questions. your written testimony will be included in the record of the hearing. i now recognize our first witness for five minutes. >> thank you. distinguished committee members, i thank you for the opportunity to be here. y done a good job of -- you've done a good job of outlining both the problem and potential solutions and point to one of the major problems that we face in not only lack of funding, but lack of continuity in funding to do the research we need to do. not just the loss of lines, but the anxiety -- loss of lives, but the anxiety that comes from severe tornadoes and hurricanes. i will speak primarily on storms -- storm shelters or safe rooms. i think it addresses the last

problem of anxiety and human suffering. i have been part of the wind it engineering program at texas tech since 1970. civilchairman of the engineering department at that time. you can help make my day by telling me i cannot look old enough to have done that, but i do not want you to lie. haveyour support, we developed a world class program at texas tech, unparalleled facilities that i have included picture of in the report. a unique contour program in wind science and engineering. turned out 20 doctoral students and they are taking a prominent place is in the

professional community. today, we have good weather forecasting that gives information on location and paths of tornadoes and hurricanes, but we have to deal with the sex of severe winds. -- and thehe with severe ffects of winds. not only do we need to do the good works such as forecasting has done, but we need to convey a consistent message to the public to how you react and respond to disasters. approach to research

is needed to reduce impact on civil society. for windstorm damage documentation, development of computational tools, implementation of standards and codes. others will speak to that. development of manpower to pursue meaningful research and professional practice. and then educational programs that convey sound, consistent guidance to the people as to how they react and respond to extreme when to events. property damage can be abated by improved building codes and but their enforcement. we have a tremendous problem in lack of enforcement because that is done at the local level.

that are many disconnects occur between the agencies and the researchers that generate could research and what happens in the field. education is the best way to address that. in the storm shelter area, we have standards and guidelines. we have an industry association, the national storm shelter association. we have a program that recognizes storm shelters that complied with the standards. we have all types of shelters available that meets the standards and guidelines and provide your absolute occupant protection from extreme winds, despite information that has been given recently, particularly in oklahoma.

some of the advice has been wrong. there are many characteristics of the hazard mitigation grant program. ms. johnson, you mentioned that. it is an excellent program that does a lot of good things. the downside is that the funding generated is post- disaster. finishing some projects that were funded with the hazard mitigation program that came from hurricane ike four years ago. have important that we pre-disaster mitigation programs and some that can do preparation for a disastrous, not respond to them. i cannot understand why the pre-disaster mitigation program was discontinued. we need something like that that

allows us to prepare in advance. there has been a lot of talk about shelters being mandatory. believe the states such as alabama have set a good example. storm shelters for schools should be made mandatory by states that have the serious problem. to improve done existing buildings in that regard. --elieve mandatory laws shelters should be for residential housing units and populations the chest daycare such as daycare centers, retirement villages, mobile home parks and apartments. i think it should not be mandatory for probably home -- for private homes.

a recommended action was simply be that you have identified the noaa, nsf, we, have capable personnel that can conduct research. at thelook particularly programs that have been funded in the prediction program in the weather area, you will see that we have an unprecedented return on investment in those programs. i would encourage congress to make funding available to make similar investments in the area of mitigating wind disastrous. thank you. >> thank you.

we now recognize our second ms. ballen, for five minutes. >> i am with an organization supported by the insurance industry and the kitchen research and communication. as a research organization focusing on litigation, we have been supportive and provided testimony on hearings for the effort to reauthorize the program. we have worked in partnership with the number of projects with all the agencies. interestyou for your in this important matter. given the threat of when storms, the frequency of events s, the research is

much less than it should be. he coordinated, well funded research program -- a coordinated, well funded research program is needed to find the connection between storm characteristics and those imposed on buildings, structural engineering expertise that develops sufficient systems to handle these loads in new and existing buildings, and national coordinated efforts to promote mitigation. the centerpiece of our research program is our unique world three class -- a world class research center. full-sized residential test specimens and other specialized equipment allow us to recreate highly realistic natural disasters involving wind alone, hail.lus rain, wind plus

i would like to show you how our research contributes to the understanding of to strengthen -- towind. wind.tructive we subjected two with frame houses to a highly realistic storm has occurred in north texas and in the midwest. although they look the same from the outside, the home on the left was built using a code. he home on the right was built to a higher standard. the winds you are going to see tornadic. were not here is a short video of that test.

