we are going to leave this hearing now. you can see it in its entirety at c-span.org. ofre going to the house representatives live. you are watching live coverage on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the 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., july 22, 2013. i hereby appoint the honorable steve womack to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 3, 2013, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour ebate.

the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip each, to five minutes but in no event shall debate ontinue beyond 1:50 p.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. lumenauer, for five minutes. mr. blumenauer: i arrived at my office this morning to a "politico" on the front page head line "blumenauer's death panel bill lives on." it's actually a terrific article by jo ann kenan but a terrible headline about nonexistent death panels symbolizes why three congresses later we still have not helped families deal with the most difficult circumstances any of us will ever encounter.

this issue hit me with full force 10 years ago in the midst of the terri schiavo case. where we watched one family's tragedy turn into a national media circus and a political spectacle. all because one 27-year-old woman didn't have a conversation with her loved ones to make her wishes known. what would she want if the unthinkable happened? and she was caught in the terrible circumstance of being in a vegetative state, brain dead, for eight years with no likelihood of recovery. well, it's not really unthinkable. it's just that many of us would rather not think about it. too rarely do we have this conversation, yet virtually every one of us will be in these circumstances with ourselves or with a loved one unable to make their wishes known about health care because

of permanent or temporary incapacity. and this is not just about end of life. it could be any decision, about whether or not to amputate a leg or have a operation that carried with it significant risks. who speaks for each of us when we're unable to speak for ourselves? the public overwhelmingly thinks that people should have the information and that their insurance or medicare should pay for that conversation with a medical professional. unfortunately, today medicare will pay tens of thousands of dollars for a 93-year-old man with terminal cancer to have a hip replacement who will never alk again but will not have -- pay for a conversation with that same person and their family to understand the circumstances they face and what their options are.

to understand their choices and have those choices whatever they might be respected, known and enforced. this actually won't cost us anything. the evidence is that people who know more use their information to choose wisely. very often less intense medical interventions. overall it could actually save money. doctors are perhaps the best example. they certainly can't afford medical care. they certainly know about it. yet, because they know what works and what doesn't, they make their wishes known and strategically choose their health care. as a group they actually end up using less medical care in their last year of life but arguably have a higher quality of life. everybody should have the same choice as a doctor. i'm in the process of visiting with each and every member of the house to see if we can do something that will give people the care they want, that is

overwhelmingly supported by the public, that won't cost the federal government any net costs. i urge my colleagues to examine the bipartisan legislation, h.r. 1173, that doctor phil roe and i have introduced to help families in their time of greatest need. personalize your care act of 2013, i think it's worth a look, i think it's worth your support. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady lujan mexico, ms. grisham, for five minutes. ms. lujan grisham: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized. ms. lujan grisham: mr. speaker, it is important that we always remember why we are here and who we serve and the best way to do that is by spending time with the people that we were

elected to represent. for the past few days i've had the honor of showing some residents of new mexico's first district around our nation's capital, and this group includes my daughter and her w family, ian, camen, quan and -- i'm missing one -- the stuarts. these people are model citizens, they're family members and they're longtime friends. and today i'd like to recognize two of these individuals for their service to new mexico and to our nation. lori and marine both of whom are here today are exceptionally talented teachers and dedicated public servants. teachers play an invaluable role in our society, creating expanding ding and the middle class, growing the economy, making sure everyone has a fair shot at the american dream.

teachers directly contribute to all of these noble missions and they don't do it for the money. they don't do it for the glory. they do it because they care deeply about the students they teach. so i rise today to thank lori and maureen, to thank my family and to thank all of the teachers and public servants in new mexico and in america for the work they do each and every day to make this a finer and stronger america. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house 2:00 p.m. ntil today. the house is back in session at 2:00 with the bait on several suspension bill scheduled for 4:30 eastern. later this week the house will consider the 2014 defense department budget.

also, separate environmental bills. one focused on coal ash regulation and the other on epa rules. you can see the house live here on c-span. the senate doubles back in tomorrow at 10:00 eastern and will begin consideration of a bill dealing with funding for the department of transportation and housing and urban development. watch that tomorrow. but the senate out today, some live coverage on c-span to. this afternoon, jimmy carter will be joined by the former president of finland and the former prime minister to algeria on the israeli prime minister conflict. friday's newsing that israeli and palestinian officials had reached tentative agreement for resuming stalled peace talks. that is live at today at 5:00. over at the white house

