, congresswoman niki tsongas, member of the house armed services committee. and in the chairman of the house judiciary committee, bob goodlatte great -- bob goodlatte. ♪ four americans have been killed by drone attacks since 2009 according to attorney general eric holder. the president will address drone in a counterterrorism speech platforms.on c-span we want to hear your views this morning on u.s. drone policy. this morning on the "washington journal." (202) 585-3880 four democrats, (202) 585-3881 for republicans, and (202) 585-3882 for independents. you can also make, and on our facebook page, facebook.com/c- span come a or send in a tweet

-- @cspanwj. you can send an e-mail as well -- journal@c-span.org. the story about the drone attacks of the lead story in "usa today." also the lead story in the "washington post." four americans killed in drone strikes since 2009. to limit targets of drone strikes --

host: that is a little bit from "the new york times."

your views onr the u.s. drone policy and the fact that four americans have been killed by drone cents 2009. (202) 585-3880 for democrats, (202) 585-3881 for republicans, and (202) 585-3882 for independents. a little bit more from the "new york times" --

host: that is the front page of the "new york times" this morning. already several comments on our facebook page on this issue. susan says -- i think that drugs should be controlled by the military, not the cia. they should be used within the same sphere of influence as other weapons. we should not become a nation of assassins. and sergeant schultz says -- kill them withdrawals, but whatever you do, do not waterboard them. that would be cruel. perl says -- soon the house will want to check ids before initiating an overseas counterterrorism strike. then in the same breath the house will say the administration doesn't do anything to keep american safe. says -- let'sonna count how many americans have been killed in iraq and

afghanistan in bush's misguided wars, and how many americans die under the strain of republican policies that target the poor. some of the conversation going on on facebook right now. and you can continue that conversation. facebook.com/c-span. steve is republican in san diego. steve, would you think about u.s. drone policy and the fact that four americans have been killed since 2009 by drones? caller: i don't appreciate the fact that those guys have been killed. and i don't believe that drone policy is correct. what is interesting about it is that in the immigration market, those three countries that you mentioned, the numbers of those folks that are going to be allowed in the country has increased in the anger -- in the immigration markup bill. and we are droning them? at a summit any sense. thank you. >> a little bit -- host: a little the more from the "new york times" --

host: dave in michigan. you are on the "washington journal." caller: yes, i think the article by the "new york times" is deflecting criticism.

the white house is the one that signs off on each and every one of those drawn starks -- drone strikes. it can stop them without any legislation. they can just stop signing off on the damn things. i also believe that what comes out of mr. obama's mouth -- i question everything after all of these scandals and lies upon lies. 's pantsthe white house are on fire. let's put it that way. there is no truth coming out of washington, d.c. that's all i have to say. thank you. host: thank you for your call. a column in the "washington , senate the op-ed page republican leader mitch mcconnell has this article. "obamas culture of intimidation" --

host: here is how mitch mcconnell concludes his op-ed this morning in the "post." -- host: we want to get your views on drone strikes in the drone policy in the u.s. 202 is the area code. (202) 585-3881 for democrats, (202) 585-3881, for republicans, and (202) 585-3882 for independents.

for democrats.0 , "pickeringcle agrees to private interview on benghazi" -- appear for ay

transcribed interview and answer all questions posed by committee investigators, representative darrell issa said in a statement on wednesday. that is in the "washington times." the headline -- irs figures could be compelled to testify. beside story is about the drone attacks, drone killings included four from america. then is in rochester, new york. hi, ben. caller: good morning. this is how i feel about the drone strikes. the way our economy operates, and the way we have been -- the consciousness we have inherited, you know, this fossil fuel of life that we have is the only option. i don't know what all of the scuffle is about with why we keep stirring up the hornets nest overseas.

why these institutions even exist to begin with. it point i was getting an -- begins with our food. it begins with the fossil fuel industry, and all those things -- host: you are taking us a little off course this morning. we are sticking to the drone policy and the fact that four americans have been killed by drones according to attorney general eric holder. carol is a democrat. hi, carol. caller: hi. i find it to be kind of one- sided to me. on the one hand, people complain about him not protecting us. it is almost like -- we have to have a crisis, like, we make up a crisis. if he is not protecting us then, he is -- we are complaining about what he is not doing. i have never seen a most ungrateful people in my life. let me tell you something, ok,

because i look at c-span all the time. but the thing is that you cannot get past all the things that are going on in this world. -- ie can hone in on him know people got killed, but look what happened in the bush era. y'all don't talk about that. i find something wrong about that. it is almost like it did not happen and you are just honing in on president obama. i mean, it is like, you guys are delivering the news -- host: all that said, carol, what do you think should be u.s. policy on drones? caller: anybody that has anything that they want to do to the united states, then they are no longer an american then. when you want to kill somebody, an american, because you disagree with whatever our policies are, because when you are an american, you agree with everything. when you differ from that, then

you are no longer -- then you are a target. host: all right, thank you for calling in from georgia. chances are here in washington on our republican line. for the first time, i think i agree with the democrats. we need to make [indiscernible] one of my fellow administer -- fellow colleagues said they are killing, but i call them drone strikes. when a person has chosen to fight us, we whenever they choose to fight us, they are against us. there is only one way to defend ourselves before they can get to us. so the drone strikes, the president signed off on them, the cia is given important information to conclude that this is what needs to be done to get this person out of here. i agree with them. i hope it stays. .ost: thank you for calling in

the president, by the way, will be delivering his speech at 2:00 p.m. this afternoon at the college talking about town or terrorism. he will be including the drone discussion that we have been having this morning. , nationalat 2 p.m. defense university, and they'll be live on c-span. another james, this one in mclean, virginia. caller: good morning. i would like to remind our viewers that the only other time that capital punishment can be used its in instances of treason outside of murder. am totally comfortable with the united states taking a drone and killing an american citizen abroad. i think they have given up their right to life by engaging in what is essentially an act of treason. met theot ever

justifications released by the fed or the white house, but i can imagine that there is at least one notion of treason in there. so thank you for my call. host: cabinet pick whose family that against america gets hearing during his 2012 campaign for reelection -- host: that hearing will also be live on our c-span platform, if

you go to c-span.org, you will be a will to find out exactly what time it starts and where it is being held. here is a picture of lois lerner with her attorney, mr. taylor, walking out of the committee room yesterday after invoking the fifth amendment. here is the "new york times" story. irs official invokes fifth amendment at hearing -- , ignited a controversy that has ensnared the white house, denied on wednesday that she ever provided false information to congress. "new york is the on the iran story.

and here is the lead editorial on that issue -- the unaccountable executive is the title.

host: back to your calls on u.s. drone policy during -- all of the. , florida.lahassee democrat. go ahead. caller: common sense has left this country a long, long time ago. we have laws today that say if you are involved with robbing a charged with that bank robbery. come with terrorists, you are part of a terrorist [indiscernible]

we have lost the concept of common sense in this country, and this is getting worse and worse everyday. just talk to most people. they don't even talk common sense no more. if i rob a bank, i'm going to go to jail. it is common sense, people. host: all right, i'm afraid the connection is kind of weak. robinson stockton, california on the republican line. what is your comment on drone policy? presidentagree with obama. when somebody is coming against this country, and their treason -- no matter if they are american or not, and there in that war zone of afghanistan, pakistan, and those areas that are hot areas, take them out. no questions asked. but the line gets drawn when you start flying drones over

america, spying on americans within our continental united states and set of using that unit down at the borders, that is where the line should be drawn. that is rob in stockton, california. here is michael on our twitter ,eed -- we want to be protected but we question the way it is done. wake up, america, this is not softball. we have to play hardball. in c says -- drone strikes and i arrest are out of the same cloth -- the imperial presidency. flight for freedom -- obama is continuing and wildly increasing the war agenda started by jordan -- george w. bush peered were the protesters, code pink and cindy sheehan. another -- drone policy, due process of law on u.s. shores. on any foreign battlefield, light them up. patricia on our independent

line. caller: hello. out ofling personally personal experience. i would like to say about these drone policy -- we should be very careful about entering our red zones because united states is multicultural. i mean, the same individuals that we are waging war against -- these individuals are brought into this country. and when you start speaking aret drone attacks, you bringing something that could be integrated right here in the united states. just the you have a different political view. i think that we are inviting something that we do not really know all the consequences of. we are going to be entering into socialized medicine, and when you start speaking about attacks, we can graduate from drones to medicine.

to actually take a person out using socialized medicine. like we'retacked -- having this controversy with the irs. there are all types of ways to attack american citizens on american soil. and i think we should be very, --y careful about being saying it is ok to attack somebody abroad because those same individuals are right here in this country making a living. we are going to have to come to a point where we have to distinguish about because addition. we have a constitution. host: all right, patricia, thank you for calling in from houston. this is from "politico" this morning. this is daniel warfel's first day --

" morningn "politico report. this is in the "washington times" -- mr. garcetti won the job with

182,000 votes according to parliamentary results. host: and this is in the "washington post" this morning --

host: that is in the "close." in next call is from jesse michigan, democrat. drone policy is our topic. please go ahead. caller: good morning. withagree with this policy the drone strikes. the president -- wants to kill people. drone strikes in russia, you think they would do it in saudi arabia. it is nothing but a cherry picked policy that they have got. [indiscernible] you ought to try to learn something about your history.

i know about this country's history. when colin was killing people, it was ok. nobody had a problem with it. [indiscernible] and all these women being raped and stuff going on right there. i have one word to say about that. but i don't agree with this. invading sovereign countries. [indiscernible] americans, calm yourself great -- calm yourself. was george bush, everybody would be demonstrating in the streets about it. at least i'm honest about this.

it is wrong what he is doing. i disagree with it. thank you, for letting you show. -- for letting me on the show this morning. host: jesse, are you still with us? no, he is gone. we're going to move onto clarice in fairfield on the independent line. caller: how are you doing, sir? first of all, about the drone strikes, you had a point earlier you do not want to open the door to much because of the fact that it could attack american citizens. four americans killed by drugs killed byhe u.s. -- - drones outside the u.s. americans pay the bill for illegal immigrants outside of the americas. and then we have these drones that are able without judicial caused -- if you were on

american soil, no matter what the crime is, you have the right to go through trial. you have a right. that is why we have trials. hey, we do not have to go through this process and at any time the president can find that they can use a drone to kill americans on american soil, a cover the problem. the main point i want to bring up is that you have the authorization of military force. angus king brought up the fact is a nullity to the constitution. so the war could be said from boston to yemen. the work would be set anywhere -- the war can be set anywhere. what is this a about what the drones and it'll americans gecko it is troubling. west pointr. cole at teaching our young soldiers

that -- people who believe that the government is radical aren't dangerous groups. that is how you tie in the tea party in the irs and the conservative groups. asking people what their views are -- that is above interested. anybody listening to c-span right now, you have to be troubled by these drones. i mean, you have a law passed that we will have 6000 drones in the sky by 2020. that is a lot of drones. -- you seem to know a lot about this topic. why is that? caller: about the 10,000 rows in the sky by 2020 -- host: just in general. caller: pretty much, and me doing my studying, i come to when you have a court, a federal judge saying

that mr. obama on a legal leve l does not have to let american citizens know what is the reason or the legality of the drone strikes on americans on american soil, and protected mr. obama -- it is troubling. it is concerning because you are taking away our rights to know. we have a right to know anything and everything. -- funding -- our funding fathers gave us the right to question. host: thank you for calling in and sharing your views. floor on twitter -- we saw bush 's foreign-policy even though obama is president. "nd from the "washington post this morning -- on the irs, senior aides focus on shielding obama --

host: this is just part of the "washington post" article this

morning on that issue. a couple of more calls before our first guest comes out. there is an edgewater, maryland. republican. what are your thoughts? caller: i can see how it is helpful, however, i do have some concerns. i listened to some of the hearings. the patriot act has given our government unprecedented powers. the whole purpose of this was to go after the people associated with 9/11, and also to prevent future attacks. however, according to some of these hearings, it also disclosed that groups that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 are being targeted. they have not been a threat to the united states in the past and currently are not. some of these drone attacks on behalf of other governments were government asked us to assassinate certain people on behalf for them. what concerns me about it is very simple -- if we have a group that has internal conflict

with their government, and we go in killing their people, we are creating a backlash against the united states. i also think that there is the backlash with innocent people being killed. the example given on c-span was at the hearing where you heard a guy from yemen who is actually educated in the united states talking about how his village was pro-american, and when they did the drone strike there to kill one person, 12 people got killed, including pregnant women who he said we cannot even identify the dead bodies. everything is sacred. there is no policy, international policy, and i think that is a very dangerous precedent because we are doing what we want to do anyway because of the patriot act. if it is doing any good. i think it has backlash that i

think people have not really come prevented yet. thank you. , thank you,ght stare. this is the "guardian" out of london. the whole page is taken up with the suspect in the beheading of a social oh -- of a soldier over there -- you people will never be safe. this image is taken from a cell phone video. by the way, if you would like to suggest a topic for the "washington journal" to do on our show, send it in. you can send it via twitter, or you can send it in an e-mail, or you can post it on our facebook page. last week, we did a segment on the underground economy that was suggested by a viewer in massachusetts. i'm sorry, and vermont. to suggest alike topic, citizen on twitter @cspanwj, you can e-mail it to journal@c-span.org as well.