you can see just how quickly and how completely the home on the left was destroyed. as you think about the loss of life and property had this been a real event with people inside the home, you can also understand the importance of research as a complement to communications in order to get people to pay attention, change their attitudes, and demand safer and stronger buildings. it is better to learn this lesson from the test chamber than in places like oklahoma and miami, florida. we believe mitigation leads to a stronger, safer insurance system. with mitigation there is a betterd shift, management of losses in the rare and severe events, more

efficient capital deployment, and less stress on residual markets. the property insurance priorities for wind mitigation is in line with our interests. less societal displacements, fewer injuries and death. breaking the cycle of destruction so that residential and commercial structures to not have to be put together again and again will benefit of the faith -- will benefit owners and the short period -- will benefit owners and the inshore and. -- insured. >> thank you very much for your testimony. i now recognize our final witness, dr. prevatt, for five

minutes. >> on a row -- honorable subcommittee members, i am here to advocate for the creation of a win hazard resilience houston within the next 10 years. hazards resilience community within the next 10 years. i wish to add the support of the american society of civil engineers and the american association for wind engineering and my own support for hr1786. these organizations have been working for the past 10 years since the legislation was first proposed. ofsupport the transfer leadership to the national institute of standards and technology. since the professor first published his skill in 1971 and

his report on the walls of tornadoes, our population in 20 of alley has grown 50%. what does that mean -- our population in a tornado alley has grown 15 -- 50%. there are more on ticks in harm's way and there were before. -- there are more objects in harm's way and there were before. the national storm laboratory has invested heavily in whether $167structure, over billion over the last 10 years in better research to predict severe weather, in the equipment for products. the public is aware of this and confident in its use. forecasting

information on our smartphones. it is not complicated. longer lead times before turning of strikes reduces loss of life. the 1970 texas tech university wind engineering faculty initiated the first building damage studies, it documented problems with houses and how they are made. modern houses still have those problems. smaller and nails, fewer nails that there were in the 1940's. connections are inadequate. think cannot resist tornadoes. houses are insufficiently anchored to the foundation and wreck easily. oklahoma the two

weeks ago. is not complicated. the result is more fall to build houses and more -- the result is more property damage and more loss of life to our communities. 20 of damage has increased 2 1/2 times since the 1970's -- tornado damage has increased 2 1/2 times since the 1970's. the people of the 19th -- people of the united states wants to live in the 200 resilience communities. a tornado resilience community is one where all schools have where hospitals are hardened against tornadoes and built soes, houses are

builtou lose -- fewer are to destroy lives and some will be repaired after a tornado. the private cell -- private sector has the research backing to develop affordable and whether resilient houses. it is not complicated. the wind engineering and structural engineering community stand ready to begin this work. we have been ready for 10 years. with your support, we can begin the task of support for our people. 1786.ete the work of hr- let's mobilize community leaders to a great their building codes -- to upgrade their building codes.

support our research community to work with innovative private sector companies to design buildings and build a sustainable 24 century houses. it can be done. 21st century- homes. isorable members, it really not complicated. thank you. >> thank you very much. i would like to thank all of the witnesses for your testimony. it is a fascinating subject. open a round of questions. i recognize myself for five minutes. prevatt, and dr. initially, what are the steppingstones preventing us from building better homes. with all the information we have

out there, why don't we do it? a strategiceveloped plan that i think response to your question. we need to get people to pay attention. we have the research capability. these research facilities provide the technical answers. we need people to understand. the video you saw has been on the today show. it is been on the weather channel. people have begun to think about, how do i make that not happen? the first step is making them change their minds and value the stronger roof instead of a granite counter top. we need to rise up and demand to be in a community with a better building code. demands congress enact this type of legislation. congress enact this

type of legislation. would add is that we still lack the knowledge to design buildings for tornadoes. the has been research in the wind engineering that supported the faculty working on when to engineering matters. since the 1980's, there has not been the research theire. we are trying to understand how tornadoes impact a particular building. part of the problem is not only do people need to be initiated to want to change, we have to provide an opportunity and knowledge of how they are: to change. holiday are -- how they are going to change.

