveness of dwi ports by creating an inventory of operational practices. we're laying the groundwork for evaluation of the effectiveness of components used by courts to reduce impaired driving. staff believes continued emphasis on addressing repeat offenders and the courts represent a useful approach to reducing recidivism. we have proposed recommendations in this area. provide a summary

of the measures discussed in the draft report. >> good morning. before i begin my presentation. of like to thank the staff for their efforts over the past year. they reviewed hundreds of research reports, collaborated with experts, and completed a systematic review of countermeasures to identify the actions most likely to result in meaningful reductions of injuries and fatalities. this was not an easy task. there are no silver bullets to attack this problem. in crafting the proposed recommendations, staff focused on the data and looked for science-based solutions. not all of the counter measures proposed may be popular, but they are all necessary. alcohol impaired driving crashes continue to be one of the country's greatest and most persistent threats to public safety. much morin summarizing the

recommendations, the actions needed to reach zero can be grouped into five categories. wallace, enforcement, adjudication, technology, and data. we need strong and effective laws that deter individuals from driving while impaired and also that keep them from becoming repeat offenders. staff believed states should establish a blood alcohol concentration limits of 0.05 or lower. this would result in meaningful reductions in crashes and fatalities. furthermore, staff believes we should provide incentives to states that take action in this area. should benterlocks required for all offenders.

to increase the effectiveness of the programs and improve compliance, staff believes we should create incentives for states that adopt program best practices. regarding repeat offenders, there is no one size fits all solution. staff is not recommending one specific action to address the population of repeat offenders. we are calling on states to provide specific plans to target repeat offenders and have a mechanism in place to regularly evaluate the success of these efforts. for the loss to be effective and foster general deterrence, law enforcement is critical. to deter drinking and driving, individuals must be convinced there is a higher probability that if they are driving while impaired, they will be caught in the penalty will be swift and certain.

research has shown high visibility enforcement that incorporates well-publicized media campaigns and enforcement efforts such as sobriety checkpoints are extremely effective in reducing impaired driving in the crash is the result. we would like to see states continued with such efforts. we would like to see law- enforcement increase the use of passive alcohol since in tools -- sensing tools to help detect more drivers that are in. . to a swiftt consequences, education must start immediately. from the confiscation of an impaired drivers license at the time of arrest through the administrative process. staff believes suspension loss could be improved by requiring individuals arrested install an ignition-- and

interlock as a condition of license reinstatement. repeat offenders continue to pose a significant safety risk. staff believes the court to represent a useful approach to rehabilitating drivers for whom traditional countermeasures are not affected. as states establish more courts, and guidance will be needed to outline best practices to maximize their effectiveness. technology can help to reduce impaired driving crashes. we believe passive alcohol detection systems could one day dramatically reduce crashes. we have recommended the automotive industry worked to accelerate the development of this technology. all the countermeasures' we have discussed today are designed to work together to eliminate

impaired driving crashes and fatalities. representscircle approximately 4 million individuals who currently drive in. in the united states each year. the systems are designed to have a broad deterrent effect that will keep people from choosing to drive after drinking in the first place. for those who continue to make that choice, revoking or suspending a driver's license and requiring interlocks upon conviction will reduce the likelihood people caught everng impaired once will do so again. for the small population for whom other countermeasures are not effective, specialized measures to target those s areiduals in dwi court

some of the best opportunities we have to ensure repeat offenders will be rehabilitated. we believe if we commit to these efforts, we will see a reduction in the number of people who choose to drink and drive and that ultimately we will be able to eliminate alcohol-impaired driving. effective policy decisions are based on reliable data. information needed to determine the scope of safety issues, track progress over time, and evaluate the effectiveness of countermeasures. we believe states need to improve their collection, documentation, and reporting of bac results. concernedinues to be and recognizes better data is needed. that is why substance-impaired driving is a most wanted list item ny in november of last year called for ae

standard practice for toxicology testing. we're calling on the law- enforcement community to collect data during all dwi arrests and following all crashes involving alcohol-impaired driving. these data will be helpful in planning future enforcement activities. hold postsp to responsible when they serve intoxicated and underage patrons who are involved in a crash. is zeroltman goal deaths, states need to take a data-driven approach and set ambitious targets for reducing fatalities and injuries and put mechanisms in place to assess the success of the countermeasures. more than half of the

recommendations made in the report go to the states. strong leadership is needed at the state level to address this threat to public safety. this map shows states that have low fatality rates in green. mid range rates are in yellow. higher range rates are in red. the red states have two to three times the in. impairedrates -- rates compared to the green levels. if they reintegrate their efforts, this matter will become greener. one day we will reach our goal of zero deaths. this concludes staff's presentation. we are prepared to answer any questions you may have. taking this for issue on and putting together a

comprehensive report. we appreciate the commitment you have had to this issue. will begin questioning. >> as the chairman pointed out, these numbers of fatalities are not just figures. there is a face behind each and every one of those. on either side of my family we have. my wife's first husband was killed by a drunk driver driving the wrong way. on the other hand my first and the few sundays she has the privilege of visiting her 21 year-old daughter for 15 years [laughter] years for a- 15

felony dui. affect everybody on both sides. it destroys lives. it destroys families. it is a tragedy. i am really proud of the work we're doing today. i think between this report and the december report on wrong way driving, and the majority of those are due to drinking and driving. ,t provides a comprehensive systematic set of guidelines that really will bite at this problem. this report highlights a couple of things. a lot of work has been done over the years. driven the number and rate of try driving related

crashes. drivingpurred the drug related crashes. it has driven it -- don't drive driving religion crashes. it has spurred the trend driving i know what to think the staff for the report in december. i want to thank my colleagues for his leadership in this area. important topic. ise there is tragedy there opportunity. so many lives are being lost in this particular area. if we can really make appreciable differences, we can.

we can really drive these dead elm. this is ripe for opportunities. we are working on the right things to improve safety. to be honest, unless the recommendations are implemented, it is another report. it is to make an appreciable it'll take political will and action. these recommendations will need to be implemented if anything will change. to bef them are going unpopular. if we keep doing what we are doing, we will not make any difference. if anything the number of deaths are going up. the figures from last year showed traffic fatalities are up 5.3% from 2011-2012.

we have to get out there. make thesean only recommendations. it will be up to the individual to in active these recommendations. the one thing that makes me sick is to see my mom stay -- my home state is at the bottom of the list. we are at the bottom of the list. we are a red state. that embarrasses me. -- more sick again only, more significantly, my wife and my daughter share the roads with these drivers. i am out of time. i will just defer my question and come back. thank you so much for all of your hard work. this report can make a difference but it will require

the political will to implement. in the report, you talk about five different areas of safety issues, reducing alcohol concentration, high visibility, dwi courts and measurable goals on the state level. localities are state governments to not have unlimited resources, are there a , wherethese that are should they start? that is a good question. staff thinks these issues are

so important and that the fatalities that come from this are causing -- costing the community is a lot of money. we would ask that communities could take these into consideration when they're not only aat there's quality of life savings but also monetary savings. this is the national cost associated with this. from a practical perspective, i understand that communities are thinking of what they can do. some of these have to do with laws. people have to become against these. in terms of making some simple changes, and those are things they can do. some of the enforcement things that we're doing to take

resources. there are ways they can do those in more cost-effective ways. there have been papers published provide guidance on how these efforts can be done in more cost-effective ways. that.an add one thing to recognizes that -- recognizing that there are costs associated with this, we have two recommendations that call on nhtsa to call on incentive grants to support these programs. >> i understand that there are cost savings both from the government perspective as well as from the personal perspective. where the money get state is not with the costs accrue. that is tough. , just as a comment,

and the same sort of a vein in aviation for years, everybody want to do everything all at once. it was not until a much more disciplined methodology for looking at where the effectiveness, which would be thatted and in balance against tom much it cost. the model has worked very hard to drive the accident rate down at in aviation. and recognized by some of the data that there is a lot of confusion in terms of what the numbers do say. the various reports do have a wide variety of effective claims. it is a tough job to sort that out. havinglooking at consented to go to a sobriety

checkpoint. it got rained out. i was encouraged by your data 20%ing that it has a effectiveness. it was a greater effectiveness than the vac change in terms of the data you showed. any comment to that? to the highges visibility enforcement comprise the general deterrent measures. there are these types of measures that they stop doing the behavior before they are on the road. sobriety checkpoints can detect drivers who are impaired and can get them arrested. importantose are very

cornerstones in creating an environment where drivers will not want to do the behavior in the first place. >> we will turn to the member who has worked very hard on this issue for the last couple of years. we all vote on and participate in our top 10 issue. members doesoard take responsibility for getting up to speed, working with advocacy groups. the member has done a this past a 1.5 years. this issue is one that is extremely important to us. it is the biggest killer on our most wanted list.

it is a challenging issue. finesse anda lot of sensitivity. i really appreciate the efforts you have taken on personally this year. and by you to share your comments and -- i invite you to share your comments. >> it ha great to with the staff. we are focusing on this report. be viewed in the context of it was almost a decade since the previous focus on this issue. , therere has been some has been a push forward. the chairman talked about the national epidemic. while the numbers are down, the number of fatalities have remained pretty much the same over the last 15 years. there is a national complacency about this issue. why is it that we've been the

recommendations, why do we think these are going to make a difference? only looked at the recommendations, we evaluated them on a number of criteria which included specific evidence that they will reduce fatalities on the road. the second big we looked at is how widespread it was being used. a brand new effort for an enhancement to ephors other currently under way. >> we keep repeating this. there is no magic bullet that there is a diverse range of interventions. can you connect the dots? why is it so important?

no one strategy going to work? that, impairedof driving seems like a simple problem. do not drink and drive. needcognize that we really a range of different countermeasures that can address different segments of the population. that is where we talk about the ts and systemsence sell will affect everybody. everyone that may consider driving in care. this will address people who are arrested for drunk driving and those are things like administrative license and interlocks for people who are

convicted. for people who will continue let risky the small population, we are proposing the specialized measures that can target those. if you think about it, if he can make and at that at that level, you will have less of a need to address to repeat offenders. that is all we are aiming for. responsesto put these together. we really comment this requires a set a target of in a vengeance. you will not say if it out. but out of those interventions we're not want to see those numbers move. >> we feel all of them are needed. >> 01 and you adjust the importance of having -- will one

of you address the importance of having this and the progress? we recognize the importance of setting goals. there are making better progress on these issues. it means setting ambitious goals. we know this is important. it is important for all states to set a high goal for what they want to achieve. only commis bill like they're going to start moving be in the bill in that direction. >> there are some programs or they have very specific targets. we're asking to apply that approach at the state level. >> that is correct. certain states have had this for

several years. they were made at this stage in the past year. they are making strong progress in other states. haveve seen in europe they also set specific goals. they set a goal to cut in half the number a fatalities. the exceeded it. >> thank you. i want to share the views of my fellow members that congratulate the staff on an amazing amount of work you put into this too shall important and difficult issue. this is a project they have undertaken. i want to thank the citizens' groups that have made so much. it is a comprehensive effort that takes activity from lot of different domains.

those groups have been enormously able to move this. a lot of this goes to a lot of people. there's much to be done. you had a slight. 4 million people drive wall alcohol is impaired enemy. i like you to go on to these numbers. does this mean the entire u.s. population? >> the survey was done more they surveyed thousands of people. based on the survey, they projected 4 million people in the united states to drive when they are in paris. they also asked how many trips these people may.

these 4 million people made an average between two and three trips between these chips, they calculated the number of driving episodes. .> you cut these these people are on the roads. correct.s >> you have this in a lot. how effective is this to keep me from giving it to the person sitting next to me? how effective is this? numeroushave been design features built into the

interlock system to prevent those kinds of circumvents. this gives a specific coming patent that they've been trying to do. in addition, most systems feature a running great test. they have to continuously provide this. this prevents the driver from having a passenger give us this and have them do this. reduced to have any idea? these have become extremely difficult toit is get around. they were very effective

.ountermeasures par got a thought we're going to have to drive with an interlock. -- i thought we were going to have to drive with an interlock your team must install an interlock in your car appears all that means? >> yes. whatever ishis required. before you get an unrestricted license you are required to get this license. >> i see. about the high visibility. do you have any specific examples of success stories? is the intuitive that this is

going to make a difference in ?erms of general deterrence se weakens a look how well this works. >> that is a great question. i have the privilege of cutting to the safety board from a law- enforcement background. i can say that virtually all of those checkpoints had to end early because of the lack of manpower due to the number of .rrests or made perrin we have a no refusal we can program that goes periodically throughout the year.