final call on drone policy comes from beverly in new york. caller: hi. i just want to say -- you read part of what mr. obama is going to change about the drones. i think that is good. i am glad he is coming on today to explain that and to also be decreasing and being more cautious with of these drones targets. they should really be no collateral damages. if they can be helped. the other thing i wanted to say, and i think mr. obama is doing a good job in light of the facts of the eight years of mr. bush. he is cleaning up mr. bush's mess, and it is probably going to take 50 years to do that. but the other thing i wanted to talk about is -- i don't think any of these groups, whether they are democratic, independent, republican, departed -- tea party -- none of them should get exempt and.

none. i blame the supreme court for all of this problem with these tax -- with the irs. , beverly inght east amherst, new york. we have two guests, two members of congress coming up. by the way, the president will 3e live at 2:00 p.m. on c-span with his counterterrorism speech from the national defense university. 2:00 p.m., c-span3 live. two members of congress coming up. the houses and a 9:00 :00 a.m., the weekend a little bit early. of massachusetts, and bob goodlatte after that. we will be right back. ♪ >> after president grover cleveland loses his bid for reelection in 1888, his wife tell the staff --

>> i want you to take good care of all of the furniture and ornaments in the house and not let any of them get lost or broken, for i want to find everything just as it is now when we come back again four years from today. >> and they did return to the white house, winning the election of 1892. michael francis cleveland as we --tinue hours series continue our series on the first lady's. what happened in the senate was notably for three consecutive years -- we do not even consider a budget resolution. i served on the budget committee for eight years. are years -- there when a budget resolution is not pass. ,ut three consecutive years the house and senate have not reconciled their differences. this is supposed to be done by april 15. when we file our taxes. so congress is required to pass a budget and complete that

process by april 15. but he re-are sort of languishing. it is no wonder everything has gotten so destroyed and out of whack -- sequestration, the automatic cuts. major debts piling. we have $16.8 trillion of national debt. senatorr republican olympia snowe on the current state of congressional gridlock. son a knight at 9:00 on afterwards, part of the three- day holiday weekend. this weekend on c-span2's book tv. >> "washington journal" continues -- us thisining representative niki tsongas, a democrat of massachusetts, a member of the armed services to many. -- services committee. a lot of topics i want to cover. i want to begin with where we started with our viewers on the president's drone policy. he is doing a speech today.

as a member of the armed services committee, what is your thinking on u.s. drone policy? guest: i, like many americans, have been very concerned about how we use our drones. i've seen it put to very good purpose when they are in an unmanned setting and they are able to circle around an area of conflict and feedback information that helps protect soldiers on the ground. but we have also seen the way they can use context and inflict harm, if not loss of life. so i think the president's speech -- i think the very least moving it out of the world of the caa and into the world of the armed services and the active-duty military will create the transparency that this needs so we can ask hard questions as we move forward. host: representative tsongas, you recently returned from afghanistan, your fifth or so trip over there. what is your biggest concern about the u.s. withdrawal policy? are you supportive of that, first of all.

guest: i absolutely supported. i have made five trips. my most recent one was over mother's day. in the last three trips i have team ofe been with a women members of congress. thankover mother's day to membersy female service who are over there doing a great job. i mother's day, it is difficult to be over there if you have children of any age the have not seen for quite a period of time. so we go there to learn more about their expenses, how they are contributing to our effort there. we also go with a focus on afghan women because i think one of ourgreat pluses engagement over there has been the advances made for women and young women as well as older women. and we have seen up. we went to a university in her rock -- a university at a city close to the iranian border.

we were the first congressional trip to go there. went to university where over 40% of the students are women. young women who are seeking to be educated, want to contribute to the life of their country. ,e met with women leaders women who have led to run the multitude of efforts, whether it is an government or outside of government, providing a particular service to women. we heard reports on the tremendous gains that have been made around women's health. so as we talk to these women, ,specially across the board young women participating in the university, women who are in a more leadership positions, concern that as we draw down, and we seek to push the karzai government to engage in a reconciliation process with the taliban, but those gains will be tied it away. that we know the taliban are

not ones to compromise on women's issues. so tremendous concern about it. they are wanting very much for us to continue to put those gains for women out in the forefront, to enter depomed efforts to make sure that -- injured diplomatic efforts to ensure that we are mindful. these women at this point do not want more. what they wanted the opportunity to fight for what they have, and to fight for continuous participation in the life of their government. there is an election coming up in 2014, and we heard around that's, that they want to be participants and want to be able to engage freely and go to vote and support those who they think will support their gains. on a multitude of fronts, we engageding us as diplomatically to be very forceful on women's rights as we continue to contribute to aid efforts, that we focus for much on supporting gains for women and girls. host: do you think they are

sustainable with the u.s. military not there yet go -- not there? guest: i think it remains very important as we continue to support a lot of our efforts there. very important. the other thing we did was we heard from general dunford who remains cautiously optimistic. you have to be mindful that the search was put in place so that we created a time and space to train afghans to defend their own country and create a police force that could create order in their communities. general dunford remains cautiously optimistic that they will be able to do that. 85% of the effort is now in the hands of the afghan national security forces. close to 100% of it will be filled by the summer. the summer is going to be a real test. or madedunford cautiously optimistic, but our

goal was actually to make sure that afghan women were part of this process, that the legitimacy of these forces for women in afghanistan are really depending upon women's participation. so meeting with the minister of defense -- there was a commitment on his part to continue to recruit women into the afghan national security forces. we have heard from afghan women how important it is that women be on the ground in their communities, hand-in-hand, protecting the gains because i think when it's absent in those police forces undermines their credibility and legitimacy. host: we have about an other 35 minutes or so with our guest at we are running put the numbers on the scene. if you would like to participate in our about several different congressional efforts, you can see the numbers there. representative niki tsongas as a representative from massachusetts. sticking with the armed services committee, what is the be safe act? guest: the be safe act is a

response to the storage of the sexual assault in the military. this is an issue i first became aware of as a newly elected member in the fall of 2007. we had a hearing in the armed services committee. i had been on the committee for perhaps a month at best. having just arrived in congress. the various services came forward to talking about their programs that they had put in place to fight sexual assault in the military. i was somewhat stunned by the hearing, to hear that this was as pervasive a problem as was suggested. egregiousout this incident, kilo, but i did not -- as a newly elected member, i do not aware -- i was unaware it was so much across the board. there was a wounded warriors luncheon on capitol hill. i went to thit. there were several women in the room, and i went over to speak with them about whether

particular ones were. after we moved past that, i said we just had this hearing on sexual assault. i said is it as pervasive an issue as this would suggest? and one of the women was a nurse -- she had been deployed in number of times to iraq and afghanistan. she had herself never been assaulted. she was in her mid to late 40's, and she said ma'am, i am more afraid of my own soldiers then i am of the enemy. to defend herself, she carried a knife in her waste to defend waist to defend herself if ever needed. i had to say it was a wake-up call for me. it was a story that really made real the hearing. from that point on, my office and i have taken a real interest, and we have worked with organizations that have engaged around this, and introduced legislation for several years called the strong act that began to address the many shortcomings and the way in which the military dealt with thiese crimes, in particular

creating legal counsel for victims, which the be safe act makes clearer and really puts the services -- attaches the services to do just that. we learned that if something had been assaulted, they often had to continue to serve with their assailants, often in the same units. felt tremendously threatened by that. there was a provision in a strong act that allowed for a request to transfer out of the units, and if that request was denied by the commander, to have a review of that decision within virtually the vast majority of those who had been assaulted are now able to transfer out of their unit. but the be safe act really continues to go a little further. we saw the outrageous case in which a general overturn a jury decision finding of guilty of sexual assault. a commander was empowered to overturn that decision, and he

did. it outraged anybody who saw that, especially those of us who have been closely watching the situation. so the be safe act would curtail the commander's authority -- it is called the convening of power -- the commander's authority to overturn a jury's decision in any instance of any serious offense, not just sexual assault, but any serious offense. restrict their authority to change sentencing, and it requires that they give a real -- a written explanation. at the very least, anybody convicted of a sexual assault would have to be dishonorably discharged from the military. that they could no longer continue to serve. you have to remove or the military as a profession. profession.tely a nec be held to professional standards of contact -- or conduct across the board. host: we want to introduce one more topic before we go to

calls. from your other committee -- u natural resources. [video clip] >> mr. speaker, i rise in support of this rule and the underlying legislation. let's be honest, this permit is five years old. the average time of authorizing the permits and these types of rods x is 18 to 24 months. enough for alice's by analysis. paralysis by analysis. some may say that we are being inpatient and we are rushing this through. 1700 days? this delay has taken longer than it took the greatest generation to win world war ii on both fronts. it is longer than it took lewis and clark to do their exploration of the louisiana purchase to oregon and back.

the keystone xl is a private infrastructure project with no government funds to create nongovernment jobs. by the way, 7 billion dollar infrastructure project -- 20,000 direct jobs along this route over a two-year period. ,ost: representative tsongas where do you stand on the xl pipeline? guest: despite his remarks, i think there are many questions that remain to be answered. it is a particularly dirty, heavy form of oil. if there is a still. very difficult to clean up. highly corrosive in the pipeline itself. creates a greater likelihood of a spill. i think there are questions that still need to be answered. we know that climate change is an issue that we continue to really have to struggle with. it is a generational issue. theies suggest that

refinery or the creation of tar sands will crude tribute greatly to additional climate change issues. i think it is an important issue we have to address. i think the impact on our national resources -- this pipeline is going across very important sources of water, whether it is one of our major aquifers, but also many private wells that this will transit across. i think the economic impact of a still, i think we thought off the coast of louisiana, that, yes, there are tremendous jobs created around the production of thered all of that, but are also economic interests that we have to remain mindful of. this will transit across ranchers, farmers, the tourism industry can be impacted should there be a spill him a so to there are still issues to be answered. this would essentially have deemed all of that dealt with but in just in this

other regulatory into the spirit it is not a way for us to govern. "ost: here is the "hill newspaper -- the house floats to override obama on keystone -- niki tsongas is our guest. the first call is from steve in naples, florida. caller: good morning and thank you for the show. i watch it every morning religiously. she said sheng -- has made them -- several trips to afghanistan and talk to a lot of educated women. have they shown any desire to be armed to go -- be armed? these women some i couldn't have been -- these women sound like they have been for centuries, so maybe we should give them a gun and teach them how to use them so they can defend themselves. the way. -- thank you.