president obama begins a two- month series of speeches across the country focusing on the economy and jobs as congress works on spending bills ahead of the new fiscal year on october. wednesday the president returns to an illinois college he visited as a freshman senator. knox college in galesburg. he will speak wednesday at the university of central missouri and warrensburg's. vice-president joe biden beginning a trip to east asia with a focus on trade and regional security ties. the vice president will spend several days in india speaking with officials on ways to expand bilateral trade. he will meet this week with business leaders before heading to singapore on thursday. was raised as her mother was raised. the same kind of wife and host this. the home, children, entertainment with style and

panache. that was her heritage and did it again in the white house, right after her administration, during the johnson years, the whole world erupted like volcanoes. we had women who went to work and got the forces and demanded equal rights. lover children, and free and free sex. it was great for the young. and i missed all of that. the whole world changed. it became a whole new concept of women. and i think mrs. clinton today represents the new woman. >> as we continue the conversation on first ladies, secretary to jack and kennedy, reporters and others talk about the role of the first lady and how it has changed along with the nation tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span. ted crews was the keynote speaker for the iowa

republican party and des moines. reportedly said to be among those weighing a possible pendent -- presidential bid in 2016. and the senator spoke about immigration, taxes and health- care law. it is 45 minutes. >> thank you for coming out. thank you for the incredible hospitality. today is the first time i have been to iowa, and i have to say it is a been a wonderful day. i am struck by the commonality of values between iowa and my home state of texas. we obviously have some friends outside who have a little different view than those of us in here. i am reminded of a few years where i had the curious opportunity to travel to , and it so happened

that attracted protesters. they were very upset i had defended the 10 commandments monument and they were protesting. my wife's comments upon hearing that if she looked at me and said goodness, you are not nearly important enough to protest. who is married understands the tremendous role us spouses play in reminding of our humility. for that matter, kids do a good job of that as well. i remember in the course of the campaign for senate one saturday morning i was home and doing a radio interview. we have two little girls, kathrin.e and caroline came in and wanted to play with that. kathrin said she is doing -- he

is doing radio interview, wait a minute. she stomped her arms and she said politics, politics, it is always politics. and [laughter] the commitment of each of you to politics. even more importantly, the commitment to changing our country. [applause] everyone of you today is here because you understand these are not ordinary times. we're facing an extraordinary challenges in this country. we cannot keep going down the road we are going. we are jeopardize in the future of this great nation. we're jeopardize in the future of our kids and grandkids. in my view, the men and women in this room are key to helping

turn the nation around. i think we should do two things in the coming year. number one, defend the constitution. number two, a champion growth and opportunity. let me talk about both of those. defend the constitution. it is extraordinary right now the assault on the constitution that is coming from the federal government. this administration is sadly the most lawless administration we have ever seen. i can tell you in my short time in the senate over and over again i have been blessed to have the chance to stand up and fight the defending constitution. early on i had the great privilege of standing alongside rand paul and participating in a 13-hour filibuster against a drawn policy.

you may not know that, but that was my first time ever to speak on the floor of the senate. there is a tradition and the senate that junior senators should be seen and not heard. entirely manage to comply with that. [applause] as the fight started, this was the fight i could not sit on the sidelines for. so i have the opportunity. i went to the floor to support day, and it so happens the was the 177th anniversary of the fall of the alamo.

i had the opportunity to read shakespeare's st. crispin's day speech. and i have the opportunity to read the opening monologue patent. i had an opportunity to read 1960 for a time for choosing. as they say in the beer commercial, it don't get no better than that. what we saw that day, and it is important to look at what happened. when he started the filibuster, our colleagues bought what he

was doing was curious. one senator after another came to join him. then the american people got engaged. thousands of americans began going on line, going on twitter, facebook, speaking out saying, protect our rights. actual tweets sent by americans.

i will be be a scare one to read a tweet of the floor of the senate. was from a tweet woman who said i am a grandmother. i have never use twitter before in my life, and i signed up today to stand with rand. and what happened in the course of the day is the american people got focused, got engaged and began speaking out. our elected representatives began listening to the people. after a 13 hour standing together we were able to accomplish something that for three weeks the obama administration had refused to do and the next day in writing it admitted the constitution puts limits on their authority to target americans. [applause] another example of defending the

constitution is the battle we have on the second amendment right to bear arms. i am guessing one or two people in this remake care slightly about the second amendment. as you know, following the horrific shooting in newtown, conn., the obama administration chose to cut -- to take a bit of that tragedy to push an anti-gun of done that not to target violent criminals, but to target the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. chuck grassley, all of you know his leadership number one, there is no member of the u.s. senate, bar none, who is more relentless and more effective on oversight of the obama administration.