60% -- the statistics was a 60% a respite i think it is quite a successful story. low upyou want to fall of as far as effectiveness? >> i certainly could if you like. high visibility in force and has been successful. the people who are out there driving with the levels, finding these

reduced alcohol related crashes by about 20% which is a very meaningful number. >> we have a comparison of a couple of counties. i think mrs. cited in the report. aboutnk you're talking a study that completed weekly sobriety checkpoints. >> how far away are we on dad's technology?

alreadyevelopment has been under way for a couple of years. they currently have two prototypes in the bench testing stage where they're continuing to understand how well they are working. it is anticipated that there will be several years before it is available for use. the next wave is suit make sure they can conduct the user .esting pai >> it is several years away. getting the technology into the fleet is still some time away. technology enter the fleet, what is our understanding of how long it takes to get penetration?

about 20 or 30 years to penetrate the fleet with new technologies. >> on the technology we're probably a generation or two away before we see that technology being effective in the population. if the testing comes out positively, if it is into vehicles. >> that is correct. >> let's talk about interlocks. we mentioned some states have requirements for the interlock sector only 30 days. the reference it as being too short. can you help me understand what an appropriate period is? is there a best practice? >> i was referring to an interim has publisheda

same states can obtain the funds for their program. they're cut off as a 30 day time frame. we believe it should be the best practices would suggest they should be longer, particularly that there should be other features that increase the number of interlocks that get put on and make sure those drivers are compliant. there is a whole suite of best practices we think states need to consider. to what is the right time frame, do we have a medium time frame we're seeing in states that are affected? what are we looking for? >> i do not know that we have a medium.

the first pilot was one year. the second was two years. the virtue of the second pilot was that we saw a long standing in effect after the interlock came off. one of the challenges is they are very effective when they were on the car and then you start to see people refer back to their previous behavior. in the two-year program they did not see the same level of bounce back. there are some other things that were difficult. they hoped to do a third pilot. final thing.dd one some states are engaging in a practice where a driver hostage have into a lot free time frame. washington state will not reinstate driver's license and sold the interlocked our violation free for not less than the last four months.

it has a contingency where a driver must have aailu free time frame before the interlock is removed. >> internet lockout sent to be predictive of whether you are going to revert back to your previous behavior. let me ask about these. help me understand. a contractual procedure where as a conviction is a criminaldui procedure. explain to me how this is different from the recommendation that we have on als/alr interlock? do you still have to have conviction for to be installed

?h similar the contractual arrangement that you had. one of the biggest issues will be timing. .0 states have laws for alr/als you are arrested. the law enforcement is an agent and seizes your license and gives you a temporary. if you do not challenge this you willallenge fails be suspended. that is a result of your privilege to drive. states also have a post conviction license time frame. months down the line the court orders a suspension. there are some rules about giving the credit for any time

au /als. get are ordering you to suspended license. be tied into would the administrative process. this entity that this same way of taking a license. you'rer to get it back going to be required to serve a time frame of interlock. >> thank you. you could please pull up slide 17. while he is doing that, and that i will just a. there it is. not thinkto say i do we're having an earthquake here. we have some duct work that is being done. is causing the camera to shake

like crazy. everything is still here. bac of17, we go from a .08 we have a crash rate fell 2.69. if we go to .05 we have a crash rest 1.38%. percentage wise that is a 40 a% reduction. that is highly -- 48% reduction. that is highly significant. that is not just moving it down. 48%. moving the crash risk i am pretty sure that is close. let's go to slide #18 or 19.

slight 19, the second bullet point shows the lowering the bac in one country, they found between and 8% and an 18% reduction in fatal crashes. that is anywhere from about 800 to 1800 lives saved every year. that is highly significant. , and i amus that we through with that slide. .05.id we go through ? i know commercial drivers are .04. know theer pilot, i federal aviation regulations call for .04 bac. why do we go with .05 and not

.04? you are right. commercial drivers are at .04. we would start with our recommendation in remembering that our proposed recommendation included 0.5 or lower. one of the reasons we chose .05 is that is the reduction from research in the number of fatalities. our focus was on how can we reduce the number of fatalities. we have research. when we look at countries around the world that had pay bac below .08, the most frequent number is .05. we thought we would be very consistent with that. our pieces of evidence.

clearrepresents a place where the risk is increased by 38%. the is why we chose it for numbers that we used for the andarch supported the .05 the rest of the world is primarily on .05. >> i do not want to do because of the rest of the world is there. showing would be that much better even yet, i would want us to go there appeared how many countries are at .0 -- what is to go there. how many countries are i .04. ? >> one. >> only one. i understand there has to be a trade-off.

they will pushed back on this. i was just curious about that. my other have lost thought there. ama was at .04, and they recommend it .04 i believe. putknow that as we stronger laws in place to discourage drinking and driving that some people will say how i'm going to go the safer way, and the way i will not get caught. i will start doing drugs instead.

do we expect there might be a spike in other impaired driving as we clampdown on alcohol impaired driving? we are concerned about the problem. go by.g use could we go to establish a better drug closely so we can monitor that to see if it does become even more of a problem than it is right now. >> i did notice that when you're in an accident involving alcohol impaired -- i do not want to use an accident. if you are in a crash, and alcohol in bald crash, you are more likely to be injured or killed.

nearly twice as many people are killed or injured. 17% of non alcohol impaired crashes. and do not have time to get into that. i'll just wait until the next round. it is somewhat of a conundrum. a public opinion. of the aaa steady survey indicated that they perceive drinking and driving to be a threat to personal safety. 97% consider it unacceptable to drive when they have had too

much to drink. do notes the beliefs translate into behavior's. it is like what we have seen with cell phone use and texting. they think it is bad behavior but do not depend upon my ability to do it. i felt that was a conundrum. a lot of people think this is wrong to do. it is not often times change behavior is. we need to figure out these recommendations. you doring the bac change driving behavior. the reason i was really thinking about the /05, years ago we thought was very significant to go from .10 to .08. i will not be here in 20 years but i do not want the ntsb to be

sitting here wishing we would have gone to .04. that is the right balance for where we need to be. thank you. >> just to be clear, our recommendation is .05 or lower. we have a lot more countries that are at .02 or .00. we recognize there are a lea range of options. being a pilot when he talked about .04 limit for commercial drivers, that is the legal limit. what is safe is something different. most companies do have a zero tolerance. their decision about their employees is not going to be whether or not you are at .04 or

not our whether you were alcohol. >> thank you. draft report the you talked about the effectiveness in terms of the interlocks. in terms of the installed of theage, only 24% interlocks ordered by the judges were ultimately [inaudible] factored?widespread that problemse installing offenders interlocks is widespread. we wanted to propose measures that would increase the

installation. we know that getting them on the vehicle for convicted offenders is one of the most effective things we can do. it was not gained or defeated. the installation rate seems to be bothersome. how expense of our interlocks? >> to purchase bit self it is between $5,100. then there is a monthly service. -- 50 and 100 dollars. then there is a monthly service. the costs are generally paid for by the offender. >> on one of your slides when you talk about best practices, you talk about financial assistance. what does that mean? >> that refers to some programs that are available in some states, whether a state or private funding that for

individuals that are indigent hamate request assistance with getting the interlock. it is better to provide that assistance and make them a separate driver. -- a safer driver. some.poke with they said maybe the average fee may be about $70. that is less than $2.50 a day. if they're on the interlock they're probably not drinking which means they're not purchasing alcohol. there's probably some of money available for paying for their interlock. >> i suspect they do not budget that in the same category though. >> what is the most effective thing that could be done in terms of getting interlocks gained?d and not

>> one of the most effective isngs that they have shown because they're having it be in to a more restrictive sanction. did a pilotey study were the offered defendants -- the vendors to have an interlock or house arrest. in that case, many offenders, 70% took the interlock. 70% installation rates compared to 17%. >> interlock are affected when there are installed and used. >> exactly.

they are looking at this as a dependent measure. when you look at the logic behind that if the driver cannot recidivate they're not getting out there. we believe that if all of thinners to get interlock in use them that we could save over 1000 -- all of fenders got interlocked and use them that we could save over 1000 lives a year. >> with 24% using them effectively, that means three forof four are a potential actually improving safety. >> exactly. that was one of the factors that led us to highlight certain countermeasures as being

particular need it. we know they are effective and not being utilized to their full potential and gives us an opportunity to make some change. >> thank you. does he get more time? >> i thought he brought a great point about the strength of the recommendations. lookout effective it can be. if you're only getting 20 4% uses it shows you where your opportunity is. besides talking about the diversity of the intervention there are some long-term actions, and if you wanted that tamara you cannot have it. it is not developed. -- last time it changed over it took over 20 levels. there are things that are near term. they are here now. can you talk about the importance of having a long-term

strategy approach with the near term opportunities? >> certainly. that was another dimension we looked at. it was public acceptance and how easy it is to implement. we did want a series of actions that would be relatively supportive and would be immediate that jurisdiction states would be able to take on right away. toause we're trying to move 0, we recognize that some of these longer-term efforts would be needed. it should be a long time to implement. we needed to have those in place. line, can you address the general deterrents importance of following the blood alcohol limits can affect

driving at all levels? >> certainly. when the united states moved it had an effect for drivers you're driving at those levels and levels as high as 0.15 and higher. across the spectrum we were seen reductions in those -- in their involvement in crashes. we would anticipate that we would see a similar effect across the spectrum partly because it will raise awareness of these laws and change behaviors. we had the importance of the checkpoints. if one of the two of you talked about identifying people with those, our recommendation also goes to the use of technology.

can you give us a sense of what kind of identifying increase we can expect from greater implementation of that technology? >> the greatest impact would be in the sobriety checkpoints. the when you have that type of high visibility, the officers have the ability to make an assessment of the individual motors. sensorng the alcohol would greatly aid them in being able to make that initial determination as to whether a particular motorists may be able to have the additional scrutiny. research has shown a could be somewhere in the neighborhood of 50%. of there missing 50% potential violators. >> the distinction is we're talking about the road stop or

any type of potential use. you're pointing out that this is one of the key places. >> yes. in the report we say one particular study found that by passive alcohol sensors at , police officers were able to identify 55% of higher..51 and when the officers then incorporates a passive alcohol sensors, the detection rates increase to 71% and 39% respectively. >> thank you.

>> this can explain -- can you explain how this approach differs in? >> dwi course are designed for people who have demonstrated a resistance to changing their behavior either because they learned they can get aware that or because they have an underlying out of problem or to be honest a mental health problem to which alcohol is a symptom. they are very resource intensive. of arely on treatment constant monitoring of case managers and meetings before judges to have that accountability peace. not everybody needs that same level of resources. ist is why the ntsb recommending that targeted set of intervention. in the case of the courts, they are resistant to changing their

behavior. mentionedirman everyone of these numbers is a real person with families, etc. there have been some cruise estimate of lives saves -- mention of lives saved. can you give us a sense of those? >> you would like to know what changes have been associated? >> people have made estimates about how many lives can be saved appeared 1000 could be saved with interlocks. lives. >> thank you very much. these are real people. some estimates have made with those two things all along we can look at 1900 lives potentially saved. one of the key concepts that seems to be here is to separate

drinking from drinking. one of the things that get emphasize to through here is an impairment stars with that first drink a means decision making d.n be effecti can speak of the importance of someone having a plan? what can people do? areur recommendations focused on the general deterrents and on separate drinking and driving. there are a lot of things that people can do. we've all heard the term "designated driver." there are version sees to get save ride home. there opportunities to monitor your own -- there are opportunities to get a safe ride home. there opportunities to monitor your own behavior. we're focused on keeping impaired drivers off the road

appeared to have to separate them. there are different types of strategies and lots of the information out there. you again to everybody. a great effort. this is still the beginning. we need to go up and make sure all of the recommendations really be used if we want to see the changes. for all the car pushed that has come, the bigger push will come after work. thanks everybody. >> i have a couple of questions about the flashlight. not astion is that it is quantitative tool but it indicator that we need to dig further. he opened the car window and something comes out but you do not know which person is responsible. can you explain some of the pluses and minuses of that technology?

another tool in the toolbox. when a law enforcement officer is involved in a check point for conducting a traffic stop, he is essentially utilizing all of his senses to make help -- to help he is determination if intoxicate. how do they appear? -- attemptingng to smell for the owner of an alcoholic beverage. watching the movement of the individual for lack of coordination and such. means toust another what an absurd have some making this determination.

your advertising to this offender if you're about to be scrutinized. he inhibits one of the most valuable assets the officer has. bypasses that. it is able to detect the ethanol in the atmosphere. it is a tool used by the officer in if he needsm to look at the person more closely or is he not a problem. you mentioned a number of courts. itsd you give me a sense of

success story. the numbers are declining. how much is in penetration of its? is there a trend in the penetration? >> we have seen an increase in a number of courts. but something that we know can decrease recidivism. driving impaired they cannot drive impaired and crash. a way of establishing what are the absolute critical components of what is the target population. it could very for a number of factors. the recommendations are timely.

we're asking for them to identify and let states know what is best practices are. there are 609 courts between the drug courts and the ones that are dedicated dwi chords. i do not know if they are and all the states. i can find that out for you. they are in the majority of states. they are in different levels. some have had extensive experience in court such as michigan. last i knew virginia had one. they differ across the country. >> thank you.

can you tell me what we know about drivers who are operating in have been convicted of impaired driving and operated a -- operating with a suspended license? i do not have that at my fingertips. they're trying to get to the mandatory interlocks. they understand what constitutes .05 bac.

these are all terms that we use to describe things. what are we talking about tax we're asking people to think ahead. use alcohol.ing to that is really critical. if people of going to go out injuring that is fine. we want them to think ahead about they can be safe on the road. it seems like a simple problem. it is. it takes a change in the way we think about this issue. it can affect that change in our culture. >> have not have this campaign that have gone on for decades? -- haven't we have this campaign that can go on for decades that

what is different about what we're doing? we look for that for decades. does not been as effective as it should be. we need to do other things. what are in looking at it to have an impact on that behavior? >> the changes that happened in the 80's in the previous reductions did cause a change. they did cause a change in the way we think about this behavior. it is exemplified in the aaa survey. people do think it is inappropriate. some people are still doing it. we need to go further and think harder about what meaning to do to change it even further. peopleompson thousand dying every the message has not gone through to everyone. only writes from scientific standpoint.

cause reductions in crash risk and will lead to people driving safety. it will also send a message in social circles that it is not appropriate to do. >> i understand that, but we are still asking for a lowering of the bac. i think point 05, .08, .15 -- these are numbers on a scale. what do these mean for individuals? what do they mean to the people serving them? we have talked about educating people in establishments that serve people. what are we asking individuals to be thinking about, when we are telling them have a plan? we want them to have a plan. if you have a drink, wait a couple hours.