guest: the only women i have seen of had a desire to be armed are the ones who are training to be just that. national defense academy, it is an academy modeled after west point, and met with women cadets there. they were a small number. it is a tremendous cultural shifts to involve women in military activities. but they were absolutely being trained to defend themselves and defend their country. overall effort to transition to the afghan national security forces. in another visit, i met with young women who were being trained to be helicopter pilots. again, so they can participate in the effort to defend their country. obviously, women who are being trained to be police officers. i did not hear from any of these women a desire to be armed in order to defend themselves. what they want to use are the instruments of government to protect the rights that they have gained.

host: and this tweet from jim -- i just have a very hard time believing our military is full of rapists and sexual predators. why now when that was not the facts before you go -- before? guest: we have to be very clear -- there are those who definitely have committed sexual assaults. whos often an individual commits more than one. but there are also many honorable people serving in our military who are deeply offended by the prevalence of this crime. ishink what we have to do distinguish between those who honorably served us, and there are so many, and we are so grateful for that, but we also know -- a recent hole showed almost a 35% increase in the incidence of sexual assault in the military. we had to take it seriously because it is a human issue. women serving,

obviously, but also impacts men. there are actually more men subject to sexual assault than women. since there are more men generally serving, the percentages are not as high. so this is corrosive to the military. it is corrosive to the current -- to the cohesion of the unit that is the underlying principle of military service. it impacts the readiness of our soldiers to meet the threats that they are tasked to do. so it is an issue that i and so many others have to take seriously. fortunately, the military itself is starting to do that. we saw the chairman of the joint steve -- joint chief of staff meeting with president obama who has now taken this on as well. i have met with the chiefs of staff of the different branches of the services. they recognize what a challenge it is, and they are committed to moving forward, but the reality is that requires a culture change. it is our job in congress to challenge the services to do

that and create legislation that does just that. host: niki tsongas is currently in her first -- her fourth term, a graduate of boston university law school. serves on the armed services and natural resources. a note here that your father survived the attack on pearl harbor. guest: he did. in fact, he went on to serve across the south pacific. he was an engineer, and he engineered runways across the south pacific so that as we were moving through, our plane could land. then he went on to a 20 year career in the air force after the army and the air force were divided. he went off into the air force. so i grew up on air force bases across this country and the world. i have tremendous respect for the services. i am the product of it. i am the product of the department of defense school. i grew up in that world. that is why i think it is so important to get this right. host: is that what sparked your interest in being on the armed

services in congress? guest: that among other things. in massachusetts, we do not have a lot of military installations at this point, but we have a number of companies, small and large, that we work with the defense department. i'm extraordinarily proud of the innovation. my district have a great tradition of service here it is multigenerational in nature. wherever i go, i meet people who are either serving, who have a family member serving, or have served over the generations. you point back to the civil war. general benjamin butler came from lowell, massachusetts. so a great tradition of service. my spirit having grown up in a service, as well. it is a great committee. it is one of the least partisan and congress could we are committed to producing a bill every year. we understand how important it is that we create and put in place the resources to protect our country and to protect those who are serving on our behalf. host: if the last name sounds

really, niki tsongas of the widow of paul tsongas, former senator of massachusetts and residents of canada of 1991. daniel is in indiana -- and presidential candidate of 1991. thank c- would like to span for not hanging up on me today. i want to enlighten people on the issue of drone strikes. specifically state that the only argument really coming out of this is how these four americans killed were still classified through customs as american citizens. if the founding fathers had had their way, they would have either exterminated them as traitors or capture them and treated them as such. e line wejust a fin have to find, and i'm not saying one being drawn by anyone.

guest: thank you for your call. i think what is important we have discussion about this before the fact that after-the- fact. the president's decision to transition to the effort to the military side of the equation, removing it from cia, creates the kind of transparency to have the very important discussion. host: a viewer sent in this tweet ban -- report in "thea washington times" about men being assaulted as well. guest: that is true. the absolute numbers show that more men are assaulted and women, but because women -- women are about 14% in the military and by 2025, we expect it will be about 25%, but because it is fewer than numbers it is a higher percentage of actual numbers show more men are assaulted than women.

an across-the-board effort, not just focused on women, absolutely not. all of these changes will be very important. the reality is, one of the things we have to do to change the culture is have more of those who have been assaulted come forward. and i have come to understand in the course of my dealing with this issue is there are many aspects to it. the us that -- the fact the crime itself takes place is a deep affront to those seeking to serve our country. it is a betrayal of the trust they have in the military that they seek to serve and in a country they hope to defend. the second issue is the way in which the command structure has dealt with this issue. too often the commanders are overseeing both the person who has been hurt, the survivor, as well as the assailants. there is an inherent conflict in it, but also too often commanders do not take these allegations seriously. they tended to ignore them, brush them under the rug.

so, they don't move forward, they don't say we are going to move forward and bring charges. that, again, is another betrayal of the trust that is so key to military service. then for those who do come forward, there is too often professional retaliation. those who come forward are more often drummed out of the service then those who have done the hard. and the way the uniform code of military justice, the way it deals with this. the recent case in which the commander was able to overturn a jury finding of guilt thing is an outrageous example of the kind of powers given to a commander. and so, we have got to focus on all four pieces in the legislation i am introducing with congressman turner, senator mccaskill, senator collins, is the first effort to change the commanding authority, the power in the course of seeking justice. host: mike turner is a republican from ohio.

do you see this legislation being fast tracked? an interest in leadership? >> we know it will be instituted in some version of the defense authorization bill. the armed services committee produces one piece of legislation and media and it incorporates a lot of policy decisions. we know this legislation will be incorporated in the house armed services bill. it would come through the military personnel subcommittee. yesterday we had the markup and it was in their pretty much in total. and senatorins mccaskill are introducing it on the senate side. that will be an effort to include it in their bill. and then we will go to cons -- conference and hash it out. i think the fact it is in our house side reflects strong bipartisan support for this effort and recognition that we have got to change the way in which the military is able to deal with these kinds. host: any idea when this legislation will hit the floor? guest: we are marking up the

bill in total the second week of june and then i think -- usually it is a pretty quick movement to bring it to the floor. we will pass it out of the house, i would guess, before the end of the summer at the very ,east weird host: minneapolis democrat. thanks. caller: thank you, c-span, and thank you for allowing me to speak it and thank you, representative, for being one. first, i want to talk about keystone. i am 65 years old. i want a job. i feel able to work. so, i want to know, is it a tit- for-tat thing going on? if we don't agree to the keystone, and -- is that why the republicans are not talking about other jobs in america? i don't want to move from minnesota. can the democrats or the republicans do about jobs here in america?

and one more point. my ex-husband was in vietnam. ,e talked about women vietnamese women being raped by military soldiers. i remember in the early 1970s there was all kinds of biracial children left behind that was not able to live -- they were killing those children. rape and assault have been going on a long time. it is just that now since it is our american soldier, women and men, it is happening to him and now we are talking about it. but before, he talked about, they did not care about the vietnamese women. host: sharon, thank you for coming -- calling in. representative tsongas? guest: rate is an unacceptable crime in any instance, absolutely. rap is an-

unacceptable crime in any instance. what we are focusing right now is soldier on soldier crime, american on a mac and crime, those coming into the service seeking to serve and nor should anyone expect they would be so egregiously harmed in any instance, especially not when you are in a professional environment and you have a culture that allows altogether too many of these crimes to take place within the context and profession of military service. so, our focus is that. but you are absolutely right, those crimes are outrageous in any instance, and as a country we need to, especially in our military context, repair and change the culture of a military that allows for these crimes come against whether our own or inside -- against somebody whose country we are having to be in. we've got to change the culture of the military.

and in terms of job creation, you are absolutely right. there is much work that we should be doing that we have not been doing. we have come a long way since the freefall in our economy that we all confronted. we see tremendous success is going forward. we see how our stock market has recovered. we see how the value of our homes have recovered. but there is still tremendous effort that needs to be made around job creation. and the keystone pipeline is not the panacea. there are important questions that have to be asked, because while there may be jobs created in creating the pipeline, it also has the potential to impact other jobs should there be a spill. for example, if you are a rancher and you have a tremendous spill on your land, it impacts your livelihood. if you are a farmer, it impacts your livelihood. if you are dependent on the tourism industry and you have a spill, it has an impact on your livelihood. and also the issue of global

warming has an impact on our economic well-being as well. there are a lot of considerations we have to fully vet. host: next call comes from steven from winham, connecticut. this military sex scandal is so reminiscent of the catholic church scandal. it is very disturbing. priests being shuffled around from parish to parish, these nco's and sergeants are being several -- shuffled around. i think it is time we take the power out of the leadership. andve faith that dempsey -- will get this job done and prosecute these guys in the most vigorous terms. doesn't raise the question of, is the military's capacity to police itself and

change itself. -- it does raise the question of the military's capacity to police and change itself. taking it out of the chain of command -- i do not rule it in or out, we simply have to get it right. the act that i introduced with congressman turner and introduced on the senate side by senator mccaskill and collins is the first effort to change the powers of the commanders authority. it is an important step forward to changing the culture and removing the commanders and limiting the commanders authority when these crimes occur. but actually, the legislation itself addresses not just sexual assault but any serious offense. so, the commander would no longer have the capacity to overturn a jury decision. the other really important issue is how we prevent predators from coming into the services. better filtere a

of identifying those who commit great harm, because there is a lot of research that has been done that shows that often people who sexually assault others, they do it many times over. so, we also have to have a better shelter of keeping those people out -- filter for keeping those people out of service and have in place tremendous training efforts that make those coming into the services the kind of respect to do one another. because sexual harassment is also an issue, and the kind of culture that encourages the kind of behavior that is not appropriate -- it is not appropriate in any instance and particularly not in a profession where you are tasked to defend our country. callerhe cost -- the also mention shuffling. have you seen instances where commanders are being reassigned without honesty? tost: i have not seen that date, but i think what we are going to see, we are going to

learn ever more as this becomes ever more visible. , we arers of congress only as good as the stories where he -- we hear. and it is the stories we have heard from survivors of sexual assault that had driven all that i have done and i think driven all what many have done in congress. i suspect you are going to hear additional stories as to the ways in which the prevalence of this crime is allowed for in the military services, and we will address it as we do. -- to get youru thoughts on two issues you are not directly involved with necessarily. of the irs investigation, the benghazi investigation, something you are more involved with, and the doj investigation about ap phone records. do you think -- are you happy with the way the house republicans are approaching those issues? well, you know, as a

democrat, one always has to support things that you think are appropriate when you are not in control but take exception when you think things are being sort of miss read or misused. issues of thethe irs, a lot of important questions have been raised. and we need to answer them. it is quite appropriate that the hearings going forward raise those questions and we get the important answers. the have to trust the neutrality of the irs. we all have to trust that. questions have been raised, and they need to be answered. i am the ranking member of the oversight and investigation committee in the house armed services committee. ranking member, the most senior democrat, the lead democrat. benghazi toring on address the department of defense response, the military response once the attacks began benghazi. we did not revisit anything new that the accountability review

board had taken a look at that had otherwise been vetted, but we got very thorough explanations of the response. essentially wanted the attack took place, there were two avenues of response. one was the people that we could send in to help support those that were on the ground and the kind of air assets, the airplanes or the unmanned aerial vehicles that could be sent to benghazi to assist in the effort. secret or top secret, much of it. that i think secretary gates got it right when he said had i been in that position i think i would have made the same decisions that our president, working with our secretary of defense and military leaders made. and i came away feeling the same way. given the short time period in which this took place and the availability of airplanes or other air assets as well as people, that we did