>> it is a different thing when people see the statistical chance of their home being built -- being hit. it is a difficult thing to overcome, as well as messaging. this is my own personal question. is there research out there not only telling us where tornadoes are and where they are going, but how to convert them away from urban centers? >> the first part of that question, the answer is yes. people are doing an excellent job of predicting the path of where the tornadoes are. see any hope of diverting. of in the first place, we do not know when they are going to occur. it is a tremendous amount of

energy that has to be dedicated in trying to divert them. i personally do not have much hope for that. hopefully, it can work. i have to depend upon the next generation to come up with solutions. how we can not see dissipate our divert tornadoes. difference ine tornadicline winds and winds. is there a difference there? line to winds are predictable. winds aret line predictable. we have to know more about the

characteristics of extreme winds. we are making progress. it is a long, slow process the requires manpower that is hard to come by. >> i would add that in tornadoes, we have something that we do not understand, which is a vertical section below vortex.r tax -- how that understood interact with the wind in the tornado. >> thank you very much. my time is about to expire. i will recognize ms. wilson for her line of questioning. >> thank you. in her testimony, ms. ballen states that wind has its research has been underfunded for decades. the other witnesses also expressed a similar sentiment

in their testimony. weref you indicate that kept seven implemented in any meaningful way because of lack of resources. what opportunities are we missing by not providing the reliable,th a sustained source of funding for maturation and expansion? >> we have to look at the earthquake engineering program and see what benefits we have gained from that. we are talking us something that has been funded to the level of millions of dollars per year. literally, all of the wind engineering research over the last 10 years at the top when engineering schools amounts to about $1 million per year. in their schools amounts to about $1 billion per year. we are talking about to does

billion, $3 billion, and $5 billion -- we are talking about and $5ion, $3 billion, billion. fairness been an attrition of wind engineering faculty. attritionas been an of when engineering faculty. wind engineering faculty. these are the areas where we lost and the most people affected. >> if there was more money in this program, we have identified the areas where we can really lead to progress. the first is enhanced understanding of the events themselves. different issues in terms of

understanding hurricanes. it starts with the science and the meteorology of that. the second is understanding the connections between those events and the building fireman's. war can be done to enhance the second is understanding the connections between those events and the building environment. the area of hurricanes, we know a lot more, but there is more to be learned and how we can make a structures better able to sustain nature. the final thing would be making sure the tests that our products and standards are based on that really affect -- reflects the real world. what we saw in the auto safety

arena was then everyone could build a, to withstand a test. that did not mean it was safe car toyone could build a withstand a test. that did not mean it was safe in the real world. -- more islonel is -- whatever of the level is, you have identified that static funding is a problem. some of these are short, some of them are medium, some of them are long-term events. you get everything started and you cannot identify anything new. we would certainly recommend modest upticks so that we can make sure we can start what we finish, but also start other things to identify in the early

years of the program. kiesling, do you have a response? >> what was the question? >> do you want to add anything to the lack of funding? >> not only the level of funding, but the continuity is a with youngrticularly faculty. young faculty are under tremendous pressure to produce research, to generate funding, to publish. have areas where that funding is more readily available and dependable, fair oy to go to those areas. they areficult --

going to go to those areas. it is difficult to recruit because of the lack of funding. >> thank you. >> i would like to yield. >> i appreciate the gentleman. i think one of the things we want to happen year, and it has been alluded to, he is getting people to build buildings that will mitigate some of the potential damage and loss of life. that youe misnomers is and thatuild fort knox it is not economic because the probability of that event happening versus the cost of doing it. one of the things i am because on is using the carrot rather