part of that is understanding, how many drinks can you have? and how long do you need to wait? >> one thing we know is that the amount of drinks it takes to make a person reach a .05 based on a lot of factors. a stunned gender, aced on weight, based on how quickly they are drinking and the potency of the drink. and we also know that the safest thing is simply not to drive after drinking, because we know that risks do begin, that there are forms of impairment beginning with the first ring. sizedsaid, for an average- person, they can still consume drink or two drinks before

they get to a .05. a person of my size can still have a glass of wine with dinner. i know it is safest not to do that, but i know, based on looking at information that is available, charts that are published, that i can have one glass of wine and still be under .05. >> and there is a difference between being legal and being safe. i think one of the things we have talked about is what the best choice is, obviously, is have a plan. what we are looking at legal limits. when we talk about impairment, we look at these numbers we have looked at in the past, .08, .15. it takes a lot of alcohol to to some of those levels. i do not know if anyone wants to talk about that. we have talked about binge

drinking, defined as for drinks in a sitting. the average american that is involved in binge drinking -- the average woman is thinking six strings, binge drinking. the average man, when they binge, it is a drinks. that is a lot of alcohol in a short time. when we talk about bac levels, what are we talking about at .08? mr. carroll, for a man of your size? >> prior to the board meeting, i was looking at what it would take for me to be .05. at my weight, it would probably take over for drinks in an hour time frame, on an empty stomach. there are a lot of tables out there that give various numbers of drinks, based on your weight and other factors. we are not recommending that anybody use those tables in determining. what we want to have happening is to have a dialogue occur even before you start having the first drink. once you start having more and

more drinks, your decision- making as to whether you should get behind the wheel diminishes greatly. i believe that is a reason we see all the tragedy we see on the highways. people are drinking more, and then they are making poor decisions and getting behind wheel. i have one of the tables, if you want to look up a weight. >> i think what we know is it is very dependent. actor price could have one drink. mr. carroll, you could have three or four. it really depends on the person. the best action is to not drive at all after you have been drinking. but i think what the conversation is about -- it is about reducing consumption of alcohol behind the wheel, and with respect to the statistics of what we have seen, it when the bac numbers come down, all drinkers, either at low levels or at high levels, we see less consumption before they get behind the wheel. you have recommended 19 things.

that is a lot. those are a lot of things to focus on. that there are some things you did not recommend. in the report, we talked about some things being done in some states and other countries. 24-7 monitoring is being done in some states. in other countries, they have random compulsory breath testing. many have lower bac levels and lower frequency of impaired driving. there are also studies that show that raising taxes on alcohol will affect these issues. you did not recommend some of those things. and you explain why not? >> we tried to focus on those countermeasures that were the most effective and had the greatest potential for addressing the largest number of people, and things that we thought could be implemented. that is where we are focusing. i think what you are pointing out is, there are other things communities could be doing. we recognize that. when we ask for states to make

goals and meet those, we are not saying these are the only things they can do. we recognize that some states are trying new and innovative things all the time. for funding purposes, they are not looking at exactly what states are doing. they are looking at the impaired driving fatality rate. that is ultimately what we want to see change. if people have innovative ways to go about that, we support that. >> we also did look at what we thought could not be implemented in this country. mandatory breath testing of people is something that would not pass muster. with the legal system in this country, we do not recommend it. with regard to raising taxes, there was some discomfort on our team, whether or not that would be appropriate for the safety board to address, with regard to fatalities on the roadway.

we would be stepping somewhat out of our bounds. we definitely considered things we thought would be implemented. this is something we believe will be implemented one day. it is a matter of time, though. with the other two, we thought we would have a harder time. >> great. i know we have a couple of law enforcement officials. i know that each of you have responded to crashes where we have had impaired drivers involved in fatalities. alsow each of you have been called on to knock on someone's door, to tell people that their loved one is not going to be coming home. i am sure those are some of the darkest hours you had in your professional career. help me understand why this issue of impaired driving continues to kill 10,000 people a year, and why people will be resistant to the

recommendations that we are issuing. iti think mr. carol summed up in his earlier response. drking is, in that process,ter you may start out with the best intentions in the world. however, the more you consume, the more your ability to make good decisions is diminished, and you may find yourself, having all the good intentions in the world behind a car when you should not be. i think that is the crux of the problem. we are not advocates that say, you should not drink. that is going to be something that occurs long after i am retired from the safety force.

what we are saying is, drinking and driving is not a good thing, and just getting people to think in that frame of mind. when i go out, i need to have a plan. i need to think about how i am going to get back home. will i have a designated driver? will i look for public transportation, taxis? dr. price had brought up the change from .10 to .08, how society views 20 and driving. i started out at the .10 level as being the limit. seeing the change in attitude from the citizens you were dealing with -- i can remember the days when it was kind of the good old boy, joe has had much to drink again, let us get him home, versus, this is completely unacceptable. he has to be held accountable for the actions he is making.

i think it has been coined as a simple problem, but in my mind, it is complex. the nature of that problem is -- i may have these good intentions. but the more i drink, the more my ability to move forward with those good intentions is diminished, because i am now a very poor decision maker. >> to be honest with you, i personally do not understand why anybody would have difficulty with the making,dations we are at least if you are in the position that even kenny bragg andhe last row has seen, been to so many tragedies, over and over. we are not asking too much. i look at the fatality numbers of what we are calling a

success. for 2009, it was 10,759 fatalities. in 2010, it was 10,136. this past year, it was 9878. 2012, it has gone up again. if this is what we are looking at as acceptable, as far as the number of lives that can be lost, something new is required. something bold is required. lowering the bac is one of the things we are recommending that needs to move the bar. go into somebody's house. i have done countless times and had a note that their child died or someone that they love died. is the hardest rain for a law enforcement officer to do. this is something that can be solved with more personal responsibility.

>> are there any further comments by the staff? it is 11:31. we are going to take a break for about 15 minutes and come back at11:45 to consider adoption of the report. welcome back. dr. mayer, will you please read the proposed findings? >> yes, ma'am. staff proposes 12 findings to read one, although impaired driving injuries, patel these and fatality rate have significantly increased over the past several decades the pace of these reductions has slowed since the 1990s and alcohol impaired driving continues to interview to thousands of the tallies and tens of thousands of serious injuries each year. two, the public generally

believes that driving after drinking alcohol poses a significant risk to safety, however many into need to drink alcohol and drive. bac levels as low as .01 have been associated with significant impairment. alcoholood concentration levels higher of .05 have been reviewed with respect to public safety as posing unacceptable risk for driving and more than 100 countries have established bac limits at or below .05. five, changing bac rates to.05 were lower would lead to a meaningful reduction in the tallies related to alcohol consumption and driving. sensorsassive alcohol are ineffective, but

underutilized technology for making a determination for the presence of alcohol at traffic stops or sobriety checkpoints. eight, administrative license revocation laws are effective means of reducing alcohol related traffic the televisa and they could be strengthened by suggesting individuals who convicted of driving while intoxicated install an interlock device as a condition of reinstatement. nine, it is best to employ those practices that increase interlock compliance. the effective new approaches are needed to address the problem. 11, driving while intoxicated courts, dwi courts, with their focus on changing offender behaviors represent a useful

approach for rehabilitating drivers here it finally, 12, a data-driven approach that incorporates specific, ambitious, and measurable goals as well as continuous monitoring of countermeasures is a practical model for leaving 20 deaths in impaired driving. adoptthere a motion to the findings as written? >> i have a question. i think i saw a meme out last -- an email last week that the number of countries at .05 was closer to 100 and not 70. what is the number on that, mr. carol? >> this was over 100. currentwhat is in our findings.

>> so, it has been changedo 100? was there a paper on that i may have missed? >> i sent out an e-mail with the proposed new language to all the board members and the staff. >> yes, thank you. we can all have the latest version of that. with that in mind, i make a motion that we accept the findings as presented. >> second. >> so moved. all those in favor, signal with a hand and aye. aye's. the findings have been accepted. will you read the safety recommendations proposed by staff? >> yes, ma'am. staff proposes 10 new safety

national traffic highway the administration, four to the 50 states, the commonwealth of are rico, and the district of columbia. states that have administrative license revocation laws and one to states to do not have such laws. seek legislative authority to award incentive grants for the states to establish a per se blood alcohol doesn't ration limit of .05 or lower for all drivers. two, develop and disseminate to the states best practices for increasing interlock compliance based on recent national highway traffic administration research. fore, create incentives states to adopt the alcohol interlock best practices developed in response to safety recommendations.

four, develop and disseminate to the states best practices driving while intoxicated, dwi, courts. to the 50 states, the commonwealth of puerto rico, and the district of columbia -- five, establish up blood alcohol concentration limit of.05 for all drivers not required to adhere to lower bac limits. implements highway safety plan provisions for enforcement of driving laws using all call sensing technology, saturation patrols, sobriety checkpoints, accident scene responses. impairedclude in your driving prevention plan elements to target repeat offenders and reduce driving while intoxicated incidents. such measures should include

interlock requirements and the plan to revive the mechanism to regularly assess the success of these efforts. eight, take the following steps to move toward zero deaths from impaired driving. set specific and measurable efforts to reduce injuries and deaths. foride a mechanism regularly assessing the success and implementing countermeasures and determining whether the targets have been met. recommendation nine, to the states that have administrative license prevention revocation laws -- incorporate into your revocation laws the requirement that drivers arrested for driving while intoxicated use and alcohol ignition interlock on their vehicle for a time before obtaining full license reinstatement. recommendation 10, to the states to do not have administrative license revocation laws, establish revocation laws that require drivers arrested for driving

while intoxicated to use and alcohol ignition interlock on their vehicle for a time but or obtaining license reinstatement. staff is also proposing the reiteration of nine previous recommendations. first, to the national highway safety administration -- develop and disseminate to the 50 states, the commonwealth of order rico, and the district of columbia reporting deadlines -- puerto rico and the district of columbia reporting guidelines, current practices, results, and strategies. also, develop and disseminate a common standard for toxicology

test the circumstances under which such test should be conducted, cut off values for reporting results. also, work with the automated of -- automotive coalition to promote widespread driver adoption of safety systems by defining the use of testing that will guide the driver interface design and implement a communication program that will direct driver education and promote public assistance. also proposed for iteration to the 45 states that have lower wording rates for -- low reporting rates were bac testing, recommendations h12-34 and h12-35. take the following actions as needed to improve reporting rates. enact legislation.

issue regulations. improve procedures used by law enforcement agencies and testing facilities. and once the national highways take the administration has developed the reporting guidelines recommended, incorporate the guidelines into a statewide action plan to receive bac reporting rates for 60% of surviving drivers involved in fatal crashes. also proposed for reiteration, h12-36 -- require law enforcement to collect place of last drink information in any case involving an alcohol am paired -- impaired driver. a recommendation to the 32 states that do not recommend alcohol interlock devices -- enact laws to require the use

of alcohol ignition interlock devices for all individuals addicted of driving while intoxicated defenses. h12-37 to the national association of chiefs of police and the national sheriffs association -- inform your members to collect last drink data as part of any arrest or accident investigation involving an alcohol impaired driver. the last recommendation proposed for reiteration is h12- with the national highway traffic safety administration to accelerate widespread intimidation of technology by defining usability testing, driver interface design, implementing a program that will

promote public acceptance. finally, staff is also proposing to reclassify the following recommendation, h00- 26. establish a comprehensive program to reduce the incidence of alcohol related drinking and driving, and that includes elements adjusted by the national transit safety board program. staff recommends that this recommendation be considered closed by item seven in this report, which i read earlier. >> any questions from the board members? is there a motion to adopt the recommendations as written? >> second. >> all those in favor signal with a hand and aye. the ayes have it. the recommendations have been unanimously adopted.

are there any board members who wish to file a conferring or defending statement? member weener, member rosekind, chairman hersman have indicated an instant -- an interest in filing a statement. that will be posted later today, indicating the statements are forthcoming. member rosekind, i did not know if you had any closing thoughts? ok. thank you. thank you for the reminder that we need a vote to adopt the asort in the final version written in. all those in favor signal with a hand -- motion to adopt the report as written?

>> second. >> of those in favor signal with a hand and aye. five aye's. let friends and move on without adopting the final report. thanks. congratulation to our staff. this is really the capstone to a long year of work. i know you have worked personally on this for many, many years. this signifies a lot of work that was put in to this activity, so thank you for what you have done. thank you to the team, the office of highway safety. you were challenged. you picked it up. four products to us in the course of the year to support this most wanted list

and you have set the course of this for the next decade when it comes to substance impaired driving. i know this was the last piece of this year and it's a it's a very good foundation over us to move ahead. thank you for your work. dr. price, thank you for this report. and for all the work reviewing and all the work done in each of the states, nationally, and internationally. we have a good product we're all proud to support. earlier, there are 10,000 deaths, 10,000 reasons to .ackle this persistent problem due000 people have perished to talk of impaired driving. what will be our legacy 30 years from now? the policy makers have made hard

choices or will we be looking at 300,000 more lives and by aly cut short million more people needlessly injured? we don't tackle this problem of alcohol-impaired driving now, when will we find the well as a nation to do so? we can choose to except the senseless and needless losses, or we can choose to act. the recommendations we issued today outlined a set of targeted interventions that, if followed, will prevent crashes, reduce injuries, and save lives. i recommendations called for stronger laws, swifter enforcement, and expanded use of technology.

setting goals and measuring results. that's how to succeed in any great endeavor -- set an ambitious goal and track progress. that, but we know impairment starts with the first drink. drivers experienced diminished visual function, increased drowsiness, and reduced vigilance producing a greater crash risk. reaching zero and eliminating deaths and injuries from alcohol-impaired driving will be challenging. will be easy. b inuzz ande -- you will will.

you adjourned. if you are drinking, don't drive. we stand adjourned. >> the fallout from the past week's news and how it could affect negotiations over issues like immigration reform. we will talk with jennifer bendery of the huffington post. our guest is julian sanchez of the cato institute. in the recent pentagon report on sexual assault in the military with the cofounder of the service women's action network. washington journal is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. in his weekly address, president obama talked about the economy and the middle class. then maryland congressman andy harris gave the republican address on repealing the

affordable care act. >> hi, everybody. over the past few months i have laid out a series of common sense ideas to reignite the true engine of our economic growth -- our rising, thriving middle class. the way i see it, there are three areas where we need to look as -- one, making america a ,agnet for good jobs, too making sure our workers have the education and skills they need to do those jobs, and three, making sure your hard work leads to a decent living. i've also been visiting cities across the country doing some interesting and creative things along these lines. on friday i stopped by a factory in baltimore creating good jobs here at home by exporting dredging equipment abroad. i read with young kids at a pre- are gettingere kids the skills they need to succeed in life.