everything we could appropriately so in the context of the timeline. fournfortunately lost americans and our ambassador. host: what about the ap phone records? a case of zealous overreach and i think the administration is learning that. eldridge, iowa. you are the last call. caller: thanks. hello. , 12 years of think war and a lot of alcohol. andquit going to war missing these kids up -- messing these kids up. host: talking about sexual assault issue? a nightclubhol and with civilians, you still have problems. 12 years ofow on

being in a war, you got a little bit bigger problem. , pat.thank you guest: there is no denying the impacts of the wars, back-to- back -- not just back-to-back but overlaying one another. with an all volunteer army and the multiple complainants that have have been required with our service members had an extraordinary impact on those serving, whether it is through posttraumatic stress is order or traumatic brain injury and then the egregious physical injuries that so many have sustained. , we often do hear that alcohol is a computing factor. that may be the case. where i come back to all of this is this is a profession. it is a profession. yes, it is a unique profession, especially when you are deployed. you are living together as you are working together. but you have to always be mindful you are representing your country and you are serving in a very unique

institution that depends on the trust of one another. and as people seek to serve their country, they do not anticipate that they are going to be seriously harmed by their own. which, in and of itself, inflicts great injury, especially posttraumatic stress disorder. the issue i did not talk about, as i laid out of four pieces of all of this, it's really what happens as those who were assaulted transition to the va. a lot of issues as to how those crimes and the impact of those crimes on individuals are dealt with. the va has a lot of work to do. host: finally, before we let you go, are you satisfied with the federal response to the boston -- bombings? guest: i had so many come up to me and say that they were taken all theay in which different entities worked together and how the city and

the larger state just kind of supported the effort and did everything we could to find the perpetrators and just the unity of effort. in fact, i wear a band for two people for my district who were seriously injured. a mother who lost both of her legs and a daughter who was seriously hurt, and also sustained a serious car accident, so a terrible whammy. and others as well from the district. even though i am not in the boston area, we had many, many who were seriously impacted. secretary napolitano is coming up to massachusetts to talk about the homeland security side, what is being done. but i think the kind of unity of effort is something we all take pride in. i think there are questions to be remain, whether or not tamerlan could have been identified ahead of time. host: we have been talking to

representative niki tsongas, democrat from massachusetts. coming up next, the chair of the judiciary committee and the house, bob goodlatte, we will talk to him as well about a number of issues after this news update from c-span radio. .> thank you, peter more on sexual assault in the military from democrat gillibrand. on "the today show" the new york senator said repeated sexual assault in the military allow a altar to continue. addressing the latest case at west point where an army sergeant is charged with secretly taking pictures and video of at least a dozen people. -- dozen women. the senator said sexual assault should be reported outside the chain of command, directly to a military prosecutor, and victims need to know justice is possible. gillibrand is on the armed services committee. international stock markets are down this hour after japanese stocks suffered their biggest

loss since the tsunami. a number of reasons being blamed for the 7.3% fall in the nikkei includes unexpectedly weak chinese manufacturing figures and mixed messages from the united states federal reserve board. at head of the opening bell on wall street, dow futures are down about 120 points. the u.s. house takes up student loan interest rates this morning. the measure, expected to pass, would avoid a rate increase on new subsidized stafford loans. interest rates on those loans are set to double from 3.4% to 6.8% for new loans july 1. the parties want to avoid that, but there is disagreement as to how to do it. live house coverage begins at 9:00 a.m. eastern. watch gavel to gavel coverage on c-span. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. none morecollege -- meaningful than the education you received here.

you see, education is transformational. .t literally changes lives that is why people work so hard to become educated. and that is why education has always been the key to the american dream. the force that he races arbitrary divisions of race, class, and culture, and unlocks every person god-given potential. as john f. kennedy once said, all of us do not have equal talent him about all of us should have an equal opportunity to develop our talents. visitsy spring, c-span college and university campuses to your comments and beaches from leaders in politics, the arts, business,, and the finances. the next two weekends, you will hear stories and advice for the new graduating cast -- class. this weekend, from members of congress, including senators al franken and ted cruz and representatives james clyburn and paul ryan. "washington journal" continues.

bob: regular guest goodlatte is a republican of virginia and he is chair of the house judiciary committee. mr. goodlatte, if we could start with the issue of immigration am a moving through the senate. where does it stand in the house? guest: we have been working very hard on it in the house. several different approaches. first of all, the judiciary committee has held a number of hearings. first am a we started out with the subject, various aspects of immigration, and then hearings on specific bills we introduced. the legislative language of those bills. yesterday we held a hearing on it hasate bill as constituted coming out of the senate judiciary committee. in addition, since there are, i think, three members of the house that have practice immigration law prior to coming to congress -- myself, democrat from california and a republican from idaho them all on the judiciary committee, by the way

-- but most members do not have in-depth knowledge of immigration law. we have spent extensive time in the house holding briefings where we take members through the law and how it works and how different aspects of it are not working and listen to their ideas about how it can be improved. we so far have introduced three bills in the house of dealing with aspects of immigration law. the homeland security committee, which has jurisdiction over the border issues, has passed border security bill out of the committee and into the judiciary committee we introduced two bills. one dealing with agricultural guest workers and the other dealing with either a five, a program that is voluntary today would become mandatory -- soling with e-verify, people applying for jobs are able to do so and they have the necessary documentation to do

it in an electronic way that is much more efficient. the voluntary system is very well liked by the 500 thousand companies who use it today, so we think it should be applied to all. issa,congressman darrell chairman of the oversight and government reform committee and also member of the judiciary committee i and others will introduce a high skilled worker bill. right now ahe works companion bill to the homeland withrity bill dealing internal security, internal enforcement of our immigration laws. 35-40% of the people not -- they enter lawfully and simply overstayed their visa. so, the border security component does not address all ways in which illegal immigration comes about, and therefore other measures will be included in that bill.

most likely introduce right after recess. we also have in the house a group of eight members similar gange senate and they -- of 8, but they refused and asked her for the group of eight. iny announced an agreement principle and they are in the process of drafting that legislation now. .e are anxious to see we will continue with the regular order in the committee process, and most members of the house have been pleased with the nature and which we methodically looked at every aspect of immigration, and we will continue to do that in the hopes of getting a bipartisan bill that gets it right. we are concerned about aspects of the senate bill and that it not repeat the mistakes of 1986. the laste passed major immigration reform bill. that legislation granted a

pathway to citizenship. in fact, a very easy pathway to citizenship to about 3 million people and have the promise of a number of enforcement measures come including employer shanks they-- sanctions, but have been honored in the breach. i there not have been enforced or not been implemented. as a result, the problem with people unlawfully entering the country has grown exponentially rather than having them solved. we are determined to not make the mistake again. host: there has been chatter and the newspapers and editorial nots about the house coming up with a comprehensive bill like the senate did, but more piecemeal. guest: we certainly have taken what we caught a step-by-step approach, but we do want to address all three major areas. there are hundreds of issues, but the three major areas in immigration law are improving our legal immigration system so that it really works to grow

our economy, create jobs for americans and not lose out on opportunities, for example, which will will be reflected in issaill that congressman and i introduced today. people graduating from american universities who have come from around the world to study at the best universities and then leaving the united states to go back to their home countries and other countries to compete with us and create jobs there. we want them to stay here and create jobs in this country. of it.t aspect also, you got to make sure that, for example, agriculture -- a highly competitive international agriculture economy where food can be grown in every part of the world, we need to make sure that u.s. agriculture has the workers for these very tough and difficult jobs that they need, including the fact that after the 1986 law was passed, about one third of the agricultural workforce left the forms because they were able to work anywhere they wanted. if you have a program this time, the same thing would occur.

so, unlike 1986, we want to be ready for that if this does indeed take place, with a workable program so we make sure that american agriculture has the u.s. workers and temporary workers from outside the country as they are needed. the second area is enforcement of the law. as i say, both at the border e- verify, very important. and the third aspect is what kind of legal status can we provide to the millions of people who are not here lawfully. that status could be different for different people. being very all closely examined and considered as well. we think that in order to really have an immigration system that works for our country, works for our economy, all three of those areas need to be addressed. host: chairman goodlatte, what is the next step in the eric holder doj ap investigation? investigation is

of considerable concern. we had the attorney general before the judiciary committee on many subjects -- i don't know if people can type in "eric holder, i don't know" and find a youtube video to find out many different ways to say "i don't know" on a multitude of subjects. one thing he said it on was the ap issue, and he said as the basis, the fact he recused -- the of the decision subpoena, which many stated they believe is overbroad, including mukasey.ey -- a lot of information about a lot of phone calls made. not the content but numbers that were dialed. for a government to be slipping behind what these reporters have done.

is alwaysd that, it important when you are dealing with national security issues to make sure that you are actually theing the process all make sure that leaks do not occur when national security is being compromised. that is one of the issues, of course, in the ap matter so, the abm of the just -- the idea of the justice department looking into leaks is not a put -- inappropriate in itself but if you deal with it in an inappropriate way is a problem. they turned the matter over to, the deputy attorney general. the judiciary committee will be communicating with mr. cole, and we will be looking to hold hearings on this matter in the future as well. lots of questions. for newsevisions organizations to be notified

when a subpoena is being issued that affects them. i am sure that there are exceptions to that, it is hard to understand why there would need to be an exception here, he cut the records being sought are not held by the ap but being held by a telephone company. therefore, the organization, knowing it was taking place, not -- at least an initial view -- have surmised investigation. secondly, there are reports that the associated press contacted the administration a week before they used the news information regarding the matter in yemen that was the subject of the underlying leak investigation. clearly they were attempting to be cooperative with the administration and give them an opportunity to let them know why they should not have released that information. so, in this instance, certainly the administration has the right

to investigate leaks, but the congress and the american people and the associated press and other news organizations -- we also have a report of a fox news reporter having even more intense investigation taking place with regard to his reporting. all of these things are of concern to us because of the first amendment of the united states constitution. and the judiciary committee is the committee that has the responsibility of protecting our , dealing with constitutional amendments -- new ones offered but also the oversight of how the current mm it -- amendments to the constitution are being used by the administration and protected for the benefit of the people, including, in this case, of course, the first amendment freedom of the press. it is very, very important the press have the ability to do its job without intimidation, without disrupting --

disruption of their ability to develop sources in a legitimate way. it certainly happens at times news sources are developed in a legitimate ways that could compromise national security for other reasons that are inappropriate, and those should be investigated, but investigated properly. there were a lot of questions about why this agonist -- investigation was conducted the way it was. on youtube, eric holder "i don't know your go with this put together by the house judiciary -- guest: certainly was not. i am sure it was done by some interested viewer. as you know, youtube has lots of different things available. host: where is the trust factor when it comes to attorney general eric holder, between you and him? guest: certainly he is the attorney general of the united states, and we want him to successfully do his job. but there is a lot of question on the part of myself and a lot of members about whether he is doing that job effectively went on issue after issue, whether it

is fast and furious -- certainly not the first issue -- but the big first issue with regard to the conduct of the justice department and the related agencies in the justice department. and then you have issues related where he isters asked about questions and then simply doesn't know. but he is the chief law enforcement officer of the united states and he is supposed to know these things, and yet repeatedly we get a lack of answers from him. of course, with regard to fast and furious, he was pressed for documents. the documents were not provided. .he documents were subpoenaed he refused to supply them with a subpoena. the house of representatives has actually held him in contempt of congress, and the effort to get those documents persist but has dragged on for years. there is a lot of dissatisfaction with the

administration being about legitimate oversight questions that the congress has. and it is important that any attorney general of the united states understand that and be more communicative than this attorney general has been. host: somebody who tweets as "oversight of gop" -- guest: have we passed a bill in response to sandy hook? meaning the newtown matter? well, we certainly are looking very closely at this issue. the national instant check system, the system that was heavily debated in the senate and upon which they could not reach the votes necessary to pass legislation is up for reauthorization later this year. now, that could provide a basis for legislation. the instant check system will continue, whether reauthorized