than the stick. i have a couple of questions. many of these losses of property were insured losses. the insurance industry has a huge interest in this issue. do you see them recognizing a difference in the homes or buildings built to different standards to show that there is incentive for homeowners or people building a building to spend the extra dollars to do that? that would be my first question. becausee take that one i know a little about that issue. we look at property mitigation in two ways. one is building codes and one is the first to go above building codes. building codes are to protect life safety. a cold built home is better in

many ways. is better in home many ways. we helped develop a voluntary standard called fortified home or fall -- fortified for safer living. we try to lead identify the types of building construction techniques that will help for specific hazards. every insurance company makes its own decisions. several states have recognized fortified and require insurance companies to do that in their filings. we have a track record in mississippi, louisiana, south carolina. companies are making decisions in terms of filing. i want to emphasize that the types of things in fortified are not on affordable. they are low cost improvements a homeowner can make -- types of

things in fortified are not un affordable. thetat for humanity is largest builder at this time. we have partnered with them in hurricane-prone areas. if we can get those fourth bystanders in a habitat home, you know those are not -- standards in a habitat home, you know they are not un the space affordable. if you are at the point where a home owner -- you know that they affordable. a number of people up here talked about is dissemination of

the informational and coordination of the information. when you research, do you sit down with industry participants, the national home builders, for example, and shared this information and into this dialogue with them to make sure they are made aware of this? >> we have certainly started that. they started out negative and skeptical of us and our capabilities. we have abided them all to our research center. they see that $40 million facility and they realize we are serious about doing research in doing communications. he has led to a more constructive dialogue. there are a number of a organizations where we have had longstanding cost of relationships with. our strongest

partners here in washington and at the state level. are anotherts group. we are trying to encourage a lot -- young architects to occurred -- to a) stronger buildings. leverage relationships with policyholders. we try to pick the word out on social media, which is huge in all areas. when you are trying to make that part of the mitigation movement as well. >> i think the gentleman from year -- for yielding. johnson forze ms. her line of questioning for five minutes. >> i cannot forget the image of the one lone house that remains standing during onlycane ike in galveston,

to think how this survive out there all alone. to find later that the entire devastated inas that house survived because they had used the type of materials the would resist many winds. comments fromour the standpoint of encouraging architects. local ordinances have to be involved. how do we do this without making it seem that this is the government trying to gloss everybody? insurance company -- hoss boss -- boss everybody? with the ability of our satellite system to predict, we

have gone a long way in saving lives. we have not done nearly as well in saving property. that is a major concern in an economy like today. how do you see that response ability thinking we are and what can we do? -- how do you see that responsibility and what can we do? moore, one man but in oklahoma that had something that would hold the roof down to the wall. just one of the thousands that we looked at. better argument to convince individuals that this is something they should think about it instead of that granite counter top.

back at ourselves one of years ago. our large cities, chicago, new york, san francisco, we faced fire considerations. blocks and blocks were burning down. it was at that time the city leaders, legislators, politicians and the public got together and said, enough is enough. if chicago was going to survive, we have to pull in one direction. that is what we did. we can do it again. we have the ability to do it again. the public is generally fearful of tornadoes and fearful of the wind has a. they think we cannot have the talent to do it -- the public is generally fearful of trails and fearful that we have the talent -- fearful of tornadoes and

fearful that we have the talent to do it. >> we looked at building code regimes from texas to maine on a zero-100 scale. he scores ranged from four to 95. as a public communications vehicle, a lot of people may not know what a building code is, but they know it is good to get a high score and bad to have been low score. the most positive responses we have gotten from the media have been in the state with low scores. one state that was done at the bottom, but actually passed a bill last year, maryland, passed a bill that and identify issues in that state. making building codes understandable to people so that

d statewides -- deman building codes. there are some states where that has not happened. at the local level, there ought to be strong ordinances in effect. >> any other witness comments? thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. in his testimony, dr. kiesling called for economic, social, and behavioral studies to understand research results like stronger building codes. this is something important that use lessons from

social science to ensure the the other lessons we are learning from research yet implemented. kiesling and other witnesses expand upon that and when they see this importance? >> implementation is a serious problem in many areas. i would back up a little bit and say that in terms of improved building codes, we can do a lot of good by meeting existing building codes. they are not effectively enforced or inspected. designedreased the wind load, we would save a lot of property. even in a tornado, most of the damage is done when speeds of 120 miles per hour -- winds