they get the training and guidance they need to find work and support their families. that's why i like getting out of the washington chamber whenever i can because too often our politics are not focused on the same things you are -- working hard, supporting her family, and supporting your community. making sure your kids have every chance in life. more than anything, the american people make me optimistic about where we are headed as a nation, especially after all we have been through during the past several years. that should encourage us all to work even harder on the issues that matter to you. have createds more than 6.5 million new jobs in three years and while unemployment is still too high, it is the lowest since 2008. we need to create even more good middle-class jobs and we have to do it faster. corporate profits have skyrocketed to an all-time high. but now we need to get middle- class wages and incomes rising, too. our housing market is healing but we need to do a lot more to

help families stay in their homes, more to help them refinance to take advantage of low rates. our deficits are shrinking at the fastest rate in decades but now we have a budget -- have to budget and a smarter way that does not hurt middle-class amides or harm critical investment in our future. the american auto industry is thriving, energy is booming and american ingenuity in our high- tech sector has the potential to change the way we do almost everything. , i willoming weeks visit more cities like boston and austin, texas, places where americans are coming together to strengthen their own committees and economies in the process making this country better for all of us. and i'm going to keep trying to work with both parties in washington to make progress on your priorities because i know that if we come together around creating more jobs, educating more of our kids and building new ladders of opportunity for everyone willing to climb them,

we will all prosper. together. thanks and have a great weekend. >> hi, i'm tribesmen andy harris and this is the red tape power congressman andy harris and this is the red tape power. it encompasses all the regulations already associated with president obama's health care law. the red tape, taxes, the mandates, the fine print. it is all here. just think about the fact that the iressa will be responsible for forcing many of these irs will -- that the be responsible for forcing many of these relations. if we have learned anything this week, the irs need less power, not more. the officials who oversaw the operation for targeting conservatives is now in charge of the irs'obamacare office. you can't make this stuff up. as a position for nearly 30 years, i have always believed the power and our healthcare system should belong to

patients patients and their families, not politicians and certainly not the tax man. americans should be able to choose the coverage they need at a cost they can afford. the president health care law turns the equation and in many ways our lives upside down. buyequires america to government approved plans that cover all kinds of services you may not need. instead of keeping your coverage like president obama promised, millions will be .orced off the plan they like instead of the lower cost you were promised, you could pay a lot more. according to new data from the nations insurers, under obamacare, premiums and individual market will skyrocket by by an average of double what we pay now with some rates rising by more than 400%. because employers can't afford obamacare, they are not hiring new workers. many are actually cutting back hours for their workers, making it harder for small businesses to higher in the last thing we need during one of the slowest

economic recoveries and american history. it's no wonder one of the laws in the senate said "i see a huge train wreck." the train wreck is already here. obamacare is mocking americans off the ladder and the sooner we can start fixing health care for working families. the house of representatives voted to do just that as part of a republican plan for atlantic -- for economic growth and jobs. it focuses on patient centered reforms. by concentrating on disease prevention research, we will improve care and bring down the smallf strain amides of businesses. there are powerful interests who will do all they can to prop up obamacare. we learned last week that the secretary of health and human services has been pushing private companies, businesses she herself regulates, to help pay for the

limitation of obamacare. right now we need more accountability in washington and the government that works for you, not the other way around. that senator is right. this law is a train wreck. this week is the third time in three years the people's house has listened to the people and list -- and voted for full repeal of the health care law. together we can fix our healthcare challenges to building new generation of prosperity and opportunity for ourselves and our children. take you for listening -- thank you for listening. >> first lady michelle obama spoke friday at the we stayed -- state'st bowie university, founded nearly 150 years ago. in her remarks, the first lady urged graduates to continue the legacy of those who struggle for

civil rights. thehe commencement was held at the university of maryland's college park campus. visit 20 minutes. minutes.s 20 [applause] >> thank you. my goodness. thank you so much. [applause] .t is such a pleasure you all right yourself. you had a long day -- you have a long day ahead. it is beyond a pleasure and an honor for me to be here with all of you today. of course i want to start by thanking the president for that very kind introduction for this wonderful degree and for his outstanding leadership here at

bowie state university. i also want to recognize chancellor kirwan, prorate jackson, the executive vice and ofnt, the vice chair course i went to thank the singers. the university choir and demarcus franklin for that wonderful performances. you are amazing. i wish i could sing. can't sing a lick. so want to recognize today's presidential medal recipient professor freeman lebowski. him for hisank tremendous work as the chair of the president advisory commission on educational excellence for african- americans. he has done some magnificent work but we have so much more work to do. moment to another

thank all of the beautiful people sitting around us today. the folks who have loved you and pushed you and put up with you every step of the way. give another round of applause to all the family members here today. yes, indeed. this is your day, too. but most of all, to the bowie ,tate university class of 2013 congratulations. oh, congratulations! you don't know how proud we all are of you. just look at you. we are so proud of how hard you worked, all those long hours in the classroom and the library. amen. all those jobs you worked to help pay your tuition, many of

you are the first and your family to get a college degree. [applause] are balancing school with raising families of your own. i know this journey has not been easy. i know you have had id of of moments of doubt and frustration -- you have had moments of doubt and frustration but you doug aegon you kept pushing forward to make it to this magnificent day -- keptou dug deep and pushing forward to make it to this important day. you did not just complete an important chapter in your own story, you also became part of the story of this great university, a story that began nearly 150 years ago, not far from where we all sit today. schoolall know, this

first opened its doors in , and african65 baptist church in baltimore, and by 1866, just a year later, it began offering education courses to train a new generation of african-american teachers. just think about this for a moment. in many parts of this country, it was illegal for black people to get an taught readinge or writing could be beaten to within an inch of their lives. anyone black or white who dared to teach them could be fined or thrown into jail. theyet just two years after emancipation proclamation was foundedthis school was not just to educate african-

americans but to teach them how to educate others. it was in many ways an act of defiance, and eloquent rebuttal to the idea that black people could not or should not be educated. of since then, generations students from all backgrounds have come to this school to be challenged, inspired, and empowered. and they have gone on to become leaders here in maryland and across this country, running businesses, educating young people, leading the high-tech industry that will power our economy for decades to come. that is the story of bowie state university, the commitment to educating our next generation and building ladders of opportunity for anyone willing to work for it. all of you are now part of that story. and with that tremendous privilege comes an important set

of responsibility, responsibility you inherited the moment you leave this stadium with that diploma in your hand. that's what i want to talk with you about today. i want to talk about the obligations that come with the bowie state education at how you can fulfill those obligations by how you live your lives. tolet's return for a moment the time when the school and others like it were founded. were nothese schools more than drafty log cabins ith mud floors, leaking brucroofs. blackboards were considered luxuries and students and faced constant threats from those who refuse to accept freedom for african- americans.

and one eastern shore town, a teacher reported to work one morning to find someone smashed the windows of the schoolhouse. black schools across maryland were burned to the ground, teachers received death threats, one was even beaten by an angry mob but despite the risk, students flocked to the schools and drones, often walking as many as 10 miles a day to get their education. the educational association that standards -- that founded bowie "these people are coming in beyond our ability to receive them." desperately poor communities held fundraisers for these schools, schools which they often built with their own hands. barely scraping by doug deep into their own

pockets to donate money -- deep intoy dug their own pockets to donate money. ist frederickion i douglass put it, education means emancipation, it means life and liberty, the lifting of the soul of man into the glorious light of truth, the only light by which men can be free. you hear that? the only light by which men can be free. the folks that showed up to your school on that january day back in 1865, education meant nothing less than freedom. it meant economic independence, chances to provide for their family, it meant political empowerment, the chance to read the newspaper and articulate and informed opinion and take their

rightful place as citizens of this nation. back then, people were hungry to me, hungryyou hear to learn to get what they needed to succeed in this country. that hunger did not fade over time. think about the centuries long battle that so many folks waged to end the evils of segregation. think about civil rights icons like thurgood marshall, dr. who led historic marches, protests and boycotts. dr. king's house was bombed, police chief pulled a gun on thurgood marshall. they both received piles of hate mail and countless death threats but they kept on fighting. think about those nine young men and women who faced down an angry mob just to attend school in little rockarand that was ju.

for months afterwards, they were spat on, punched, tripped as they walked down the hall. classmates threw food at them in the cafeteria and hurled ink at them during class. but they kept on showing up. they kept claiming their rightful place at that school. , justabout ruby bridges six years old when she became one of the first black children in new orleans to attend an all- white school. pulled theirlly children out of that school of protest. people retaliated against her family. her father lost his job and only one teacher at that entire school would agree to teach her. but the bridges family refused to back down.

so for an entire year, ruby sat one,alone, a class of learning her lessons. that is the sacrifice those folks and so many others have made. that is the hunger they felt for them and so many others getting an education was literally a matter of life or death. more than 150 years after the emancipation proclamation, more than did the years after the end of separate but equal, when it comes to many ofan education, our young people just can't be bothered. today is that of walking miles every day to school, they're sitting on couches for hours playing video games emma watson , watching tv.

dreaming about being a lawyer or doctor,, they are fantasizing at th about bea rapper or aballer. 3 african-1 in american students are dropping out of high school. only one in five have gotten a college degree. but let's be very clear. today getting an education is as important, if not more important, then it was back when the university was founded. just look at this statistic. people who earn a bachelors degree or higher make nearly three times more money than high school dropouts. and they are far much less likely to be unemployed. a recent study even found that african-american women with a college degree live in average of six and a half years longer than those without. and for men, nearly 10 years

longer. who are, people more educated actually live longer. so i think we can agree that we need to start feeling that hunger again, you know what i mean? in fightto once agasi to educate ourselves and our children like our lives depend on it because they do. we need to dig deep and find the same grit and determination that drove those first students to school and generations of students who came after them. i'm talking about the kind of grit and determination displayed by folks right here at bowie williamslks like ariel edwards, one of today's graduates. with's mother struggled substance abuse and heshe and hr sister were removed from her

care and sent to live with her grandmother. but ariel decided to draw inspiration from her struggle. so majored in social work she could help families like hers. [applause] of the phia member alpha national honors society and has been accepted to graduate school to get her masters degree in social work guarding at september -- social work starting in september. [applause] yes, indeed. and then there's audrey marie ludmyer, another one of this years graduates. she is the daughter of a single father and her dad has struggled with serious health issues. so after graduating from high school, she worked full-time for a year because she could not bear her father putting any more -- she could not bear putting any more financial burdens on her father.

she kept working even while juggling a full course load and today she's graduating with a perfect 4.0 gpa. [applause] yes. god is very good. it is that kind of unwavering determination, that relentless focus on getting an education in the face of obstacles, that's what we need to reclaim as a community and as a nation. that was the idea at the very ehart of -- heart of the founding of this school. it is even in the words of your school song -- bowie state, may you forever be the flame of faith, the torch of truth to guide the steps of youth. that's not just a lyric, it is

a call to action. many of you will answer that call by carrying on the proudly state tradition of serving as teachers, devoting your careers to guiding the steps of the next generation. for those of you who aren't going into education, you are not off the hook. oh, no. no matter what career you pursue, every single one of you has a role to play as educators for our young people. so if you have friends or cousins or siblings who are not taking their education seriously thomas shake them up up!seriously, shake them get them back on track. at the school in your neighborhood isn't good, don't just accept it. get in there, fixed it, talk to the parents, get this this and community leaders involved as well. we all have a stake in building schools worthy of our children's time.

'like but they are watching on tv, turn it off. video don't like the games they are playing, take them away. make a stand against the media to elevate today's celebrity gossip instead of the serious issues of our time. take a stand against the culture that glorifies instant gratification instead of hard work and lasting success. and as my husband has said often, lee's stand up and slander that says a black child with a book is trying to act white. reject that. [applause] ofshort, be an example excellence for the next generation. do everything you can to help them understand the power and purpose of a good education. own parentshat my

did for me and my brother. my parents did not go to college but they were determined to give us the opportunity. was a pump operator at the city water plant. diagnosed with ms in his early 30's. every morning i watched him struggle to get out of bed. and inch his way to his walker and painstakingly but in his uniform. but never once did i hear him complain. not once. he just kept getting up. day after day. year after year, to do whatever he could to give our families a better shot at life. so when it came time for my brother and i to go to college, most of our tuition came from student loans and grants that my dad still have to pay a small orchard that tuition each semester. and he was always determined to pay his share right on time. even taking out loans and he

fell short. because he could not bear the thought of us missing a registration deadline because he is -- because his check was late. there is not a day that goes by when i don't think about the sacrifices that my mom and dad made for me. that goes bya day when i don't think about living up to the example they set and how i must do everything in my power to make them proud of the daughter they have raised. today i'm thinking about all the mothers and fathers just like my parents, all the folks who dug into their pockets for that last dime. the folks who build both schools brick by brick, to face down angry mobs just to reach those cool house doors. i am thinking about all the folks who worked the extra shift and took the extra job and toiled and let him prayed that we could have something

better. who as the poet alice walker once wrote, and what we must know without knowing a page of it themselves. their sacrifice is your legacy. do you hear me? and now it is up to all of you to carry that legacy forward, to be that flame of faith, that porch of truth to guide our young people. toward a better future for themselves and for this country. uphold that obligation, i am confident we will build an even better future for the next generation of graduates from the fine school and for all the children in this country because our lives depend on it. i wish you godspeed. do good things. god bless.