or not, but there are problems with the national instant check system. the two biggest being the lack of enforcement of the law right now with regard to people who violated the instant check system now, and secondly, the need for the states to put more data into the system about people who have been convicted of crimes that would preclude them under the law from owning firearms or people who have mental health commitments. again, have been found by a judge, to be a danger of themselves or others and also can be precluded under the law from possessing a firearm. as you know, those are the two major areas of concern with regard to misuse of ire arms that result in tragedies like or just murders and other deaths that occur around the country. we are looking at it from the standpoint of what can be done to improve that system. we think the very first thing

that can be done does not require legislation, it requires the administration to enforce the law. in 2010, 70 6000 people -- 76,000 people went to purchase firearms either in gun stores or on the internet or at gun shows from federally licensed firearms dealers where all of them are required all the time to do an ,nstant check, background check and 76,000 people put false information on the forms. of those, the atf referred 4500 or slightly more than that to than 94 united states attorneys around the country. of those 4005 hundred referred, only 62 were prosecuted in 92 attorneys offices with thousands of assistant united states attorneys. so, the proposal in the senate to add additional requirements for additional instant checks

on not commercial gun transactions but on individuals selling a gun to another individual does not make a lot of sense, and it appears to many people it would impose a burden on law abiding citizens and would not be an additional check against people who are not lawfully entitled to own firearms because they are not enforcing the law that exists now. 25 minutesve about before the house comes in. our guest is bob goodlatte, chair of the house judiciary committee, republican of virginia. greg is a republican in kansas city, missouri. you're on the air. caller: good morning. for an investigation into the irs scandal. as bad as that's candle is, nobody has died from it. people died on 9/11 and countless members of congress -- there is a. review the paper on explosives -- host: when it comes to the irs issued, had he called for an

investigation? guest: we certainly have. just yesterday, a substantial number of members of the house , andany, including myself the investigations subcommittee chairman jim sensenbrenner signed a letter to the attorney general asking about conduct of this investigation, and in particular, to investigate thegations that the way matter has been characterized by the administration thus far as lower-level irs employees being the only ones involved, to investigate the fact there are reports that people outside of the irs and in the administration and in the higher levels of the irs knew about this selective targeting of conservative groups and tea party groups and others a long time ago. perhaps as long ago as three

years ago. and therefore, we want that to be included as part of this investigation. certainly want to get to the bottom of how this took place, but also want to know who knew about it, when they knew about it, why they did not disclose it to congress even though questions were asked that would suggest the appropriate answer would be, yes, this program is going on and is being conducted in this manner. the other thing that is really important to the judiciary committee and other members of congress with regard to all of these investigations is accountability. when very important that mistakes are made, people will be held accountable. the general public understands that. they know in their jobs in the private sector, if you make a serious mistake, there are consequences for doing that. oftentimes they get the sense that the administration -- not not just this administration but previous administrations and not make the effort to hold the people responsible accountable. youart, it may be because

hold a person accountable at one level, and they say why am i held accountable when i was told to do this by somebody higher up? that helps to unfold the entire investigation, to have real accountability, which the legislative branch of the government has a responsibility to do. we passed the laws that are becoming the law of the land him and we have a responsibility to check to see of those laws are being applied in the manner that was intended by the congress. and in this case, it appears they were not. i think it is a very serious question that people have about ,he fairness of the process when the internal revenue service target individuals or groups for investigation based upon first amendment free speech, based upon first amendment freedom of assembly, first amendment freedom to petition your government for address of grievance and does it in a way that would suggest

that they are trying to disadvantage or even pressure groups that they may not have sympathy for or agreement with. you've got to make sure that no matter who is running the irs, it is done in a neutral and fair manner. obviously our tax laws need to be properly administered and enforced. but they need to be done in a way that does not suggest they are being politicized. , utah.gden democratic line. prudence, good morning. caller: i am concerned about those people you mentioned, the high skilled people. our college graduates in the united states, many of them are working in fast food places and they are trying to get ahead, trying to find a job that has benefits and a good salary. it is very, very difficult. they are bringing in people from other countries not to harvest

crops but to take engineering jobs, whatever, all kinds of jobs that require high skilled, good learning, and good work in -- work ethic, all those good things. bringing them in, and they have the jobs that our college graduates need to have. tothere anything you can do give a little less protection to companies that are taking on their high skilled employees from other countries? host: got the point, prudence. thank you for calling in. guest: the caller makes a very good point. that is, as you write immigration law, you have to first respect the rights and job opportunities of people who are already lawfully resident in the united states, particularly american citizens. when you do this, you have to weigh that against the fact that

if companies can't get access to those workers from the u.s. workforce, then a couple of things happen. the companies don't grow, they don't create other jobs, or they move their work to other places around the world where there is -- places like india and china, an abundance of people who have a good quality education in science, technology, engineering, and math. that is the main focus of this high skilled area. and we want to have more u.s. graduates getting jobs in the sector. very, very important. but it is also important that we recognize if you don't have the workers that are needed when a company needs them, they could actually cost us a lot of jobs by moving their work to someplace else in the world, or they simply don't grow. when you hire a high-tech worker that allows a company to

produce a product in the united states, you are then, in most instances, creating more jobs for u.s. citizens around them. balance has to be the that is found. we don't want to have an unlimited number of people in this area. we don't want to have employers paying below market wages so that the jobs are less attractive to u.s. workers. that we also want to make sure that we have an immigration system that has the necessary number of workers to meet u.s. companies need. host: would you like to see that caps on removed from the high-tech visas? guest: i would not remove the caps. i think we need to have a limitation on it and we need to review where that h-1b wrote graham is used properly and where it is used improperly and fix the system. we make measures to do that in the legislation.

want to make sure that once we do have an h-1b worker, a graduate of an american university who we want to keep your, we want to make sure that they are able to transition from that h-1b and we have sufficient numbers of immigrant visas. if you look at other countries that have a shortage of them -- , you will find in countries like canada, the united kingdom, australia, the percentage of overall immigrant visas issued that are issued related to education, job offers, job skills, is in the 60%-70% range depending on the country. in the united states, only 12% of the 1.1 million green cards we issue each year and of the 12%, half of those are family members of that high skilled worker. the 1.1 six percent of million green cards go to any workers of any kind.

and we are just not -- not just talking about high skilled workers but workers who work in areas that may not be high skilled but a shortage of u.s. citizens to do the work. numbersing the right here is important, but also recognizing that other ,ountries are beating us out if you will, in recognizing the immigration system, when used correctly, can grow our economy and create jobs for u.s. citizens is something we think can be improved with immigration reform. host: bob goodlatte, currently in his 11th term, and part of his district includes roanoke, lynchburg, and serves as cochair of congressional internet caucus, chairman of the house republican high-tech working group. as chair a term or two of agriculture committee. if i remember correctly. and chair of the judiciary committee. akron, ohio. independent line. caller: how're you doing?

thanks for c-span. i wanted to piggyback on on the one caller about immigration. it is a topic that democrats, republicans, we all are concerned about it. i don't agree that much with republicans on most of their policy, but i hope they hold firm on this. o.e thing, to was it the 14th or 15th amendment? the whole idea of just becoming an american citizen because you stumbled over the border and were born in the united states. i know it is part of the constitution. we can't do anything about it. but, my god, can they look into that? one more question for you, representative. that the fact that came out, should there be riceology made to susan and why wasn't general petraeus called to testify?

i will hang up and listen to you. guest: i don't know whether there are plans to call general petraeus. that investigation is being primarily led by the oversight and government reform committee. interest inhave an that issue in the house judiciary committee because of the fact that the federal bureau of investigation, part of the justice department, is responsible for the investigation into what happened in benghazi and for the work to track down the terrorists who perpetrated these four murders. it is a terrible situation. there are still many questions to be asked and it is very apparent people in the administration were involved in making decisions about how they character arise -- characterize these events after they took place. also very strong concerns about why the request for more security ahead of time in that matter were not honored.

here we had a the ambassador based in the libyan capital tripoli but having to travel frequently to benghazi because that is whether rebels who had had been based before they overthrew the libyan government, and requests were made on a number of occasions for additional security and not provided. why that did not occur is important. and the secretary of state asking the question rhetorically in a hearing that she participated in not too long ago saying "why does it matter?" it matters a great deal because it is an invitation for more of these kinds of terrorist attacks. it is an invitation to people who are dedicated to our foreign service to not want to serve in these places around the world, not even want to serve in our foreign service. and it is something that needs to be addressed, and forcefully,

so we are assured a kind of security that was not provided there is being provided where it is needed and this sort of thing doesn't happen again. so, the investigation both before and after are, in my opinion, is very important. the whole issue i raised earlier, accountability. who is being held accountable for the mistakes that were made? had the un ambassador rice information that was not correct. what did she know about that information in terms of how it was prepared and how she presented it, we still do not know all the answers to that, so i think it is premature to say who was responsible and who was not responsible in the administration. but more work needs to be done in this matter. and i have every confidence that the five committees that are involved in working cooperatively to pursue this investigation will indeed continue to pursue the truth of the matter.

host: representative goodlatte, can you shed any light or the search for a new fbi director are? guest: i have heard probably the same rumors that you have. some members of congress have been mentioned. thei do not know what thoughts are in the administration regarding that. i also would say i think director mueller has done a good job. he was recruited to stay on for a longer period of time once already. is readyld me that he to go on and do other things in life. it was not bother me at all if he were kept on a little bit longer to make sure, if willing to do that, to make sure we do get somebody of the highest fulfill that very important role. it is very important from a law- enforcement sandpoint and very important from public trust in government standpoint. that you have somebody of great

law-enforcement skills and unimpeachable integrity. host: will your committee have a say or is it authentic? guest: it is always senate confirmation. the judiciary committee is always interested and follows a closely. we do not have confirmation authorities. --t: a viewer tweet in guest: well, i do not agree that the use of a facility outside the united states to hold foreign enemy combatants is a waste of money. has think that how this all been administered and the uncertainty created around it has certainly caused problems. and as you wind down the number of people being detained, at some point in time it would be appropriate to close the facility,, but the basic ifcept -- enemy combatants,

you had a war declared against the country and they were captured and in -- they would be held in a prisoner of war facility someplace, it is not an inappropriate thing to do for people who are captured as a part of the clear war on terror by extremist islamic organizations like al qaeda. so, that is appropriate. now, having said that, i also believe that if you are a united states citizen and you are arrested in the united states and accused of being a terrorist, that you should have available to you your full panoply of rights under the bill of rights and be tried in article three courts. the administration has applied that to all of the terrorists that they have apprehended recently, including some that they have captured outside the united states and who are not united states in essence, and i do not agree that they need to

be handled in the way as a united states citizen who is apprehended in the united states. to has happened on a couple of occasions. and both those instances, the individuals were indeed terrorist and ultimately they were treated properly, but they were detained without charges, without the various protections under the fourth and fifth amendments of our bill of , without those benefits, and i think that was wrong. we are slowly moving in the direction of correcting that through the amendments made to the national defense authorization act, but i don't think we are there yet. because even with the changes made last year, the u.s. listens were charged with being a terrorist -- each means they can be held, comparable to holding a prisoner of war in a war with another country -- we held indefinitely, they are not being afforded their rights to be confronted by their accuser, to be presumed innocent until