speeds of 120 miles per hour. if we did tests at that speed, that would save structures from being destroyed. i see it as a serious problem, not only in enforcing building codes, but it haunts me when i hear reports of traffic deaths in our city. in many instances, people were killed in rollover accidents in cars without their seat belts. they are in a home that can be effective saving lives. it should not surprise us that we have problems enforcing building codes and motivating people to do a better cup of construction. i do not know the answer. i think we need to involve social science and disciplines we have the effect of the end

dates before to see how do we implement what we already know. there is much more to be learned. we need to learn much more. we also need to do a better job of using what we already have. have the hoping to social scientists at our research facilities so that we can begin to explore that in more detail. we have sketched out the way we think about this issue. it is first a question of getting the hearts and minds of people, getting them to want this. we talked about that before in terms of the answer to one of the previous questions. second is providing adequate incentives for individuals and at the state level. the state building code incentives act has been introduced in this congress and provides additional funding for

states that do the right thing in in that in kong building codes. that is called incentive. there can be an incentive for in this address for individuals. we have to make this a win-win proposition to make this market want this to happen to address the social science issue. nsf last yeare organized a pretty comprehensive workshop called weather ready nation when they brought together social scientists have aged years to recognize that forecasting has gotten us so far, boohoo -- but that weto recognize

need more. we are working with social scientists. i was on a nsf project in oklahoma and we evolved mississippi state social sciences from the state and from the university of alabama as well. >> thank you. i would like to take a look at that. i think it is something that we often overlook. sure that wee include the social sciences. you can do all of these essential that you want to mitigate the damage to property , threats to human life. if no one is implementing those, we are not sure about the incentives about how to get people to take that into account. onjust have research sitting

the shelf that is that doing anything -- doing anyone any good. we have to make sure we are providing it at the federal level. i yield back. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. as a quick follow-up to the discussion. for ms. ballen, is the insurance industry offering lower premiums for those who are retrofitted? was sort of consensus is the marketplace providing? the tax code does not seem to be terribly effective. i wonder what is being done on the private side. >> i always stress that individual companies make their own decisions. we developed a technical standard called for a defined. we know those technical standards work -- we developed a

technical standard called fortified. we know that those technical standards work. we know that the homes built to those standards are built to those standards. many companies are providing discounts for fortified homes. a homeowner say, if or a builder says the bill to that standard, it is. it has got to be inspected -- says they built to that standard, it is. it has got to be inspected. >> we have a great concern about utilities. about can you talk about what is being done on tv certification sign on these critical issues where you can have -- can you talk about what is being done on the

resilience side on these critical issues? thehe entire direction of engineering school of sustainable structure at the isversity of florida, that our entire mission. before we get to a sustainable society, we first have to get a resilience one, one that is more robust. to research is fundamental this. we need to better understand structural properties of the buildings, the infrastructure, the utilities. we've really just need to decide -- we really just need to decide if we want to live in

a sustainable society. if you put engineers and social scientists on this case, we can do this in 10 years. bold vision to go after it. work thatsome of the been done looking at multiple ways to address climate change issues, particularly with our population is being concentrated on the coast. to,ever it is attributable we are seeing an increase in severe weather. it will be important that we take this resilience line of research quite seriously and address it as an extremely high priority as we are extremely energy-dependent for everything we do. we have been looking at cypress security. we need to look at the natural

-- we have been looking at cyber security. we need to look at natural weather. in new what happened york. we need to be emphasizing retrofiting, not just new standards. thanks very much. i yield back the balance of my time. consent to unanimous recognize a member -- i ask unanimous consent to recognize a member of the full committee. >> i would like to return the favor and yielded little bit of my time to the gentleman from arizona. >> i did not know if i should object. thank you mr. chairman. elizabeth was hitting a point i wanted to go to. how many of us will go out and buy a volvo over a corvair?