[a >> and educated woman and a believer in women's rights, she expressed fresh station with a traditional roles of mother and wife. during james garfield campaign for president, she will actively played a bowl of hostess for her but when he was assassinated, she returned to ohio and georgia legacy by making their home and do an early version of a presidential library. we will look at the life of the first lady and that of mary arthur mcelroy two noble role of first lady when her brother chester arthur becomes president who fulfilled the role of first lady when her brother, chester arthur, becomes president.

butorw i newsmakers, our guest is congressman chris van hollen, the top democrat on the house budget committee. he about how the administration and congress are adjusting the irs'targeting of conservative groups. >> the conduct was clearly unacceptable. we need to get to the bottom of it. we also need to recognize that after the citizens united case, you had about a dozen applications from groups for 501c4 tax status. there are lots of groups, republican leaning and democratic leaning, trying to get this kind of tax status to conduct political activities without disclosing donors. that's why the irs is having a tough time. they have to go through all these applications, decide whether the main purpose of an organization is a social or whether the main purpose is political. therly they went about it

wrong way but we need to apply the law uniformly. in my view, if you require disclosure of donors for people for dissipating and political activities, you would actually eliminate the incentive these groups have to try to get this particular kind of status, whether on the right or left. >> being in the minority in the house, how do you push this kind of legislation in a way that would make republicans want to take it up? >> i think the american people are clear on this issue. they have been in every public servant i have seen, whether they are republicans, democrats or independents, they believe voters have a right to know who was bankrolling these political campaign activities. for,is all we are asking transparency. we believe transparency leads to greater accountability in the political process. and if groups engage in political activities who formed

these kinds of organizations had to disclose, you would not have this. there are lots of issues with the right to the different irs organizations but the bottom- line is if you have disclosure transparency, you would take away the incentive for a lot of groups to try to gaiuge the system whether they are on the right to left. . >> you can watch the entire newsmakers program with congressman chris van hollen as he talks about sequestration, the debt and agreeing on a budget and house and senate tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. we will also show yesterday's hearing on the irs targeting conservative groups with the irs inspector general russell george and the acting director, stephen miller. here is a look at the inspector general's testimony. the irs used in appropriate

criteria to target for review tea party and other organizations based on their name and policy positions. this practice started in 2010 and continue to evolve until june of 2011. as the monitor shows, the irs was following an appropriate criteria. let me read these criteria from the briefing held by the irs's exempt organizations function in june of 2011. the criteria included the words the party, patriots, or 912 projects. another list of criteria was that the groups issued included government spending, government that were taxes. criteriaer list in appeared as education of the public by advocacy or lobbying to "make america a better place to live." consistede criteria of any statement in the case file criticizing how the country

is being run. the reason for these criteria were inappropriate is that they did not focus on tax exempt laws and treasury regulation. for example, 501(c)(3) organizations may not engage in political campaign intervention. 501(c) four organization's can but it must not be their primary activity. local campaign intervention is taken on behalf of or against a particular candidate running for office. although these criteria appear in the irs'own documentation as of june 2011, irs employees actually began selecting tea party and other organizations for review in early 2010. from may of 2010 through may of 2012, a team of irs is -- irs specialists in cincinnati referred to as the determinations unit selected 290 cases for additional scrutiny. , theding to our findings

first time executives from washington, dc, became aware of the use of these criteria, was june, 2011 with some executives not becoming aware until april or may of 2012. 'an appropriate criteria remain in effect for approximately 18 months. after learning of the inappropriate criteria, the director of exempt organizations changed the criteria in july of 2011 to remove references to organization names and policy since it -- talk to physicians. however, the cincinnati staff changed it back to target organizations with specific policy positions but this time they did not include tea party or other named organizations. in may of 2012 after learning the criteria had been changed, the organization's director of ruling an agreement change the criteria to be consistent with laws and regulations.

the organization selected for review first of the -- significant political campaign intervention experienced substantial delays in the processing of applications. the organizations experiencing these delays included tea party organizations, patriot organizations, 912 organizations, among others. as shown on the monitor, the status of the december 2012 with that 296 cases reviewed was 100 cases have been approved, 28 cases were withdrawn, and 160 cases were still open. zero had been denied -- cases had been denied. some had been in progress for over three years and crossed two election cycles without the pollution. of the 108 cases approved, 31 were tea party, 912 or patriot organizations. >> you can watch the hearing

with more testimony from the irs'inspector general and acting director stephen miller sunday at 3:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> next, a hearing about the state of video distribution. john mccain introduced a bill that would require cable companies to provide à la carte inscriptions, letting people pay only for channels they want. senator mccain is followed by a panel of representatives from the cable, satellite, and broadcast industries. in the senate commerce committee, this is an hour and 45 minutes. hearing toll our order. good morning. i want to thank everyone for

being here this morning. we have two penalty. i want to thank our panelists for being here. this morning, this communication subcommittee hearing will be on the state of video. i want to thank everyone for their participation and input today. a series ofcond in hearings on the state of communication and the united ittes. it is my hope that will help subcommittee members and the public have a better understanding of the current that people in the communication sector face. today, we are focused on issues of importance to consumers of video services. as we all know, the video industry has changed dramatically in the last decade, particularly in might of internet video and wireless video. of increased adoption broadband has changed the manner in which americans watch video programming, bringing both

opportunities and challenges to consumers and companies in the video marketplace. continue to put pressure on the use and availability of spectrum. our witnesses today will tell us how consumers are navigating and taking advantage of this ever- changing environment. hear from analysts about their concerns and views on a number of policy issues, including some that have been in place since the cable act was enacted over 20 years ago and others even longer than that. many of these issues were discussed last summer before folk in mid-hearing. it is helpful that with our new and returning members, we hear from witnesses on their views on this matter. we want to hear about current policies and the dynamic market that is affecting the consumer. is the consumer receiving the services, channel and shows that he or she wants and are these products affordable? before we go to our panel

discussions, i will like to ask senator wicker to say a few words request thank you very much. a few words. >> thank you very much. this is a good time to examine the truly vibrant growing and multifaceted video marketplace. today's video marketplace is radically different from the one that existed two decades ago when the only options were over the air broadcasting and cable television. the advent of the world wide web has given consumers a seemingly endless host of avenues to receive video content. there are cable and satellite services, verizon fios and at&t ande services options like netflix, hulu.

the video marketplace has thrived. i'm eager to learn how policymakers can ensure that the video delivery ecosystem continues on this path of exponential growth, fostering policies that encourage innovation rather than hindering it, you need to focus not only on the current marketplace and the more poorly on the future of video. we need to not only where the market has been but where it is going. i will like to thank our witnesses for testifying today. these industry and consumer representatives are able to bring diverse experience in bertie's on the current state of theo -- and expertise on current state of video. i'm hearing -- i am interested in hearing there's perspectives on the role of video it whirl america -- in rural america. uniquepoints on the

challenge of these areas would be appreciated. i would also like to recognize the tangible presence each of the three industries represented paicularly in my home state of mississippi. first, broadcasting. coveragecasting storm and issuing tornado and hurricane alerts to helping first responders, broadcasters have been an invaluable resource to mississippi residents during times of natural disasters. in february, tornadoes devastated pedal, mississippi. causedh, a hailstorm major damage. in jackson, mississippi, radio and television statutions was a lifeline when lines were down. i would like to thank them for their service for my -- to my

constituents. it was also vast portions of other areas of mississippi but that devastating tornado. as with arkansas and west virginia, mississippi has a number of rural remote areas that make it difficult to reach via traditional infrastructure. they are, satellite providers such as dish and direct tv, have provided access to competitive quality video an resources. the satellite industry serves approximately 450,000 households and businesses in my state. many of the dishes are prominently visible at football tailgate parties. cable has demonstrated a strong commitment to broadband adoption, investing $200 billion since 1996 to build a broadband of infrastructure across the country. cable has created partnerships

with the federal government and private sector to increase broadband delivery to low income households that need it most. this includes a company called comcast, which started with one small cable system into below, tupelo,ppi -- in mississippi, and 1963. tupelo.yo back iou back in i think the attendance we have here at the five to the importance of it and i look forward to hearing from our witnesses and having a healthy debate on the video marketplace issues. i would like to welcome my friend, colleague, and former chairman of this committee, the from arizonaenator john mccain who is here to give a statement on legislation. he recently introduced regarding that pay-tvt.

welcome back, senator mccain. thank you, mr. chairman. >> before we hear from our industry panel, we would like to expand a special welcome to senator mccain as former chairman of the full commerce committee and long-standing member of the committee who was long expressed his interest in these issues and we are happy to hear your thoughts on the current state of the video marketplace. senator mccain. >> take you very much, chairman pryor and ranking member wicker, i thank you for your warm words of welcome. it's great to be back in a committee that i enjoyed as much or more than any that i was ever privileged to be part of. the game. with a myriad of issues that are part of the ever-changing world we live in, i introduced a television consumer freedom act and bill that would give consumers the option to

onchase television channels a per channel basis, also known as à la carte, rather than tiers of programming currently offered by satellite and cable compans.basically i support à le and i believe most americans do for the basic reasons of consumers should not have to pay for television channel they don't watch. and have no interest in watching. would --theion existing statute and regulations as incentives to encourage the retail and wholesale distribution of television channels on an à la carte basis. components will say -- proponents would say that government should stay out of television industry but that overlooks the government existing presence in the form of legal benefits like compulsory copyright license, indicated exclusivity, and

network nonproduction -- not duplication, rife wit government involvementh. it is time to restore the operation of the maintenance by the market by empowering american consumers. it is already garnered the support of the consumers union and free press. they recognize that à la carte channel options are the right thing to do and popular with consumers in large part because of dramatically rising cable prices which are dramatically exceeding the cost of living. according to the most recent sec since 1995 the average monthly cable bill for expanded basic service, the most popular tier, has gone up from $54 a monthto today. as a 6.1% annual annual increase of more than 100% total price

hike over gory --ered by cable executive following story offered by a cable executive. he says my next report -- my next-door neighbor is a widow, 74. why do i need all that sports programming? in the course of a year just for espn, she is sending a check to disney for about $70, even though she does not watch it. she would be apoplectic if she knew, particularly in today's challenging economy, $70 is a lot of money for a lot of americans. i am a sports fanatic and i love espn. i stay awake many nights watching games in arizona with a horrible three hour time change and while i would never go without espn, the fact is that the majority of tv wa consumers who have no interest in sports programming should not be forced to purchase it. any of these americans are

beginning to realize that included in their cable bill is a charge of about $10 a month just to carry sports programming right espn which costs nearly five dollars a month, far more expensive than any other cable. even less popular channels like regional sports networks but can be almost as expensive. we address bundling between individual channels tied together by television programmer and sold to a pay-tv company in packages. do consumers want bundles -- consumers want bundles? the answer is no. according to nielsen statistics, and 1995, the average people household had 41 channels and tune to 11. average table household was sold 130 channels but tuned in to only 18.

these excess channels are obviously driving up cable bills. companies like viacom don't go channels like mtv and vh1 individually but bundle them together but at least pay-tv companies who have little choice to do the same thing to consumers -- bunle them together to pay-e little choice tv companies who have to do the same thing to consumers. the choice remains but the program and the outcome to the consumer is à la carte and a lower cable bill. theddition, it ensures public spectrum resources are used in the most efficient and publicly beneficial ways possible. nt to endwe diwabtbt black outs. those stadiums are publicly financed by the taxpayer. today the practice of the nfl is out,ey don't get i a sell

all the people in that area don't get to see the game. i think that outrageous. if that stadium is not taxpayer financed, that owner can do anything they want to with it but if the taxpayers pay for itm , they should be able to see the game whether they sell out the stadium or not. obviously i am a sports fan as you can easily tell. i believe the consumers are a tipping point when it comes to the monthly tv bill and à la waye is a consumer from a to provide consumers with the freedom to lower the bills and pay only for what they watch. i hope this committee will examine this issue. i truly believe a lot of americans are fed up with the size of their cable bill. they should be able to do the same thing we are able to do what we walk into a restaurant and not have to buy everything on the menu in a bundle and pick

out what we want and choose it. i think my colleagues for allowing me to appear and i look orward to any questions insults you might have for me. thank you very much. >> thank you, senator mccain. you are certainly welcome to join us if you would like. and ask questions of the panel if you like. >> i'm sure if they -- i'm sure they look forward to it. [laughter] >> i will let the penalty take a seat at the table. -- i would like the panel to take a seat at the table. as they get situated, let me just say that -- i will go ahead and introduce them to save time. gordone have senator smith, president and ceo of the

national association of broadcasters. next, former fcc chairman michael powell, president -- president ceo of the national cable television medication. the executive vice president and general counsel of dish network , senior staffayer attorney for public knowledge. we asked them to give an opening statement. we have the written statement in the record. we ask that each would if possible keep their statements to five minutes. first, senator smith. >> it is always a privilege to just be in this room. it is like to be back. as you know, i have the great honor of advocating on behalf of america's local radio and television stations. asians play vital role --

stations play a vital role in every local community across this nation. that is ever more apparent than when a disaster strikes, reminding us that broadcasters important role. we do this time and again in arkansas and mississippi we saw the largest tornado operate that took hundreds of lives across the cell. whether an earthquake in newington, hurricane in york or terrorist attack in boston, i have no doubt that each of you can tell a similar tragic story from your own state. i'm also confident each store involved in response to your local broadcast stations. these stations kept residents residents safe. when there was no firm -- no phone service, they were there to provide a lifeline to their communities.

when it t stations were there r neighbors in need, holding fundraisers and food drives to help them get to the hardest of times. it is not a public good? isn't this a will that should be supported because if broadcasters are not there to serve in this role as first informers, who will? even with all the spectrum and the universe, the wireless --ustry could never watch it could never match our unique architecture and ability to forecast to masses are large events. this is crucial to broadcasting and broadband to work hand-in- hand and deliver content to and the emergency information they need. it is also critical congress and lamented the necessary safeguards in the legislation granting voluntary incentive authority. they will present an enormous challenge the fcc, your

constituents and local broadcasters but we stand ready to roll up our sleeves and conclude this auction and a successful and timely fashion. broadcasters not only inform, we entertain. as content producers, we create the most watched shows on tv. are onhe top 100 shows broadcast television last year. tos content is valuable viewers, stations that the that, and the companies retransmitted -- patient that supply it, and the companies that we transmit it. retransmit it. one paid advertising and the fees paid to us by those who rent our signals and sell our content to paying subscribers.