proven guilty, and so on. and if this occurs on a battlefield in afghanistan and they happen to be u.s. citizens, that is a different situation. but if they are arrested in the united states, they need to be charged under our laws and given the protections anyone has and would expect to have if they were charged with a crime, particularly those who are innocent and charged with a crime. host: just a few minutes left with our guests before the house of representatives comes into session. judy is a republican from hyattsville, maryland, in the suburbs. guest: nice and rainy -- caller: nice and rainy. if i were a diplomat right now, i would be attending my resignation to the presidency because quite obviously we are not attacking our diplomats. i do not know what happened in have beenbut i listening to the hearings. i listen to c-span all day long, right behind me at work. i am 69 years old and i have

never, ever, ever heard the kind both sides.from no one is interested in getting to the truth or the constitutionality of the irs, or what happened in benghazi. we had four people killed and everyone acts like, no big deal. the irs is taking personal information from people and taking their rights. no big deal because we are turning it into politics. from both that i see sides. i hear harry reid and i hear mitch mcconnell and they both get up and point the finger at the other assigned -- at the other side. in the meantime, i can guarantee you the people in sandy hook have not gotten support from the federal government or they have not done what they were supposed to do. and oklahoma is going to sit there for a long time. we could give 200 million dollars to egypt and fight endless wars and we cannot even

take care of our own people, and we aren't no longer a nation -- we are no longer a nation that lives under the rule of law. host: representative goodlatte? guest: certainly it is very important that we recognize these issues are important, from several standpoint. number one, holding people accountable who do not follow the law. sure thatly, making people who are responsible for upholding the law understand and respect the united states constitution, the bill of rights, the first amendment, and organizations that organize in order to protest the government, in order to petition the government, in order to be outspoken about issues related to the issues before the congress and the federal government as a whole. they have a right to know that they can do that and can have their first amendment freedoms protected. so, she is absolutely right some of the matter of the irs is of extreme importance and needs

to be investigated, and have the people who have perpetrated that be held accountable. similarly, as i mentioned earlier, regarding benghzi, it is very important we send the right message to foreign governments, to terrorists, and more important -- most importantly, that we send the right assets to people who are in our service who are putting their lives on the line as is so benghazi,parent in but in many countries in the world their security could be at risk for a variety of reasons and providing that security is vitally important. so there is a constructive good to holding the hearings and getting to the bottom of this if we can shine the light of what needs to be done on this process and hold accountable the people who did not get it right the first time. host: i don't know if you got a chance to see editor mitch mcconnell's op-ed in "the post."

"obama's culture of intimidation" is the headline. evidencehere is ample to suggest the culture of intimidation and which of the iris tactics was allowed to flourish beyond one agency or a few rogue employees. and he goes on to talk about the so-called disclose act, that it could be reintroduced, there is a must. what do you think of the disclose act? guest: i would have to see more about what he is writing about and the legislation he is talking about. but i would say that he is absolutely right that it cannot be tolerated that the instrumentalities of government to carry outssary the work of government that people expect not be done in a way that people -- are used to intimidate people. of course, that issue rests with all of these issues that we talk about, not just the irs but also the associated press issue and otherspress issue and.

we have a free society in this country and when government start using it to favor one person or another or suppress some one that is a major challenge to our freedoms, liberties, and congress has a duty to step up and pursue the truth wherever it leads. >> we of been talking to the chair of the house judiciary committee. we appreciate your time this morning. the house representative is about to come into session. i want to remind you one more time the president is making a speech on counterterrorism and the use of drones at the national defense university. it will be live at 2:00. now the house of representatives comes into session. thank you for being with us. house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., may 23, 2013. i hereby appoint the honorable

kevin yoder to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain. chaplain conroy: shall we pray. our father in heaven, we are eternally grateful for the opportunity to approach your thrown as we open this session of congress in prayer. we pray for your particular blessing on voting authority. please give them guidance. we understand and recognize the gravity of their responsibilities and the courage to be unwilling to compromise the integrity for any political advantage. lord, we have critical issues and we are exhausting our resources in this time of chaos

and confusion, we need your mercies and divine assistance as no other time in our nation's history. and you say if we acknowledge you in all your ways that you will direct our paths. your word gives us hope. if my people, which are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then i will hear from heaven. and forgive our sons and will heal their land. so, lord, at this time we are honestly appealing to thee in the name of jesus christ, our lord. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his pproval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the

gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: mr. speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule 1, i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor, please say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. ms. foxx: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from mac. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from rhode island, mr. cicilline. mr. cicilline: i ask our guests to please stand and join us in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg, is recognized for one minute. mr. walberg: thank you, mr.

speaker. pastor frank hampson jr. has been praying over his congregation at the church of god in michigan since 1967. but today it's an honor to have him praying over the u.s. house of representatives. back in michigan, pastor hampton has lived, worked and served the jackson community for over 45 years as a well-respected man of god. local business owners, elected officials and pastors from around the country seek his counsel on matters of faith and life itself. and i'm grateful for the opportunity to learn from his wisdom and to call him my friend. i first met pastor hampton in 2003 and admired him for his sincere faith and heart for service. his impact has been long and consistent whether in his church, community, the family

barbershop or his ministry to prisoners in the court system. pastor harchton's influence has extended -- hampton's influence has extended beyond the state in michigan, speaking in panama, honduras, haiti and jamaica. i sincerely appreciate pastor hampton's presence today and prayer.ghtful i hope he has many opportunities to share his faith and uphold this great country in prayer. may god bless you and all the work you do. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, for over 1,700 days, the administration has delayed the keystone x.l. pipeline application. according to a pew research poll, 2/3 of the american

people from both political parties support the project. last night there was a bipartisan vote to promote the pipeline from canada, america's best energy partner. the completion of the keystone x.l. pipeline will create 120,000 jobs and produce 830,000 barrels of oil a day, helping to grow our economy. two years ago i had the opportunity to visit alberta, canada, and i witnessed firsthand the canadian oil sands and positive impact that exploration has for american families. in south carolina's second congressional district, companies like michelin tire corporation of lexington and m.t.u. detroit diesel of akin county, will create jobs due to keystone's production. as the american people and a bipartisan congress support it, let's create jobs and build the keystone pipeline. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. our sympathy to our british allies in this war who were cowardly attacked at the royal

artillery barracks in london yesterday. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair will entertain five further requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? mr. cicilline: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for one minute. mr. cicilline: mr. speaker, i rise today to express my deepest sympathies for the victims of this week's tornado in moore, oklahoma, and the surrounding area. i want to especially may my respects to congressman tom cole and james lankford and their constituents as they begin the difficult work of rebuilding their community after this disaster. all of those mourn today for the 24 individuals who were killed, including nine children, seven of whom died in their local elementary school. our thoughts and prayers remain with them and their families. we ask how so many american lives could be taken so quickly, but as we have in past

through other natural disasters, our country will get through this difficult time, confident in our capacity to persevere through any trial and committed to doing all that we can to help each other. if the spirit of america, one nation, indivisible, means anything at all, it means we will come together and help oklahomans during this difficult time. i offer my thoughts and prayers to the people of oklahoma. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from south dakota eek recognition? mrs. noem: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. mrs. noem: i rise in support of passing a five-year farm bill. the house agriculture committee acted last week to pass a bipartisan farm bill by a vote of 36-10. it saves nearly $40 billion and makes substantial reforms to the food stamps programs and farm programs. it eliminates direct payments and consolidates many of the

conservation programs and through this it saves money and promotes a strong safety net that is accountable to american taxpayers. we know that the ag and community will take cuts given our nation's fiscal situation, but we need to continue to support good policies that support our ability to grow our own food in this country. the farm bill we passed out of the committee represents the first reforms to the food stamp program since 1996. we put a lot of work into this reform and making sure the money goes exactly where it's needed. it closes loopholes and cracks down on waste, fraud and abuse. the reforms we make makes sure we keep integrity in the program. it makes sure assistance goes to those who need it the most. i believe we need to hold the federal government accountable for the taxpayers. our number one industry in south dakota's agriculture, and i'm proud of the families in my state who are dedicated to growing our food. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition?

ms. wilson: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady from florida is recognized for one minute. , this son: mr. speaker week the class of 2013 graduates from college. this congress is offering them a terrible graduation present. the bill we're voting on today would increase the long-term cost of student loans in order to pay for a budget deficit that college students did not create. but worse, this congress is doing absolutely nothing to address the core challenge in their lives -- jobs, jobs, jobs. the class of 2013 is entering the most difficult job market of any graduating class in memory. many who have the good fortune to receive jobs will not be

using their university-level skills or earning a living wage. has been 872 days since i arrived in congress, and not one vote on jobs. mr. speaker, for the sake of the class of 2013, i urge you to bring the american jobs act to the floor for a vote. it deserves a vote. our mantra should be jobs, jobs, jobs. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. as house republicans continue to get to the bottom of what happened last september in benghazi, it's important to bear in mind how events around the world affects things like

your family's gas bill here at home. we import oil here at home. it's a natural fact of our global economy. but considering how volatile things can get elsewhere in the world, wouldn't it be a good idea to develop as much energy as we can right here at home? you'd think that would be a commonsense idea, but apparently it hasn't occurred to the democrats who run washington. the keystone x.l. pipeline, for instance, would be able to transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day. that's about half the oil the u.s. imports from the middle east. the more energy we can produce right here in america, the more jobs and more secure future we create. it's time for the president to approve this pipeline. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i rise to ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. bera: mr. speaker, i rise in support of affordable loans

for all students. i could afford to go because of federally funded student loans. my country made an investment in me and we need to make that same investment in the next generation of students. yesterday, i offered an amendment to the rules committee and they rejected it. this amendment would have made student loans more affordable for today's students. that's what we have to do, invest in the next generation. unfortunately, the bill that is coming to the floor today is going to make college less affordable for the next generation. we must make education more accessible. vote no on the making college more expensive act. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise in

support of h.r. 1910, the bipartisan foreign manufacturers legal accountability act, which i've introduced this term with representative mike turner of ohio. mr. cartwright: this bill will help level the playing field for american manufacturers and retailers and protect american consumers. current law allows foreign companies selling defective products in the united states to dodge service of process, and they do. when a foreign company does that, it puts all of the burden on american retailers to account for any harm that is caused because of the defective product. that is not fair to american companies and it's not fair to american citizens. this bill streamlines service rules so foreign companies selling products here in america can be served with process here in america. mr. speaker, i urge the members to support h.r. 1910. let's make sure that everyone

benefiting from the american marketplace plays by american rules. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> i seek unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady from california is recognized for one minute. . mrs. napolitano: thank you, miss nope klan may is mental health month. it's an opportunity to encourage others to get help, to recognize the symptoms and warning signs of mental health issues. there is a lot of stigma. we must accept it as an illness. expand the mental health services and give it the parity needed because it does not know boundaries. it affects everybody and every segment of our community. it is all right. it's ok to ask for help and learn to recognize the symptoms, to learn about the service providers in your area. we must expand more mental health services to our community. we need them for the military

because one in five suffer from ptsd. youth, suicide, the third leading cause of death. second for college students. school-based mental health services are greatly needed for early intervention. minority communities, native americans, highest ethnicity for suicide. mental health services must be provide the in languages also. thank you to the mental health professionals of 500,000 licenses, certified professional counselors that work for us throughout the united states. thank you, president obama, first to declare mental health month. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of h.r. 1911, the smarter solutions for student act. ever since 2006 student loan interest rates have been set by congress through legislation.