[applause] when the second amendment fight began happening, chuck and i sat down, work together, and we wrote together what became of the leave law enforcement opportunity -- leave law enforcement clause. it focus on violent criminals. i think violent criminals we should come down like a ton of bricks on by let criminals to take the lives of innocent americans. at the same time it safeguards the ability of law-abiding citizens to bear arms. it is the power of the american people, grassroots. early on in that bottle it did

not look encouraging. in that battle it did not look encouraging. conventional wisdom was his legislation was unstoppable. callingan representatives, going on facebook and speaking up. instead of a joint with rand paul riding a very short letter that said we will filibuster any legislation that underlines the second memory to keep and bear arms. did is the time for the grass roots to engage. protect the constitution. another asne after elected officials were forced to

listen to we the people. when the boats came on the floor of the senate, every single proposal of president obama would have underlying this was voted down on the floor of the senate. [applause] i am grateful for chuck grassley. we should champion growth and opportunity. my top priority in office is restoring economic growth. growth is foundational to every other challenge. you want to turn around employment -- and a plum, national debt, maintain the strongest military in the world, you have to have growth.

years the economy has averaged 0.9% growth per year. to put that into perspective 1979-1982. coming out of the jimmy carter administration, the same failed economic policy of our control -- out of control spending, taxes and regulation and produce the exact same stagnation. there are three ways to do so. number one, finally rain and out of control spending.

last fall i had the chance to speak at the republican convention in tampa. i talked about our little girls. after a court -- and afterward i went back to my hotel room and pulled out my phone and started looking at twitter. ted crews just said when his daughter was born the national debt was ted trillion dollars. -- ted cruz. what the heck did she do? [laughter] heidi and i laughed so hard we almost fell out of bed.

our kids and grandkids, if we keep going down this path will spend their entire lives working not to meet the challenges they face, but to pay off the debt that their parents and grandparents racked up because we could not live within our means. you want to know why the american people are fed up with politicians in washington, let me be clear it is politicians in both parties who have gotten us into this mess. [applause] the second element of restoring growth and opportunity is fundamental tax reform.

ofhave all seen the scandals the irs targeting conservative groups, the party groups, targeting groups that use liberty, words like constitution, a bill of rights. i think it is right there recognize those words are a threat to what they were doing. problematic as what it was. when richard nixon used the virus to target political enemies it was wrong. as bad as that scandal is that underscores what i think is a far more fundamental and simple solution, which is we need to abolish the irs.

[applause] let me tell you something. in washington, d.c., there is a technical term for what i just said. that is called crazy talk. it is the people on the french that talk about it. there is an army of lobbyists on k street to make a living putting the exemptions and to the irs code. more words in the irs code and there are in the bible. not all one of them is as good. [laughter] anyone know the shortage scripture and the bible? there has been a lot of weeping because of the irs. if you have to depend on elected officials in washington the irs will not be abolished.

there is no politician in washington that can win this fight. i cannot win this fight, chuck cannot win this fight. the only people who can win this fight are the men and women across america. ofmillions upon millions americans come together as a grass roots and demand of elected officials to stand for that is the only way it can happen, the american people demanding it. i am working very, very hard to encourage and mobilize the american people to do exactly that. the third wave we restore economic growth is regulatory

reform. reducing the armies of regulators like locusts. locusts are more friendly. use pesticide against locus. pesticide does not work nearly as well against regulators. but to stop the army and regulators who are destroying the small businesses, destroying economic growth. there is no economic reform more important than repealing every single word obama care. now, i am here right now to enlist your help. we are getting ready to have an epic battle on obama care. you may have read, congress has vote to-39506 times to

appeal obama care. none of them are binding or passed into law. is one thing to vote as a symbolic gesture. another thing to vote when you can actually get it done. time we have an opportunity to defund obama care. [applause] tupper -- september the continuing resolution that funds obama care expires. i have publicly pledged along with a number of other senators that under no circumstances will i vote for a continuing resolution that funds one bunny -- one penny obama care. [applause] now are -- our frams knew what

they were doing when the crafted the constitution. thomas jefferson said this service change to find them mischief of government. theress has the power of purse, and a very restrictive restraints to control and out of control executive. this is the last fight we will have on this before obama care starts going into full force. just a couple of weeks ago president obama unilaterally and in defiance of the law decided

to postpone the employer mandate until conveniently after the 2014 election. i will make two points about that, the fact that they moved it until after the election. thing, if it were working as harry reid wonderful for the american people. would they move it after the it's an admission from the president that just as the lead author of obama care, max bachus said, obama care is becoming a train wreck. the wheels are coming off. but secondly, what the obama administration did was postponed

it for large companies with 50 companies or more. why is it that big corporations get a special exception, a special benefit that the american people are not given, hardworking families and taxpayers are not given? that is why we need to defund every bit of this for every american. now, is this going to be easy? the two things i just put out there -- abolishing the irs and defunding obama care are -- i don't know if any of you are in the sort of business consultant world have heard of the phrase called bee hag. big hairy audacious goal. that's big hairy audacious goals for the american people. either one of those came to a vote in congress right now, we'd lose. we don't have the votes in the senate or the house.