about the economic foundation, we cannot do what we do. this revenue enables stations to meet their primary goal, serving the public interest and policy decisions that threaten the economic foundation could cripple an industry that provides an indispensable, even europe leasable lifeline service to americans -- even irreplacable lifeline service to americans. critics, what is it about free and live and local that you don't like question mark our community not only likes podcasted, they depend on it. despite a changing we get landscape, broadcast television is as relevant today as ever. when tv stations transition from analog to digital transmissions into thousand nine, it revolutionized free and local tv providing viewers more choices than ever before. most stations offer extra

channels called multi-cast channels that deliver diverse and highly local content. its coverage of local sports a two minute events, local weather and traffic mashed to your zip code and programs reflecting vast languages and cultures, amplifying the voices of women and minorities in our communities. broadcasters continue to innovate and deliver the content viewers want when and want it. including interactive tv, customized to your needs that are sent to tablets and smart phones. the future of tv is mobile and on go and more vibrant than ever. in the past month, we have seen new services rolling out to viewers. networks are investing in and launching mobile services to provide viewers with local, live in national tv on their devices and even on demand. we also saw last month at the

nab show ultra high definition broadcasting which was literally 3-d without glasses. the picture is simply astonishing. consumers have limitless options for content and countless ways to access programming and yet they continue to turn to broadcasting more than any other medium. that is an enduring value we provide. i would ask you that as you consider public policy that impacts the future of this great industry, remember the unique and critical services local stations deliver and consider the consequences of decisions that could impact broadcasters ability to serve our communities and your constituents. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> good morning. i am the president and ceo of

the national cable and tele- communications association. thank you for inviting me detest by on the state of video. the video world is undergoing exceptional transformation. the power of technology and in satiable need for video content is remodeling the video marketplace. it is both exciting and challenging for companies working to deliver value. gazing into the future is always hazardous, but a few critical trends paint a picture of what is possible in an emerging video landscape. video is flooding into every crevice of american life from the moment video content could videoitized, the rise of anywhere and everywhere was inevitable. video will be as ubiquitous as the web itself. today, as of this morning, nearly 68% of all internet traffic today is video.

as one ceo recently described, the internet -- the internet has not innovated the internet. crawling across the web and internet protocol, it can focus on nearly any screen with an internet connection. this is why we have seen such a great renaissance a video on devices. this of long been a paramount public policy objective in this country. in a world we are stepping into, we see content of every coming shortenre clips from a long series, every community and viewpoint with a voice. they make videos in their basement or large studios producing some of the most compelling stories in visually arresting formats. it will not just be about more of everything. morewill also become

dimensional in experience. tv was the original social network driving water cooler conversations about a favorite show. platforms will expand the conversation and make it much more contemporaneously. as theyhis growing posed and tweet along with their viewing. my kids a grown-up digital and they have come to expect highly personalized product and the ability to interact. lineupso see channel that are personalized and a recommendation engine to modify choices to your tastes. choice is good, but sometimes to the frustration of finding something to watch. curating consumer retail offerings in a simple way will still have value to many families navigating their

options. as reed hastings of netflix has noted, instead of trying to have everything, we should strive to have the best in each category. the cable industry has long been an innovative force and is working hard to bring much of this vision into reality. they have unveiled applications to move content out of the television set and into portable devices. car companies of work to shrink the aggravation of the set top box by offering service over devices consumers already own or prefer, like x box or roku. they put consumer guides and other tools and services in the cloud thereby vastly improving the taste and quality of innovation. it is critical to note that as broadband providers, we continue to invest massively in in the network that makes some much of this possible. we have invested over $200

billion since 1996 and invest $13 million per year continuously. as a result, we are increasingly pushing internet speeds over 50% per year. 1000% increase in the last decade. tore opening up the airwaves video and internet access by deploying major networks across our markets. this transition will be chaotic and convulsive as the market remodels itself putting a strain on existing video models and we will all have to work through. the cable industry is highly focused on meeting several key challenges. we need to innovate faster to meet the changing habits of consumers. we need to continue working on greater flexibility and channel offerings will continue to deliver the content they love. we need to manage the cost of service to make sure we face the affordable constraints.

is afraid.t it is out of sync with the realities of the marketplace. knowing that something is broken does not tell you what should replace it. we are not calling for a comprehensive rewrite because we believe in this fast-moving time that it's difficult to try to paint a comprehensive regime. we believe it more prudent to evaluate changes more surgically and deliberately as they arrive. the state of video is a critical topic or the of discussion and i thank you for holding this hearing in your attention. >> chairman pryor, ranking member, members of the subcommittee, i appreciate the opportunity to testify today. i'm a little bit under the weather and i apologize in advance.

i'm the executive vice president and general counsel at dish network, the third largest pay tv provider with 40 million subscribers and 25,000 employees. we're the only provider of local tv service in all 210 markets. we have the hopper dvr and tv everywhere features to give consumers greater control over their viewing experience. we have affordable high-speed internet through the country and our recent offer to merge with sprint would allow us to expand fixed wireless service to underserved and conservative rural households. we believe the outdated laws need to be updated to reflect changes in the market and changes in how consumers view the market. theic policy should support expansion of choices. as it should be years alike dish

offered advances in technology, some programmers are crying wolf saying this time the threat is real and they will not be able to survive the onslaught of innovation. are. enges to our d.r being called a copyright infringers. we believe in consumer choice. i want to make three points. we believe congress should protect consumers against the growing problem of blackouts. the purpose in the numbers. there were 12 black dots in 2010 and it soared to almost 100 impacting millions of viewers. consumers are the victims of these one-sided negotiations. programming gets pulled and the monthly programming bills go up and up. we propose that when a local station as polled due to a retransmit dispute that video distributor should be able to

provide in other market the network signal allowing them to keep their network programming while negotiations continue. second, americans living in remote areas have benefited. in allows americans in predominantly rural areas to receive signals for any missing local stations in their market. the distant signal sunsets at the end of 2014 and without reauthorization many will be left without access to a full complement of channels. since wasee years enacted, the video industry has not been sitting still. consumers increasingly want to watch news and entertainment on ago using a high-resolution screens on their smartphones and tablets. over the years, dish has done much to respond to the change in consumer preferences. we stand ready to make a significant invest

consuming video. the recent offer for sprint would create game changing services and capabilities by offering for the first time in nationwide fixed and mobile service for voice, video, and data. shouldeve government the sure that laws reflect changes in technology. i look forward to answering, and questions you may have. >> a good morning. members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's hearing. and going to talk about two things. first, if your remarks on the state of the video marketplace today. new technology and new services have given people more ways to watch tv. they're changing what it means to watch tv. they watch on smartphones, tablets, computers, on demand.

these control what they watch and how, but there's still a lot of must see programming available through only traditional pay-tv services. to keep up with "the game of thrones," they have to subscribe. the cost of a cable subscription is approaching $90, just for video not brown band. content prices keep rising and the reach transmission fees they demand of cable and satellite providers keep going up. nbc estimates and they will collect 400% more. going up.se are the average cable subscriber pays almost $80 per year for the nfl. they do everything they can to make sure their cable can -- channels are carried to drive out independent programmers but they have been able to pass along the cost to viewers. congress and the fcc have been

involved in the video marketplace for decades. sometimes it promote competition. satellite providers like this and verizon to start offering video services. they're protected smaller cable operators to. competition will be limited, and broadband technology changes that. is no longer necessary to operate a dedicated network. policy should reflect this shift. it is changing just as it changed the market for other media but there is a difference. dominant players in video have control over the content they need and the pipes they need to reach consumers. it's inevitable it will play a part in video delivery but not inevitable it will reach its full competitive potential. independent content producers will still struggle to reach viewers. congress makes sure that it's pro-competition policies are

neutral. they can sure viewers have more choices. online video is a success story, but it could be much more than it is now. is not driving down cable prices. it is a supplement to cable, but those offering a full range should be as competitive and open as e-mail. they could help online video developed into a competitor in three easy ways. they can clear away dated rules that slow down the marketplace. they can extend successful policies that protect them from anti-competitive contact. they can prevent discriminatory billing practices that could hold back online billing which would mean lower prices, better services, more flexibility and control for consumers. many regulations that permit the marketplace can be repealed today and some exist only to protect the business models or to enhance the revenues of major

sports leagues. they include the blackout rule and prohibitions on distant signal importation. copyright license is outdated. they should be reformed, but cautiously. measures designed to mitigate the market power should not be repealed until effective competition develops. examples of these roles include program access and program carriage rules. they should be extended. online video providers who wish to voluntarily operated as a multi-channel should be able to do so ensuring consumers have more choices for high-value content than they do today and eliminate incentives from being licensed widely. they can help insure the internet remains competitive and open by working to prevent the anti-competitive data cab in violation.

this contains more detailed analysis and recommendation. thank you for inviting me to speak. start thego ahead and questions with senator smith. broadcasters have obligations based on public policy and we have seen decades of good results. can you tell us what would happen if for some reason those obligations went away? broadcasting is in competition with everyone else providing video. we believe that we earn our licenses every day with all of programming we provide every

day, local news, sports, weather, emergency information. these are the values that broadcasting represents and their valuable still. i think i infer from your question that if you take broadcasters spectrum away, will the same regulations of public service apply to the internet? i would simply say that my experience is that it would be a real steep climb in the u.s. senate. the question is if you compromise broadcasting, whose serve those interests? the answer is no one steps up to those kinds of obligations. if you impose indecency regulations on the internet, you would collapse the business ,odel of many people on wall but notwithstanding an episodic leading expletive or wardrobe malfunction, i am proud of the

fact that broadcasters work hard to make sure that we're not purveyors of indecency and families have a place to go where they can have some confidence that their families can view what is on the television. we compete with the lowest common denominator is a production and that is the other pressure on the other side of us. best i can tell you, our spectrum comes with public service obligations that only we deliver. >> can you tell the subcommittee when your industry is doing to increase consumer's access to your programming for on line and mobile platforms? abc announced that they are putting through a process of streaming their programming. i am pushing very hard on my members to deploy in more stations, mobile facilities so

that the 130 stations that now provide mobile, that it can expand all over the country. way youthe very best can get video for the broadcast architecture. it is local and free. it is live, big events. these are the qualities that i think, as i said in my testimony, when it comes to indispensable and irreplaceable. there's not enough spectrum in the impact universe to do all video one-to-one. you have to preserve broadcasting 81 those big events, particularly those emergency events, available for the american people. chancent to give you a to respond to senator mccain's opening statement and the bill that he has filed.

seeme to handle it may very common sense that all consumers would have a choice to be able to go a la carte and pick out programming. that's kind of intuitive and it makes sense, but i would like to hear your response from the industry's perspective what problems that represents. >> senator mccain has a longstanding and deep interest in this and i had a privilege myers chairman of the ftc to work with him on this issue, and many more, quite extensively. the objective seems entirely reasonable and noble, quite intuitively correct that somehow, if you bought less, you would pay less. it seems logical, but many independent third-party studies have concluded that it is not likely to be the case including the gao in 2003, the fcc in 2004, and the congressional research service in 2006 as well

as a bunch of economic reports of concluded that it's a very serious question whether consumers would actually have lower bills or cheaper services as a consequence. the reasons are relatively clear when you think about it for a moment. if you take a channel accustomed to a large audience size and allocating services across a big base with advertising revenue and subscription revenue that goes with it and have it sold directly to the consumers a la carte, a few things happens. the audience size has shrunk dramatically, so to make up for the revenue loss associated with advertising and the revenue base, they're very likely have to raise the individual price of the programming quite substantially than the $4 or $5 a senator mccain was referencing. it does not take long for consumers to put those pieces together to quickly get to a

package that cost something very similar to what they were paying before, if not more. it's not a good deal for consumers if you pay $10 for 10 channels and you're paying $10 for 100 before. there has been some quite serious academic work to show that it's a very like the possibility. the concern is respectable and noble and one we should continue to work on, but we have found out that a la carte would deliver a lower cost product to the american consumer. >> let me start with you, mr. powell. thatelieve you testified the current statute is frayed and needs some more work. you do not think this is a good time for an overhaul of the act. we need to do something

because the state of the industry is fast moving. we are in transition. when will it ever be less fast- moving than it is now? in awill we ever not be transition era? >> very good question. we may never. it's fair enough of a question. i'm a big believer that you can migrate existing regulatory regimes as well as throw them out and try to replace them with a grand scheme. you have a demonstrable evidence, specific fact patterns, specific technology you can address that i think is very challenging to do in a comprehensive rewrite. i would emphasize that we're not saying we are enamored with every aspect of the 1992 act and that no change over time as

, but it is a more prudent and deliver to approach to try and address specifics as they arise in which there are available for us to address. inis stated, as you note, the sense that it is based on a lot of promises that are no longer true. i would be the first to admit that in 1992, the cable industry was unquestionably a monopoly provider. we had 98% of the multi-channel from the deal market. today it is under 60%. the industry was vertically 60%egrated it closer to 57%- and today that number is down to 14%, but many of the rules that underlying the act are meant to address this concentrated considerations. and i think those rules over time will have to be modified to

reflect reality. >> ok. what specifics have recently risen that would be the target of your so-called surgical changes? >> among our members, there's a difference of opinion and we, as an association, are not prepared to give you a list. >> you are not advocating an overhaul of the act, nor are you coming before us to even shortening of the surgical limit that your testimony seems to advocate? surgical proposals we might make for those of our members might make will be done, if at all, subsequently to this hearing. what do you fear might region >>

what do you fear might go wrong with an overhaul, a general overhaul, of the act? descend sensesily of the enormous revolution we see taking place. is aomprehensive rewrite long, complicated, uncertain exercise and that uncertainty over the industry while it is rewritten tends to slow taking risk because you are awaiting the understanding of the rules. i've been through this as a regulator many major transformational rewrites. the 1996 telephone provision took almost a decade to settle with multiple trips to the supreme court for resolution of clarity. i think the country under invested in taking risks in innovation during that time. it's a real risk. i do not think some of the

problem that some refer to are necessarily clear enough for government response. that said, we have members, to be perfectly honest, who are very concerned about consumer affordability and we will also be talking about ways to manage costs to deal with it. >> would you like to briefly comment on such mccain's proposal? the a la carte proposal? >> i support his bill as a first step toward a broader reform. he is clearly out raids by every increase in the cable bill and this takes note of various regulatory advantages that broadcasters and cable already get and requires these companies serve the public interest to qualify for them. out not think that the bill was the practice of bundling. it simply requires that viewers have a choice.