mrs. ellmers: a loft us remember about a yearing a we were affected by the artificially low interest rates that were ready to expire, but instepped of finding a viable solution, congress temporarily extended the rates and put off a permanent decision for another year. now here we are again, and if we do nothing we'll be here in the same exact place again with the fight again at an expense of our college students. congress should not be in the business of setting interest rates. in h.r. 1911 fixes this problem and prevents congress from playing political games with our young americans' future. the college experience has always been a large part of the american dream. we want the best for our children. we want them to have the opportunity to pursue a college education and create a better life for themselves. we owe it to our younger generation. we owe it to those high school seniors. and i believe that this bill will take care of that issue. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: mr. speaker, by direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 232, and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 28, house resolution 232. resolved, that upon the adoption of this resolution the -- it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill h.r. 1911, to amend the higher education act of 1965 to establish interest rates for new loans made on or after july 1, 2013. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on education and the work force, now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 113-12, shall be considered as

adopted. the bill as amended shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill as amended are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill as amended, and on any further amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on education and the work force. and two, one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section 2, in the engrossment of the h.r. 1911, the clerk shall, a, await the disposition of h.r. 1949. b, add the text of h.r. 1949 as passed by the house as new matter at the end of h.r. 1911. c, conform the title of h.r. 1911 to reflect the addition of the text of h.r. 1949, as passed

by the house, to the engrossment. d, assign appropriate designations to provisions within the engrossment. and e, conform cross-references and provisions for short titles within the engrossment. section 3, on any legislative day during the period from may 24, 2013, through may 31, 2013, a, the journal of the proceedings of the previous day shall be considered as approved, and b, the chair may at any time declare the house adjourned to meet at a date and time within the limits of clause 4, section 5, article 1 of the constitution to be announced by the chair in declaring the adjournment. section 4, the speaker may appoint members to perform the duties of the chair for the duration of the period addressed by section 3 of this resolution as though under clause 8-a of rule 1. section 5. the committee on appropriations may at any time before 6:00 p.m.

on wednesday, may 29, 2013, file privileged reports to accompany measures making appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2014. section 6, the committee on agriculture may at any time before 6:00 p.m. on wednesday, may 29, 2013, file a report to accompany h.r. 1947. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized for one hour. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. for the purpose of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from new york, ms. slaughter, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: house resolution 232 provides for a closed rule

providing for consideration of h.r. 1911, the smarter solutions for students act. mr. speaker, as many of us know on july 1, today's 3.4% subsidized stafford loan interest rate is set to double to 6.8% for millions of current students. all because elected officials made a promise they couldn't afford to keep for the long haul. student borrowers shouldn't have to ride the roller coaster of political largess wondering every year whether congress will intervene in time to keep their student loan rates low. and taxpayers shouldn't be expected to foot the bill whenever members of congress promise more than they can deliver. for the sake of students, families, and taxpayers, before july 1 we need to move our federal student loan programs away from politics. student loan rates should not be subject to the whims of washington or seized as bargaining chips. the smarter solutions for students act will remove

politics' uncertainty and confusion from the rate-setting equation, and instead anchor student loan interest rate on the 10-year treasury note. not just for four years, but for good. by tying rates to the market, the smarter solutions for students act establishes a predictable rate for loan calculation insulated from the politics and posturing of washington. house republicans aren't alone in finding the answer for predictibility in the market. president obama offered a similar market-based interest rate plan in his 2014 budget proposal, and some of my colleagues across the aisle have voiced openness to utilizing the markets to set interest rates as well. in developing this legislation, the committee has attempted to build on this common ground and work in good faith with the administration to improve the smarter solutions for students act and get it to the president's desk by july 1.

students families, and taxpayers deserve a long-term solution not more can kicking from washington. the smarter solutions for students act puts an end to the temporary fixes and campaign promises that have failed to deliver the best rates to students. this legislation offers predictibility, simplicity, and the ability for students to take advantage of low rates even after graduation. a need particularly acute in today's jobless economy. the american people deserve the clarity, certainty, and protection the smarter solutions for students act offers. i urge my colleagues to vote for the rule and the underlying bill. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: good morning, mr. speaker. i thank the gentlelady from north carolina for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. and i yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr. speaker. on july 1, interest rates on federally subsidized stafford student loans will double from 3.4% to 6.8%. at a time as everybody said this morning when job prospects for students remain few and far between, we must not or should not let student loan interest rates rise. that's why it's so disappointing that instead of helping the college students, the majority is doing go nowhere legislation because the senate will not take this up. it would actually increase loan costs for the nation's students. according to the nonpartisan congressional research service, a student who borrows the maximum subsidized stafford loans for each of the next four years would actually pay $1,056 more under the majority's plan than they would if congress failed to act and interest rates doubled.

and that's a rather sobering idea. this is just the latest example of putting politics ahead of the american people. as we speak, the majority's preventing a budget from being finalized even though they have been calling for a budget for years. currently both house and senate have passed the budget resolutions, which means the only step left, and everybody knows how a bill is passed knows, this the only step left is to have a conference committee to finalize the conference report. but the majority of the house refuses to appoint conferees and begin the conference process. now, why is the majority suddenly abandoning their quest to produce a budget? is it because the desire for budget is nothing more than to make political points? it is clear the majority's consistently choosing to put political interest before the welfare of the nation. even if it means american people

will and are suffering. this obstructionism must come to an end, and i urge my colleagues once again to reject today's rule and the underlying legislation that will never go past the house so that we can get busy solving the american student loan debt crisis in a bipartisan way. let's protect our nation's students from a doubling of student loan interest rates and work together to craft a solution that will end the growing mountain of student debt and ensure college is more affordable for our nation's students, our nation's future depends on it. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. it's important to remember how we landed in this predicament to begin with. why we now facing the student loan interest rate cliff? in a push to win votes during the 2006 campaign cycle,

democrats pledge to cut student loan interest rates in half across the board permanently. after gaining control of congress in 2007, they realized this campaign promise was far too expensive. instead, they championed legislation to phase down gradually the interest rate on one type of federal student loan, subsidized stafford loans made to undergraduates, from .8% to 3.4% over four years. once the law expired in 2012, the interest rates would jump back up to 6.8%. instead of working with republicans on responsible solutions that would help make higher education more affordable for students in the long run, the democrat congress chose to make false promises to borrowers and kick the can down the road. democrats had an opportunity to fix this problem. in 2009 they passed the student

aid and fiscal responsibility act which produced large budgetary savings by eliminating the private sector loan program. saving should be -- savings should be in quotation marks, mr. speaker. instead of making good on their campaign promises of lower student loan interest rates, democrats spent all of the funds on other projects, including siphoning $8 billion from federal student aid programs to pay for obamacare. it's time for a long-term solution that gets politicians out of the business of setting student loan interest rates. that's why republicans approved a one-year extension of the 3.4% interest rate last year to allow time to work on a comprehensive solution, and the smarter solutions for students act is the result of our efforts. republicans and democrats should come togethering to pass this legislation and ensure students and families don't have to worry

about politicians setting arbitrary interest rates or kicking the can down the road for years to come. and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i am pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from california, the ranking member of the committee on education and work force, mr. miller. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. . without objection. mr. miller: i thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for her work on this rule last night in the committee. as already been said, a little more than a month interest rate for millions of the neediest students will double from 6.8 -- to 6.8% from the current 3.4%. the majority put forth a bill is worse than if the congress does nothing. think about it. if the congress does nothing, the interest rates go from 3.4% from those most in need of the

student loan, they will jump on july 1 to 6.8%. we're trying to avoid that because we know what that means to students who have to borrow money and families who have to borrow money to try to pay for their college education. what's the remedy of the republicans? the remedy of the republicans is to do something that is worse than letting the interest rates double. understand that. they made a choice that's worse than if the interest rates double. it's no wonder that beyond the republican caucus it's very hard to find anybody who is supporting this legislation. and in fact yesterday, the president said if this bill was sent to his desk, i hope it will not be, but if this bill is sent to his desk he will veto it. why will he do that? it is clear that this will add $4 billion to the debt of our students who members of

congress lament are so deeply in debt because of the money they have to borrow to go to education. it's not necessarily a choice for students or families if you want to get a college education. but why would you add $4 billion onto the backs of these students and their families? now, the majority had a number of alternatives last night in the rules committee. mr. courtney went there and said we'll pay for, we'll raise additional revenues to keep it at 3.4%, and then the education and labor committee of this house can do its job which is to re-authorize the higher education act and we can put in place a long-term program for helping families finance the education -- ms. slaughter: i yield two more fins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. miller: and we have to do something about the state support and the cost of college at the institutional level. but they turned mr. courtney down. i offered the obama amendment to have that made in order, the legislation by president obama,

which actually saves students about $30 billion in interest rates over the next six years. saves students and families over $30 billion. they wouldn't make that amendment in order. when mr. heck of nevada came before them and said, why don't we do like the market does, if you pay your loan on time for four years we'll provide you an incentive to be a good payer of your loan. important to the treasury. important to the student's credit rating. let's try that. they turned mr. heck down. mr. rice came before the committee. the gentleman from south carolina. said he would like to reduce the interest rates. he understands what students and families are struggling with. they turned him down. they turned down every attempt to try to help students and families. i appreciate people talk about going through the recession. i tell you for a lot of middle-income pam lease, they are still going through the

recession. hey -- recession or no recession, their kids are graduating from high school and want to go to congress. what the hell is this congress doing making it difficult for those kids to go to college? i hope on a bipartisan basis we would reject this effort and we would go to work on legislation that is long term, that's in the interest of the students and stop crushing the aspirations of these families and these students which this legislation does. it should be rejected. this is using the market to crush these families by extracting billions of additional dollars off of their school loans. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, in my career before coming to congress i was

a director of an upper bound special services program. i was an advisor for students at appalachian state university. i was president of a college. mr. speaker, all of my life i have devoted my time to helping students, particularly disadvantaged students who wanted to go to college, who wanted to do the same kind of thing i did as a disadvantaged person and that is get a great education and use that education to better my life. i am offended that my colleagues would say that what i want to do is to stop people from going to college or to hinder them in any way from achieving the american dream. that -- my whole goal has been all my life to help other people, particularly young people, and i believe my experience shows that.

so mr. speaker, that's not what this bill is about. this bill is about taking away the arbitrary control of members of congress who think of themselves as smarter than everybody else in the world and allow the market to work. mr. speaker, the current federal loan program is broken. an overwhelming majority of students are stuck with interest rates on loans that do not match the current low interest rate environment because of failed democrat campaign promises to cut student loan interest rates in half permanently. these students are also often confused about why most of their federal loans are fixed at nearly 7% when the market rate is much lower and question why each type of student loan has a different rate. to put it simply, student borrowers are getting a raw deal and they know it. under the legislation, student

loan interest rates would reset once a year and move with the market, much like they did from 1992 to 2006. this bill is the only viable plan on the table that is fiscally responsible, helps students and protects taxpayers. we should pass this bill immediately. according to the congressional budget office, the proposal does not cost any additional revenue to implement over the next five or 10 years. h.r. 1911 will provide stability and certainty for students making decisions about how to finance their postsecondary education. they will be assured year after year that the interest rate on their student loans will be similar to market conditions, and they won't have to wonder whether congress is going to make arbitrary changes to interest rates. the bill offers students the ability to take advantage of interest rates when they're low and protects them with

affordable caps in high rate environments. the bill continues current law where students have the option to consolidate their loans after graduation and lock in a fixed interest rate for the life of the loan. mr. speaker, these are commonsense provisions that will benefit student borrowers greatly. the legislation also ensures students can continue to take advantage of a number of generous federal repayment options and debt management programs available to help those experiencing difficulty repaying their loans. for example, students can enter one of the income base repayment plans that caps their monthly payments at affordable levels and provides forgiveness after 20 or 25 years. for students in the public sector, the program allows loan forgiveness after 10 years. the smarter solutions for students act is a long-term comprehensive solution that gets washington politicians out of setting interest rates on federal loans and will better

serve the interest of students. we should pass this rule and the underlying bill now. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. butterfield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. butterfield: i thank the gentlelady for yielding time and thank her for her leadership on this issue and here in the congress. mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to the rule for h.r. 1911. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this rule to prevent this flawed legislation from moving forward. we have a student loan debt crisis to be sure, but this is not the solution. a free market approach will not solve this problem, and mr. miller was so accurate in his statement just a moment ago. for my constituents in eastern north carolina, paying for higher education has never been more difficult. i represent a very low-income district, one in four people in