unsafe at any speed. when you are buying a car today, you are looking at consumer reports say, this is safe today. my insurance is cheaper. the insurance industry changes our purchasing behavior. why isn't that the decision for those purchasing residential real estate. ourprice differential and cost of insurance? >> that is an excellent question and what we ask ourselves every single day. we asked ourselves every single day. are safer cars and people want them and you begin to see the tiflis in the losses. insurance companies respond to -- you begin to see the losses

and insurance companies respond to that. >> i recognize schools and districts with federal resources. we have a voice. if i am out buying a residential property or kidding ready to rethink or remodel -- or getting ready to rethink -- refit and remodel, how many of us will fixate on the interest rate on one finance company or another? the ultimate solution here? is themall -- the market ultimate solution. ultimately, people need to want that. it, there is a price difference. >> the building industry is more

complicated than the automobile industry. there are thousands of builders in versus five, six, or seven car companies. by undergrad is in real estate. my master's focuses on financing. not the builders. it is the consumer. if i came to you and send you by this house and you paid this interest rate. if you bought this one, you pay this is as ray. in -- if not the same you bought this one, you pay this interest rates. why is it not the same in insurance? one of thesling, things you mentioned is that the winds of a tornado are much than gusts of

vertical winds. there are categories of events. f5. to have the we do not technology to protect a home from an f5 storm. ofwe go to the mitigation life over property, to say that the house does not make, there are things they you have worked affordable fairly inside the home. could you cover a little bit of what are some practical things the could be done in the homes in retrofitting and new

construction? >> thank you. early on, we adopted the toroach that it is expensive take a home of the type we build today and to sign it to resist the worst case tornado. certainly improve the performance and protect against severe damage from the vast and the of tornadoes damage is called by marginal wind speeds. we adopted the idea of providing occupant protection in a small room, called a safe room. it is affordable to harden and stiffened a small room of the house to provide near absolute occupant protection. it might be a closet, a pantry, a bathroom. that is plausible for new

construction. the vast majority of safe rooms manufacture today are concrete boxes installed in the rise and they are affordable. that are shelters mounted under the slab. you can cut out a section of the piece of the the riots floor, as of may, put a sliding door -- iece of the garage floor, excavates, put on a sliding door, and you will not lose a parking space. it is possible to design occupant protection from the worst case tornado. we have a real problem with that right now with public perception. inre was misinformation oklahoma about having to be underground to survive an ef5.

that is a falsehood that should be squelched. i answer to your question, think there is a way to protect life in a safe room with very inexpensively. we must do the best we can in reducing the damage by through athe building building code enforcement. is other point i would make the difference in the automobile industry and the home building industry. both are sensitive to the initial cost. most of the houses are built speculative today. the marketability of housing is sensitive to the initial cost. builders, but homeowners look at the initial any half and tend to resist

improvements that cost very much initially. >> thank you very much. would likepoint, i to thank the witnesses for their testimony and the members for their questions. the members of the committee may have additional questions for you. we ask that you respond to those in writing. the record will be open for two weeks. at this point, the witnesses are excused and the hearing is adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

>> next, live your calls and comments on "washington journal ." debbieen newsmakers with stabenow. after that, sexual assault in the military. a uniform fort on a job that is a maintenance job -- this is true if you are in building a janitor or a sanitation worker -- you are subsumed by the rule to the point when you are just a part of the background, almost like a machine. you are a human being wearing

that uniform. the general world gets to overlook you cannot see you. romulan cloaking device. people who are fellow star trek geeks will recognize that reference. it is frustrating and an interesting privilege. when i am and wearing a sanitation worker uniform, i can observe people in a way they do not realize i am of serving them. >> anthropologist in residence 8 on c-gle tonight at span's "q & a." >> a look at the history of public surveillance programs. then a discussion on the growing number of families in which mothers are the primary providers.

-- and later, a talk about the u.s. role in syria. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: good morning and welcome to "washington journal." president obama wrapped up his california meeting with chinese president xi jinping. president obama heads back to washington today. the news continues to bring about the u.s. government's use of phone records, e-mails, and other data. are you willing to trade privacy for security? here are the numbers to call --