i would like to single out the threat to take high value content of the year which would be an abuse of the public trust. the a la carte tends to polarize people because they think it is a bundle between every channel or simply assembling all this on a channel by channel basis. is a bundle. you subscribe and get everything at once. frankly, i prefer the netflix than of a single flat rate to the itunes model of buying every show or a series by episode. i think a lot of people today feel like they're getting ripped off. i support the bill bec it is

aimed at at giving people more choices and flexibility. bywe have been joined senator phil newcomer ranking member of the full committee. -- senator soothune. you are recognized. >> thank you for having this hearing. i want to thank our former colleague, senator smith, for coming. we need to focus on establishing a regulatory structure that means the realities of our 21st century economy. we should continue looking through the marketplace. i want to learn where our current laws need to be modernized. every law we passed based on assumptions tends to address is use of a given moment in time

and a great deal has changed in the past five years not to mention since 1992. as they look at these issues and think about them, there are some basic questions that need to be asked. are they still relevant? do they provide consumer choice? i appreciate your testimony and your good work. thank you, mr. chairman, for holding this hearing. this will reflect what i think is a 21st century economy and some amazing changes over the years and technologies that have really given the american people higher-quality and poor choices. -- more choices. >> in much the way that the

nielsen drawn, many people do not get in state news, especially those who have been around the borders of our state. was understand it, the map developed years ago for the purpose of assessing and purchasing advertising revenue. then congress codify the ban now determines where the broadcast signals for cable and satellite can be. nebraskawatch broadcast on my computer over theinternet, i can tell you internet does not represent those boundaries. .ut i cannot get them on tv ,y question, for senator smith does this law make any sense in the current era?

and neighbors in north central nebraska, we love our neighbors to the north, but we would also like to see nebraska news. remember vividly my seat on the committee and being frustrated by the very issue that you raised. i introduced a bill to fix it. remember whent they hired me that i did that. [laughter] >> but you thought it was a good idea? >> i understand exactly what neyork saying, but when state they were were drawn, before,blished like based on irrigation. areas reflectn

those economic basins, if you will. the organs do not want to listen to the cougars and the huskies. they won the beavers. what i did his work with cable and satellite providers to, in one case, one of the satellite to add a was willing portland the station and it really of little of the pressure, but it did not solve the problem. what we have done and we will do with you is if you have a particular situation, such as the chairman did in arkansas, we were to try to resolve specific problems, but i understand the problem and i am entirely sympathetic. i do not have a statutory recommendation for you because you cannot change where the money is, where the advertising goes.

they do not necessarily by a chevrolet in oregon. they buy them somewhere else. you this yearith for cannot get some of the other providers to do so. >> limiting the ability of cable and satellite providers to carry local signals should be reformed and it they demonstrate freezes the status quo. you can match technology and expectations. for the most part, they should be able to control most of the relationship with cable or satellite providers with exceptions, as in my testimony. beo not think there should

backed up by fcc rules. >> would you try to refigure the way that the formulas have drawn now. >> i do not have any examples off of the top of my head because it is extremely technical. there are people who can better assess that than me. the basic idea of things like a distant signal protections where, if a signal in another market is willing to be carried by a cable system in another market, i don't see why those two businesses cannot reach an arrangement to do so. i do not know what the fcc should say about it one way or another. i would attack issues like that in a more fundamental level. they're revisiting the formula and taking down boundaries may make a lot of sense.

>> there is either a breakdown in the competitive model or there is not. i do not know who i should ask this of, but whoever has an opinion, chime in. if we have sufficient competition, describe it. if we do not, describe it. what is preventing the competitive model from allowing a la carte? where is the breakdown? johnson, if i could offer my perspective from my experience on this committee, i served year when senator mccain was the chairman and i remember wrestling with the issue of a la carte. i have members in broadcasting who are for and members against a la carte. and i am with my members. >> why do we not have it?

>> i did not vote for it despite senator mccain's considerable pressure. in hisael just indicated testimony, there are tremendous market forces. i foresaw a market developing that would keep pressure on this issue. michael, butk for i believe there are some cable offerings and satellite offerings beginning to offer these kinds of packages. >> is there not enough competition? is there a law or regulation that prevents all carte pricing? that's what i'm asking. >> i believe there are. cable operator wanted to offer them a broadcast-free cable package, because you can access over the air broadcast tv with an antenna.

what you need to pay your cable subscriber for? however, they cannot do it because there are rules passed by congress to prevent the flexibility, so i certainly support repealing those. i do not think they make sense anymore. a lot ofdeo showing promise as the potential, the technological potential in the business potential for online commission for cable, satellite, and stelco video services. they are not directly competing. all my nvidia more competes with the video rental store and we see what happens to blockbuster. that's much more of what that model approach is as a prose to cable. that is what competition looks like. blockbuster really had to change and they are almost out of business. i'm not exactly sure what their status is right now. i do not see them out directly competing right now and it's why you do not see them really fering as much flexibility.

>> there is really no legal implications for the internet to be able to do that? >> it cannot get access to the same kind of content partially irresponsive the overall regulatory system. most of the must see content is still on cable. caps and other things are also preventing it. in the unregulated online space, there's nothing spot -- stopping some on-line services. i would characterize itunes as a la carte. >> i get your point that it does not mean that the service will be reduced. consumers are actually voluntarily paying these prices. there is the marketplace actually working. is it fair for some content to subsidize other content, which is basically what you're doing when you bundle?

individual each program stand on its own and fight for its own audience? >> a couple things might be informative. one, the way the market is evolving, consumers have it depending on the window and timing they want to watch it. between the live current premium window verses your willingness to wait, sometimes the next day or a few days before the available on itunes, netflix, or other services that offer those offerings. secondly, one big challenge in our market are the economic cost. it is $3-$4 million per episode to produce. it again runs on cable to try to recoup some of the expense. >> if it so good, people will pay for it. dedicated tory

diversity of content, we would probably not survive being sold a la carte. it is one challenge of the economic business. if you're standing along, you depend 100% on the subscriber base that you can attract, the advertising it can attract. the challenge for a niche or minority audience that has a high-intensity love for content for programming, they would not potentially be able to survive economically being distributed and sold solo as opposed to in a model in which the whole subscription model allows it to be so. >> you do not support subsidizing certain programming over others. >> an aspect of the cable model isn't supports a wide range of diverse challenges -- channels and would not be able to survive on their own. >> ok, thank you. >> senator warner. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

it's a great sea wall. as we think about broadcast, , it along thete way have had periods of the and now there is ofdence of the status quo content distribution. i know this is a hot topic, but as we see the next wave of disruptive technology coming orong, whether it is aereo , howhing else, netflix does -- how do you will see these and what role, if any, should government play as these destructive technologies come in

and threaten each of your core business models. and may be a subset of that question being, how do we factor the kind of the new revenue stream around digital rights? it's basically a whole new revenue stream that does not fit within our kind of existing legal structure. >> senator warner, if i may? is toess can do be faithful to our constitution which includes copyright. if you have copyrighted material, the right to go along with that and they deserve compensation when others use it. was a principal valuable in the beginning and is usually important today.

>> i guess that goes to the aereo question. >> i have members in litigation and i cannot speak to the facts of it or the technical details. it seems to me of someone takes copyright material come and distributes it, charges for it, and does not do what the others do, that's called piracy. if your faithful to the principle of copyright, the constitutional principle but ultimately the courts will settle this and see if there is an exception. i do not believe there should be because i think that begins to on do the creative community. that said, i think that what other -- also needs to keep pace. are there any devices out there today that do not have buffer's?

to ad the copy be entitled royalty? i guess it all depends on the fact and circumstance of the particular case, but in our set top box today -- if we look at a transitory buffer copy on the computer, should that be an additional royalty it to the owner? i put forward that it is not. they should be able to do what they like with the content once the have paid. arrival of the internet as a genuine and viable distribution platform will shake up the marketplace. i read the different article every week. one week they are the greatest threat we have ever seen in the next week they are a complement. various ceo's are saying something else this week. it really is a convulsive change. the best part about it, i would observe, is that it creates economic competitive stimulus to

force companies to continue to innovate at a much more rapid pace to try and provide much more higher value services to consumers and compete with the pressures of content that exist in the space and puts a better punctuation mark on our needs to provide flexible channel offerings and affordable services. all of these things are exciting and positive, and i think they will continue. i think it's very typical, like a spinning jump rope, to say to congress comprehensively that we know enough to step in and write entirely new responsive, effective comprehensive regime, and i think it is still prudent to try to evaluate issues on a specific basis as they arise. in just a tear from the perspective of consumers, what's not to like about the future that's emerging? i think it's very exciting,

generally. it's something we should be excited about. question, ifquick i could. >> on the topic of aereo, they have found it is an internal rental service that does not need a license and i think both of those courts are correct and it would be bound to change copyright law to make a service like that to require a license. it's hard to say now you do need a license that happens to be located in another building. if you were to change copyright want to make changes, there could be all sorts of unintended consequences for the internet economy and that is such a growing part of our economy today that it would be a bad idea. all sorts of services that can exist today without having to negotiate licenses like services to access your own content online, dropbox, when they suddenly need a license because

you can access your own content? it would be disastrous. i do not think the law needs to change to match aereo. how should regulation cope with the rise of new technology? one of the primary ways is ensuring that these innovative services are able to reach consumers over the broadband pipe, not destroy mitt -- discriminated against or something to prevent the next netflix from offering innovative service to viewers. >> i just want to ask senator smith one last question. on the one hand, i absolutely understand how or concerned about piracy and the notion the content. but they said recently, if this continues, fox and others may

ofrt taking content broadcasts than simply putting it on cable. i've got to tell you, that raises a real concern for me because you're broadcasters, unlike some of the others, actually have public spectrum that they got four free. looking backwards, those of us to a bin in the wireless industry, let's go ahead and auction the spectrum. if you had this spectrum, an enormous value for free, and were threatening to withdraw content because of other challenges, it raises the question of whether you want to be able to keep that spectrum, which is a public good, and maybe it could be revitalized for better public services. >> i do not speak for fox. they are an esteemed member of the nab. i think he was speaking of

hypothetical or potentials. enormously produces viable content with huge viewership. they have to figure out how to pay for it. i understand the concerns you raised but i would also simply say that we do not feel like we got our licenses for free. they come with significant choices that they should be used locally to produce the news, weather, inrts which is the lifeline man-made or natural disasters. they earn those licenses every day by obeying and observing, being faithful to the conditions on those licenses. i understand what you are saying. i think he is simply saying is that we will not sit still for

piracy. >> let's go ahead and put a requirement out there as we were losing the local content of the bills upstream to the national basis. we're going to sell more of a digital component on that spectrum to entities that will provide that very local content, emergency response, these valuable items, and there would still be excess additional orue that could be better more utilized for the public and the government could receive revenues from that as well. thank you, mr. chairman. >> ought to follow up mr. powell, your conversation with senator johnson.

we talk about the subscription or packaging, is the fog that there may be some who are new becauseof product people do not know they exist that by putting them in a package people like me, who served channels, might stumble , where didnd say this come from? is that the thought behind it? is that what you're thinking there? >> there are two versions of the fog. the one you described very well. it is about discovery. it is about stumbling on some. did not know you love or wanted. i can list a long string of shows that i discovered that i did not what -- but i would not have fought to buy in advance.

course so sure over the of the year that my interest patterns would not change or the program went on the air and there is another program on another channel that seems interesting. ofis a complicated movement the way that consumers consume. also earlier, let's say you are interested in watching a brand new network and a brand new network to survive past have an audience and subscription. model, youn the still have to convince cable operators to carry you can convince them is worth paying the price to carry it, but to get on that system, your being accessed by everyone in that subscription household. if it was a la carte and you have to knock on doors and convince someone to buy something they have never seen, never experienced, i think there really would be a challenge for

new and diverse networks. standpoint,network it's like a pilot. in this case, a pilot channel, go out to market to get the share they need to get the customer base would be very expensive. but it did attempt to convince a company to carry something it's a little bit easier. is that a fair statement? another dimension is that all the marketing, all the sales, it is all done by the cable operator. ,f you had to sell a la carte you would absorber those costs yourselves. >> you may not want to answer this because it is your company's effort to merge with and softbank is also

considering going through a process. softbank is predominantly foreign owned reform process. i cannot understand the process. domestic, there are foreign, and they are buying into a domestic company in this business, how does the work in we understand when a foreign company buys our network what happens? is there a difference between what you and a half to go through? what are the risks? i know you would prefer you to buy it and not them, so i will ask you to be as long bias as possible, which i know can be difficult from widest point to understand the process.

you come to buy sprint. but don't have to go through another process? help me understand. >> for a foreign company to require the fcc licenses, the have to go through a process and it looks at the national security concerns for sec authorizations generally and reducing the other is a difference between us and them acquiring sprint for two reasons. nationwidewireless network today is an asset that is important with a national reasoning. it's better to keep it in u.s. hands and if they keep their

controlling interest in clearwater, that is evolving the global standard for mobile deployment. we think it is preferable for the u.s. company to own the spectrum in the united states. sprint has an enormous fiber network with numerous government contracts to rely on that for national-security reasons. all things being equal, it's better for american company to hold them. myspace --y, from from my state, we are a rural again this is probably self-serving to you, but how much can we provide to roll the communities? what would give the most? us back to the end of the day, that's what look for. give me your thoughts on that?

to use a 2.5 increase spectrum to broadband capability for on served in underserved households. we estimate 40 million people today. we would be in a unique position because we are largely a rural satellite country installation. so we could put antennas, the people's house as to allow the propagation of the spectrum to go much further and reach 40 million on serve and underserved households in america. question.t thank you for the answer. so i'ma 10.5 year-old always wondering what he is watching. i will not say the company name, but i do love this system and i want to suggest one piece to add.

on theiterally flying plane sending a note to my wife asked what channel he was on. saidnged it online and she he flipped it back. i literally use my ipad to change it again. i was really testing the system, flying back to alaska. i changed it to a more educational channel, in my view, but i also wanted to lock him out. literally, everywhere that i am, if i do not like the channel he's on at that moment, i can lock him out.