my district lives below the poverty level. while the economy is recovering, my region's 8.9% unemployment rate remains higher than the national average. at the same time, cost to attend college and colleges and universities have been steadily increasing. he cost to attend college is 1,100% more expensive than it was 30 years. access to affordable student aid can be the difference between a person attending college or not. spite strong opposition, want icans -- democrats to keep interest rates at 3.4% for stafford loans. if that doubles they will be saddled with $1,000 in additional debt. once again, the rates are set to double on july 1 unless we act. however, i urge my colleagues

to oppose this bill and this misguided approach. this legislation would tie loan interest rates to the 10-year treasury note but require that rates adjust each year. that variability, mr. speaker, will lead to higher interest rates and increase the debt our students face. in fact, the nonpartisan congressional research service indicates that student will pay more, will pay more than if interest rates were to double. mr. miller was absolutely correct in that assertion. that's right, passing this rule and this bill would be worse than doing nothing at all. this bill is a step in the wrong direction and will saddle students and families with unnecessary debt. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. during the 2006 election cycle, democrats made student borrowers a promise they did not keep. as a result, interest rates on student loans are set to double in a matter of weeks. the smarter solutions for

students act will provide student borrowers with the certainty and stability they need to finance their education. today's graduates are facing severe economic headwinds that make finding a job, repaying student loans and starting a family extremely difficult. these students want nothing more than the opportunity to earn their own success. that's the american dream. but for many of them, that dream seems hopelessly out of reach. we can do better, mr. speaker. the overall unemployment rate is 7.5%, hardly better than the day president obama took office. 1 million americans are unemployed and anxious to get back to work. -- 12 million americans are unemployed and anxious to get back to work. according to the joint economic committee, the slight decline in the unemployment rate is largely a mirage created by the declining labor force participation. if the labor force participation rate had not

declined since january, 2009, the unemployment rate will be 10.9% instead of 7.5%. as we all know, this is well above the officially reported rate and the stimulus promise of 5.1%. according to the burrow of labor statistics, the -- bureau of labor statistics, the number of unvoluntary part-time workers increased to 7.9 million. these are people working part time because their hours were cut back or unable to find a full-time job. there were 835,000 so-called discouraged workers in april alone. discouraged workers are those persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available before them, end quote. mr. speaker, these people aren't just jobless. they're hopeless and they deserve better. it's time to get america working again. but the failed policies of

president obama and senate democrats, higher taxes, more spending and bigger government are designed to continue to fail to create jobs or spur economic growth. the effects of president obama's runaway spending, spiraling deficits and mounting debt are being felt by every american. when president obama took office, there were 31.9 million americans using food stamps. today 47.3 million americans use food stamps. that's an increase of 15.4 million people. today, 15% of the entire u.s. population receives food stamp assistance. that is by far the largest number in history. mr. speaker, the policies of this administration are taking us in the wrong direction. the republicans are focused on creating jobs and making things better for all americans, and

we need to pay attention to those policies. we can pass this rule, pass this bill and get us going in the right direction for college students. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentlewoman from washington state. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from washington is recognized for one minute. ms. delbene: one of my top priorities is to ensure all students have the opportunity to get a high quality education and acquire the skills needed to compete in the 21st century economy. i know personally how important this is. when i was young, my father lost his job and my parents never got back on track financially. but thanks to student loans and financial aid, i was able to get a great education and build a

successful career as a businesswoman and entrepreneur. i'm very disappointed that the proposal we are considering today makes college more expensive. if we did nothing and let interest rates double in july, we would actually save students more money in the future than if we pass the underlying bill. it's incredibly disappointing that in our work to make college more affordable, this bill instead makes the problem worse. i urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this rule so we can work together on a long-term solution that supports our students and their families. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. in my last comments i talked about statistics and the effect of the policies of this administration. these statistics ultimately say the same thing. the obama economy is making life more difficult for all americans, especially young people. fortunately house republicans have a plan to restore economic

growth and spur job creation so that graduating students can find employment. job creators are being stymied by mountains of regulatory red tape, crippling tax rates, perplexing tax code, needlessly high energy prices, and rampant uncertainty caused by the president's failed leadership. mr. speaker, there is a better way. house republicans are hard at work passing legislation to help grow the economy and create jobs. our goal is to tear down the barriers to job creation and unleash the power of american ingenuity so that today's graduates can prosper and succeed and achieve the american dream. as part of this plan we are working diligently to make life easier for student borrowers, cut job-killing red tape that costs small businesses $10,585 per employee each year, reduce gas prices, and create jobs by producing more american energy,

which is important since every penny increase per gallon of gas costs consumers $4 million per day. simply filing a job-killing tax code that costs americans $168 billion in 2010 just to comply, prevent job-killing tax hikes on small businesses, and reduce uncertainty by tackling the debt crisis with responsible spending cuts. the republican plan will demolish washington's self-made roadblocks to prosperity and put american job creators back on offense. the trick to growing our economy is getting politicians out of the way and letting american workers and entrepreneurs do what they do best. create shared prosperity through freedom and innovation. the smarter solutions for students act is an important part of this plan. i urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i'm

pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from florida, ms. castor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida is recognized for two minutes. ms. castor: i thank my colleague, the ranking member of the rules committee, for yielding the time and for being a consistent voice on behalf of families and students across america. mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to the republicans' making college more expensive act and the rule. i rise on behalf of students all across america, particularly back home in florida and in the tampa bay area. mr. speaker, we know that a college education is key to success in life. and that the rising cost of attending college can be an impediment to students' ability to get into the classroom and get the corresponds that they need. about 10 -- courses that they need. about 10 days ago i was at tampa's robinson high school talking with graduating seniors, and they implored me to please stand up for them and be a voice

because they see the direct connection on the money that their feaments have to spend -- families have to spend and on their ability to attend college. that is why this republican making college more expensive act would be so detrimental to the future of our country and to those families and students that really want to get ahead in life. for example, the g.o.p.'s bill is projected to nearly double student loans by 2016, and by the time next year's freshmen graduate and start repaying their loans in 2017, the interest rate is expected to more than double beyond today's current rate. so i think about the 34,000 students in my district that rely on loans whether their at hillsburg community college, the university of south florida, university of tampa, wherever, this congress has got to stand up for families and students for a change. so i urge my republican friends

to cross over and join us and to block the student loan increase that the republican leadership is proposing, side with students and families, oppose the rule and oppose the bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i'll reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. . holt: mr. speaker, i thank the gentlelady from new york, a good friend, and i rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill. this comes down to an important question of american domestic policy. how important is it to us as a country to make college possible and accessible for students so they can improve their lives and improve our country? some of the great historic moments of american polcy, the

creation of the land grant college, the g.i. bill, providing student loans were directed toward increasing access to higher education. and today the house will vote on a bill that would reverse decades of progress. it would in effect transform the federal government into a greedy wall street bank. charging students punitive and wildly variable interest rates while banking billions in profits. yes. the government would reap profits derived from students and recent students. they see the authors of this bill as -- they see this as government revenue i stead of collecting taxes -- instead of collecting taxes, they do it through a back door trying to pay down the deficit on the backs of students. today we have a choice. do we make college more expensive for our low-income and middle class students? for me the answer, clear answer is no. it's wrong, it's shortsighted. it's not right for students.

it's not right for families. it's not right for our economy. the rules committee could have given us a bill to lock in low rates for student loans. in the national interest not to collect interest from students. but instead they want to balance the budget on the backs of students and recent students. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. my colleague is aqusing -- accusing republicans of increasing taxes on students. that is a laughable accusation, especially when you look at the number proposed tax increases included in the democrat budget resolution. it's almost as disingenuous as they call for 10-year savings generated by the underlying bill to higher education. after all, in 2010 house democrats passed the student aid

and fiscal responsibility act, which included language that put $13 billion in savings towards deficit reduction. in the final version of safra, democrats siphoned approximately $9 billion in the $19 billion in savings to pay for obamacare. the rest of those savings went to deficit reduction. the smarter solutions for students act is a fiscally responsible plan that generates a small amount of savings based on c.b.o. estimates. it stabilizes federal loan programs for future generations of students and gets washington out of the business of setting student loan interest rates. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield two meant to the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas is recognized for two minutes. ms. jackson lee: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without

objection. the gentlelady is recognized. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentlelady from new york and gentlelady from north carolina. i thank the gentlelady from new york for her persistent and i hip on this issue, rise today to ask a question how you can have a legislation that sounds positive but in actuality puts the situation in america upside-down. first let me tell you how frustrated americans are as they see the drip, drip, dripping of the sequester. i join the gentlelady in her frustration of why we have not gone to budget reconciliation. i just want to mention the pathway of education so that we can see that families are being pounded upon. sequestration is causing 70,000 children to lose head start and early head start, and unfortunately 950,000 military children will lose teachers. i live in the state where we have a lot of military bases. so when i rise today to oppose

h.r. 1911, i rise with a high degree of overwhelming frustration for the people who live in my state. i am sorry that this rule did not accept an amendment that i had that would have submitted a report to congress on the feasibility of offering loan forgiveness for those who put businesses and economically depressed areas. but then the real thing is to cap the interest rates at 4%. as was indicated by my colleague, mr. holt, he indicated how the numbers would go up for the student. let me talk to you about parent plus. now you can see the oppression on parents trying to help their students or their children go to school. in addition to the $100 billion of debt that students are carrying, we now eliminate the feasibility of parent plus loans. right now in current law there are 27,956. if we go into this bill, they'll go up to almost $36,000.

a parent with four children? i have spoken in the last couple weeks at the university of houston downtown, the university of houston texas, houston community college, i have stoken at lone star college. all these colleges in our district. but what i would say to you -- 30 seconds? ms. slaughter: i yield an extra 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. jackson lee: all of this does not anti-the question when this bill will be passed. i ask my colleagues to oppose the rule, oppose the underlying bill, this is not the president's message. the president had an extended life to be able to provide for parents and students. all you have to do is look at the red. $36,000 is what this bill is going to cost parents. and that means we are going to close the door of opportunity for women, for minorities, and for americans to get a higher education. this is not the way in graduation season to say thank you to our children for being

successful and graduating from college. let's oppose this bill and do the right thing for americans. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady from north carolina ms. foxx: i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, a member of the committee on education and the work force, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized. mr. andrews: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my friend from new york for giving me the time. we approach july 1 with a problem where if the congress does nothing interest rates will double on student loans from 3.4% to 6.8%. there are three options that are before the country and before the congress. the first is let it happen. let the rates go up to 6.8% and make higher education much more affordable for the people of the

country. the second option is the option that's on the floor which would make it worse. to raise the interest rates over the long term higher than 6.8% and cost students and families an additional $3.7 billion to pay for higher education. there is a third option offered by mr. courtney from connecticut. that option would say, let's leave the rates at 3.4% for two years, let's pay for that decision so it doesn't add to the deficit, and then use those two years to negotiate a sensible long-term solution to the problem. i know that there are those who disagree with mr. courtney's approach. i know there are those who agree with the republican approach. but what i don't understand is why all three options aren't before the congress. what we have in front of us

today is to either do nothing and let the rates go to 6.8, or do something and make them go even higher. there is a third and better choice that the majority has refused to let the congress vote on. i suspect the reason we can't vote on that choice is it would win. it would pri veil. this is suppose -- prevail. it this is a body where plal cisrules. -- paralysis rules. i ask for 30 seconds. ms. slaughter: i yield 30 seconds. mr. andrews: this bill will probably pass the floor. it will go nowhere. and we will be back sometime in late june trying to solve this problem. let's have a democratic vote with a small d. let's let the