i'm going to tell you there is nothing i can do to change that. i can argue until i'm blue in the face and it's not within my capacity to persuade 41 senate republicans or 218 house republicans. but you can. the way we get this done -- the entire terrain has changed. the american people stand together, they come together as grassroots activists and we demand of our elected officials, enough is enough. stop talking, start acting. i'm reminded of back in 2001, i worked in the department of justice, john ashcroft, my boss there, said the following. he said, if i'm ever accused of being a cristian, i would like to know they have enough evidence to convict me.

the same thing is true, we need our leaders to demonstrate not by telling us but by standing up and acting. ly w that will happen is if the grassroots demand it of our elected officials. i want to close by sharing with you -- this is a room of men and women who love this country. men and women who love liberty. for all of us, liberty is not some abstract concept that we learn and read about in a high school textbook. liberty is real in our own lives, it means something to each and every one of us. it has something do with our collected family stories. for me, that's true. my dad was from cuba. when he was a teenager, he was 14, he started fighting in the cuban revolution.

he spent four years fighting, he was thrown in prison and tortured when he was 17. he was beaten almost to death. to this this day, the front teeth are not his own because they were kicked out of his mouth in a cuban jail when he was a teenager. my dad fled cuba, fled the batista regime, and came to texas. he was 18, couldn't speak english. he had $100 sewn into his underwear. i don't advise carrying money in your underwear. he got a job washing dishes. why? he didn't have to speak english. he had to stick dishes under hot water. 50 cents an hour. he paid his way through the university of texas, got a job, went on to start a small business. worked towards the american dream. today my dad is a pastor in

dallas. my dad has been my hero my whole life, he's here today. rafael cruz, please stand up. [ applause ] when i was a kid, my dad would say to me over and over again -- when we faced oppression in cuba, i had a place to flee to. if we lose our freedom here, where do we go? there is no place to go. that's why all of us are here. you know what i find most incredible about my dad's story? how common place it is. every one of us has a story in our background, us, them, parents, great, great grandparents. we are all of the children who risked everything for freedom.

that's the most fundamental dna of what it means to be an american is to value freedom and opportunity above all else. that's what we're fighting for. that's why we're here. i am honored and blessed to have the opportunity to be side-by-side with you fight together to take our country back, to restore the shining city on the hill that is the united states of america. thank you and god bless you. [ applause ]

and now i'm happy to answer or dodge any questions you like. >> i appreciate your goals and you being here, your leadership. one topic you failed to mention is in light of edward snowden revelation, it's becoming abundantly clear that america is constructing a police state that is more advanced or sophisticated than anything that the stazi or hitler could have dreamed of. what are you going to do to hold the nsa accountable? >> i appreciate the question you ask. and i tell you, i am concerned about a pattern across this government.

of collecting more and more information about private citizens. about law-abiding citizens. now, i think in terms of addressing it, we need to be cautious about the level of rhetoric we employ in the public sphere. there are enormous differences between what the government is doing in nazi germany and other nations. i do think it is critical we preserve our constitutional liberties. i tell you, with edward snowden, i have tried very much to say let's take some time to ascertain what exactly the federal government is doing, what the policies are, and there are objectives most americans want. number one, the federal government has an opportunity to bring national security and

combat radical islamic terrorists. i will note it says something we have a president of the united states who seems unwilling to utter the words, "radical islamic terrorist." i have concerns about the approach of this administration on two fronts. one, it seems that they sweep far too willingly law-abiding citizens, americans into the sweep of information. but two, they have been on multiple occasions, less than effective and actually connecting the dots and going after radical islamic terrorists. if you look, for example, at the boston bombings, the boston bombings, we were notified by

russia about these brothers, about their being potentially radical islamic terrorists. we investigated and by all appearances, dropped the ball. the older brother posted a youtube video that seemed to advocate jihad. that apparently raltzed no red flags. i have a concern why it was that our federal government was not able to connect the dots and prevent the act of terrorism. in texas in ft. hood, again there were red flags. you have a major in the army who was communicating with known terrorists about the known servicemen who was giving a presentation to fellow soldiers about radical islam and embracing jihad. and, again, it seems we dropped the ball. my view is we need to be vigorous protecting the national security of the united states. that means finding and stopping radical islamic terrorists.