the parents of an 11 year- old, giving you some extra tools. the channel we love choices and we have the built in mechanism there to lock out channels, but sometimes there are channels with really good content and you want the show, but maybe not the whole channel. just giving you a thought for the industry. i think it's amazing. my wife was very impressed and me out of theock channel. no more movies for you. i found it very impressive. [laughter] suggestionake the back. i try to lock my 24-year old also because he is driving up

the cable bill. there may be other ways to do when you're trying to do in some of our systems. now.much as mobile >> we work hard to >> anything we can do to make those two things to work better. >> thank you. >> i have a few more questions. any other questions? >> let me go ahead and recognize you. my understanding is we will have a vote on the floor at noon. go ahead and asked some questions. to follow-up on the competitive model. you you used the term compulsive change. fromi'm getting a sense of the panel is that we need to proceed cautiously.

the senators joy for a lockout. obviously a hearing like this is about legislation. , thess i'm asking competitive model works. the chemical -- the competitive marketplace works. are there legitimate government roadblocks for that competition for cisco blocks that would be taking care of overtime through market competition? let's not have government step in and screw it up. senator johnson, i think philosophically i'm at the opponent of markets. i know that many of the rules

that sometimes you hear complaints about were government regulates, a comment was made earlier that there is a lot of row represents it in on this panel. protect rural residence in wisconsin. what are you really getting rid of? you're getting rid of congressional intent to foster -- if you just go with the money gush is, you will go to new , los angeles, and a few other business cities. rural folks get left out. congress made a decision with all of these rules, compulsory license, whatever, how do we foster this marvel that we have in this country that is unique to this country where you have local broadcasting in this big vast country that serves so many public values that are

valuable still? always ask yourself when it comes up, i do not like this. why? the answer is localism. that i thinkncur we are in a tumultuous, competitive market. it is generally operating well. as i'm obligated to on behalf of some consumers and members, a lot of ethics of the markets has government at the table. they shape the terms and conditions under which certain things can be done. i'm not in the position to say which ones can be eliminated and in what way, but would preserve where government is a party to and how market conditions unfold. there can always be a question of whether that would be a

productive place for government involvement. we reserve what that might be. >> i would love to follow up when you have those issues. i would also love to hear what rules and regulations your members disagreed upon and the reasons. >> we at dish love competition and the free market and figuring out the right answer for all manner of business questions. there is one area today where there is not competition. when this all started, there is one local broadcaster and one cable company. it really fair fight. they both need each other. today you have one broadcaster playing three or four distributors off of each other. prices are going up by hundreds of percent.

it is not a fair fight. that is why we suggested to level the playing field a little bit. at with the broadcaster has incentive to be fair. >> you want more competition so you're not forced to negotiate with only one supplier. >> when you look at the way that people watch content, it is created by the networks. the fcc has rules about that. i support localism. i think there are better ways to foster localism than subsidizing it through this baroque, regulatory apparatus. i support a lot of the same goals that the broadcaster friends support. there are better ways to accomplish those goals and

especially with the change in technology we have seen. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> let me follow up if i may. i will start with you. you mentioned in your testimony that online video distributors are having problems getting access to some content. can you explain that further? >> sure. a lot of online video providers are successful still stop i do not think they want to -- are successful. they do not want to change their business model. with that said, there is some content that is a double to more traditional channels and is simply not available online. -- that is available to more traditional channels and is simply not available online. we have seen a number of providers. i will point out sky angel.

. they were an online cable system. however, they lost access to certain content because they weren't online online system and for that reason only. they had a dispute at the sec. >> is that because of copyright considerations? >> copyright considerations and teleprompters at a rate and's. -- teleprompter considerations. >> one of the things we have to do on this committee and the senate and house is to reauthorize the seller before end of 2014. you have suggested in your statement that retransmission is one area that congress should

consider when reauthorizing the measure. i think retransmission consent deserves a much longer conversation. i see some heads bobbing back there behind you. i think some agree. what issues do think should be part of this discussion? a an area of potential whorm, there are folks live in the southern part of colorado. every time fall comes around, why can i watch my beloved denver broncos? can't i watch my beloved denver broncos question mark -- broncos? they should be able to get some in-state programming.

allow them to make a choice. there are some folks who might want to buy their cars in albuquerque. in that case, they will probably want to watch out the quirky stations and watch those advertisements. if you are in denver, and maybe you want to watch things that are in denver. there are several categories of folks who should still be protected first and foremost. some do not have a network affiliate. folks who drive around in rvs. directv has some legacy customers. i know thatk you, you offered your comments and responses to senator mccain's proposal. is there something that might give consumers more transparency and more choice that might be

short of all the cart -- a la carte? >> i think it has been mentioned. there is a whole range of product configurations. one can imagine a could improve the value from the perspective of the consumers. i think all companies believe in that and are working hard to create much more flexible offerings to get consumers that choice. ame warner cable is offering package called i believe the essentials package for a much lower price without some of the traditional programming. in this limitation -- extermination like that is going on -- experimentation like that is going on. we should not underestimate the i cable provider. the cable provider.

we are working very hard to be transparent about consumption patterns and usage meters and clarification and billing and better information on the web. those are some of the things we are doing. >> would some of this allow for more flexibility and price structure ranges question mark -- and ranges? well, interestingly enough, break outerators who on the bill some of the costs associated with specific programming. even if they are obligated to carry out by contract. some of them do let the consumer understand what the various things are. -- let asked about rural

me ask about rural. believe you all mention that there are several senators on and subcommittee that have large areas of rural constituents in their states. it is fair to say we believe that they should have the same validity to view the program -- ability to view programs in general. let me start with you on this. is it your experience that cableers of small companies end up with the same if viewing the same options and offerings that folks the larger cable companies have? >> i would say the small companies do a very terrific job

of providing services, even in rural areas. they work hard to provide a programming lineup that is compelling. i think it is merely factual true that being a small programmer, buying programming to match what might be provided on others and sometimes be a bigger challenge because it is not as large or as profitable a company. some of the premium programming that is understandably relatively expensive is a bigger challenge for them to purchase, but they work hard and trying to make sure they can replicate that as best as they can. , i need to say a word in defense of retransmission consent. donderstand why my friends not want to pay for broadcast content. we literally represent a few

pennies per dollar of restriction tv bills. it is the most viable content have got. the stuff that people watch the most. we transition consent is only a whent in terms of years we have gotten paid for that value. but we're not the driver a what is driving up their costs. we are one piece of it in literally cents per dollar. if you want to support localism, revenueemember the two streams that provides for us and pay those costs. advertising and retransmission consent. mr. dodge's company has technology to get rid of broadcasting adds. it gets rid of your ads, too. yet rid of cable or

their ads. we need to be paid for the value of what we provide. it is expensive. what does it preserve? it preserves localism. if they bring in a distant signal from la into ft. smith, it will not mean a lot to them when a hurricane or tornado touches down. these things cost money. we have only two ways to pay for it -- advertising and retransmission. they want to eliminate our advertising model. it does not add up. >> do you want to comment on that mr. dodge question mark -- do you want to comment on that, mr. dodge? people have to enable the functionality to skip ads. they fast-forward into them or

rewind, the ads are still there. it is my understanding that an increasing proportion of retransmission consent fees that are collect it in the name of localism are required to be sent back to the networks in los angeles and new york. >> it does involve both, by the way. they are important to localism. inmr. smith, let me ask you a changing of gears. i have heard you talk about spectrum and spectrum crunch that we are in in this country, especially when it comes to the most distant populated areas. i am wondering if you would share with the subcommittee your thoughts on how the broadcast

model helps to alleviate some of the spectrum crunch we are seeing. >> if there is any misunderstanding, we support the voluntary spectrum opti. we believe it should be done right and not done right now. it should be done as soon as it can be done right. the uniqueness of the broadcasting signal is that it is one to everyone. that is a huge value. the architecture is not shared by broadband, which is one to one. there's not enough spectrum in the universe to do all video 121. when it comes to big events -- one to one. what is to big events, broadcasting becomes of extreme public safety importance. as you calculate all of the various regulations around this,

go back to the original content of congress and why they set it up to foster localism. if everything is paid on tv right now, if you have to go to dish or whatever, to see television, what does that do for the elderly and the poor and minority communities who disproportionately rely on for 20, 30,levision 40 broadcast channels that they can access? i think they should be counted as well. those are the kinds of things which broadcast spectrum uniquely provides to the american people. it was valuable in beginning and is valuable still. it is the value that congress should support. >> anything else? -- and lookingng

at a schedule here. 2006 to about seven percent of the total fees paid for cable. it has been increased on the capable. , total the total amount value of advertising in broadcasting? a general rule, i would say somewhere between 50% and 30% of the revenue stream is retransmission consent. the balance is advertising. >> in terms of revenue streams, you get about $2 billion per year nationally in rebroadcasting fees. what about advertising? that is hundreds of billions of dollars. >> a lot of money. it is a small amount of the revenue stream, correct?

>> correct. the advertising model gets smaller. how do you maintain the quality? how do you provide all of the content that people demand the most, which comes from broadcasting? >> the business model is painted dramatically. a do-nothing government is good at trying to redirect business models effectively -- i do not hang government is good at trying to redirect business models effectively. i know that they are providing local content and emergency broadcasters and mike that. anyone on the panel -- and like that. >> broadcasting has about 200 30,000 -- about 200 megahertz.

the government has the other half. >> not all spectrum is created equal. technology and digital compression technology, spectrum gets more and more -- >> broadband is paying for it spectrum right now? >> in some cases. >> any idea how much that has cost? we paid in a baker's the option if you years ago. a few yearsy option ago. >> i'm time to get a feel of overall values -- i'm trying to get a feel of overall values. when you start putting a dollar to it, that is where competition kicks in. we're talking about dollars

going to and from individuals. that is how competition is created. i'm trying to get that basic information to tell me what is happening here. that is all. thanks. >> thank you. thank you to the panel. you guys have been outstanding and very informative. we appreciate your time. the fact that you are here today. we believe the record open for two weeks and allow members to ask questions and submit questions. we appreciate you getting the answers back as quick as possible. there is no other business before the subcommittee, we will adjourn. thank you. [gavel] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> in his weekly address, president obama talks about the economy and the middle class. republican gives a address on repealing the affordable care act. >> hi, everybody. over the past few months, i have laid out a series of commonsense sense ideas to reignite the true engine of our economic road. a rising and thriving middle class. way i see it, there are three areas we need to focus. one, making america a magnet for good jobs. two, making sure workers have education skills they need to do those jobs. three, making sure your hard work -- i've been visiting cities across the country that are doing some interesting and creative things along these lines. on friday, i stop by a fact or in baltimore. it is creating good jobs at home

by exporting equipment abroad. k read what kids in a pre- program are doing to get a head start in life. helping people to get the training they need to find work and support their families. that is why i like getting out of washington whenever i can. too often politics are not focused on the things you are -- working hard for your family and supporting your community. making sure your hits have every chance in life. worth anything, the american than anything, we should be purged work harder on the issues that matter to you. businesses have created more than 6.5 million new jobs. employment rate is still too high. evenow, we need to create

more good, middle-class jobs. we have got to do it fast. corporate profits have skyrocketed to an all-time high. middle-we need to get class wages rising as well. our housing market is healing. we need to do a lot more to help families stay in their homes or lowelp them refinance of rates. now we have got a budget and a smarter way that does not hurt middle families -- middle-class families. .hings are looking up the american auto industry is thriving. mirkin energy is booming. america's ingenuity in our high- tech sector has the potential to change the way we do almost everything. in the coming weeks, i will visit more cities like baltimore and austin, texas. places where americans are coming together to strengthen their own communities and economies. in the process, making this country better for all of us.

i will keep on trying to work with both parties in washington to make progress a priority. if we come together by creating more jobs in educating our kids and building or so for everyone who is willing to climb it, we will all prosper together. thank you. have a great weekend. >> hi. i'm congressman andy harris. this is the red tape power -- tower. it encompasses all of the regulations is it obama's health care law. the red tape of taxes and mandates and tricks and taxes and the fine print -- it is all here. think about the fact it is the that will be -- irs that will be responsible for enforcing these regulations. the irs needs less power and not more. it turns out the irs officials whogeervatives are

now in charge of the irs at the obama office. you cannot make this stuff up. i have always believed the power in our healthcare system should belong to patients and their families and not politicians and certainly not the tax man. americans should be able to choose the coverage they need at a cost they can afford. the president's health care law or is equation and in many ways, our lives, upside down. it requires americans to buy government approved plans that would cover all kinds of services you may not need. instead of keeping your coverage, i'd president obama promised, millions will be forced off of the plan they like. instead of lower costs, you could be a whole lot more. according to new data, under double.e, prices will some rates rising 400%.

employers cannot afford obamacare and all of its new costs and taxes. they are not hiring new workers. many are cutting back hours for the workers. making it harder for small businesses to hire. the last thing we need in one of the slowest economic recoveries in history. it is no wonder that it was said, i see a huge train wreck coming. here's the problem. the train wreck is already here. obamacare is knocking americans off the ladder of opportunity. the sooner review unit, the sooner we can fix health care for working families. -- the sooner that we can fix health care for working families. our plan focuses on patient centered reforms and not washington centered bureaucracy. would concentrate on dz's -- we concentrate on disease prevented cap. -- preventive care.

there are those will do do all they can to prop up obamacare. this raises all kinds of legal and ethical questions. i assure you we will get those answers. we need more accountability in washington and a government that works for you and not the other way around. that senator is right. this is a train wreck. look at all of the red tape. the people's house has listened to the people and voted for former peel of the health care law. now it is time for the senate to listen as well. we can fix our healthcare challenges and building new generation of prosperity and opportunity for ourselves and for our children. thank you for listening. >> next on c-span, "the communicators" on capitol hill.

ladies" focuses on lucy hayes. speaks atichard engel the journalist memorial ceremony. >> "the communicators you are watching "the communicators you are watching "the communicators" on c-span. members of congress and staff are here. there's new software on the market called phone 2 action inc. what was the issue that caused phone 2 action to become? -- i was theng to national director. it was national. what i fou