we need to protect the rights of law abiding citizens and i believe both of those are possible and indeed are serving the same ultimate objectives. yes? >> what about the -- [ question off-mic ] the senate bill -- my concern is the senate -- congress -- >> i share your concern. the question was about immigration. and let me just address immigration more broadly. on immigration, i am both optimistic and pessimistic. which may be a sign i've been in washington too long. i'm optimistic because i think there's actually a lot of

bipartisan agreement on many aspects of immigration reform. i think outside of washington, there's overwhelming bipartisan agreement that our immigration system is broken, that we've got to get serious about securing the borders, and stopping illegal immigration that it doesn't make any sense in a post 9/11 world, we don't know who's coming into the country and the backgrounds. i think there's overwhelming bipartisan agreement that we need to improve and streamline legal immigration that we need to remain a nation that doesn't just welcome, that celebrates legal immigrants. americans by choice is what president reagan referred to as legal immigrants as. if congress focussed on an immigration bill that focused on the areas of bipartisan agreement, we could have a bill that sailed through congress. so why am i pessimistic? i am because i don't believe president obama wants to pass an immigration bill. i think his principal objective is political rather than passing it. in particular, the most politically divisive evidence of this bill is the pass to citizenship to the 11 million

people who are here illegally. if you look back. 1986 was the last time congress passed immigration reform. and in 1986, the americans -- the congress told the american people, we got a deal for you -- we're going to grant amnesty to the 3 million people who are currently here illegally. and in exchange, we're going to secure the border, we're going to stop illegal immigration, we're going fix the problem. the american people by in large sailed, okay, we'll take that deal. we all know what happened. the am else inty happened and the border never got secured. and now, three decades later, instead of 3 million people here illegally, there are roughly 11 million people here illegally. and i'll tell you in many of those -- among many of those people are human tragedies. this is a terrible broken system. you know, i encourage anyone

interested in immigration come down to the texas border with me. visit with the farm farmers and the ranchers on the borders who no longer lock their homes because they have people crossing and they'll break into their houses desperate for food or water because they're on the brink of death. this current system, you have women and children entrusting themselves to coyotes, to drug dealers, being sexual assaulted, being left to die in the desert and visit with one of these ranchers who regularly encounters the bodies of those who died desperately seeking freedom and trying to come to this country. nobody who is interested in a humane system would want a system that encourages future illegal immigration. and the gang of eight bill, which i worked very hard to improve and when they weren't willing to improve it, to stop it, continues the same mistakes of the past. it offers the same deal that was offered in 1986, legalization now, and sometime maybe in the

future, we'll secure the border. and if that bill became law, 10, 20, 30 years from now, we'd be right back. instead of 11 million, we'd have 20 million or 30 million people and the same discussion would go on. i think what the american people want is to fix the system. and i think what president obama and the obama white house wants is for the bill to be voted down and the house of representatives because they want a political issue in 2014 and 2016. and i tell you to my mind, the clarifying moment of the entire immigration debate occurred during the judiciary committee markup. i introduced a whole series of amendments to approve this bill. one amendment is put real teeth in border security. that was rejected. one amendment was to eliminate the path to citizenship for the 11 million people here illegally. now, that amendment left the

underlying provisions of the bill that provided an illegal work permit after the border was secured. and senator chuck schumer responded and he said -- if there is no citizenship, there can be no reform. and i actually took the opportunity to thank senator schumer, thank him for his candor. i said senator schumer has been clear today. he's stated he's won overarching political goal and that partisan political goal is more important than every other thing in this bill. he has stated if he doesn't get 100% of his partisan political bill, he's willing to do nothing to secure the border. he's willing to do nothing to improve high-tech immigration. he's willing to do nothing to help the farmers and ranchers and improve agricultural immigration. and most tellingly, he's willing to do nothing for the 11 million

people here illegally. he's willing to say, stay in the shadows because if i don't get every bit of my partisan political goal, i'll take my marbles and go home. it was candid but it was profound lisin -- profoundly cynical. that's the attitude of the white house. president obama played a key role in sticking the knife in the immigration reform then at the behest of the union bosses. so, right now, congress is not working to actually fix the system. i think that's what the american people want. that's what i hope the house does. i don't know if they will or not. but i'm doing everything i can to encourage them to do exactly that. yes, ma'am? >> just time for one more question. then we'll have to have a meeting with the media. time for one more. thank you. >> i think many of us are willing to get going on gross roots and are excited about it. i think our hands are tied.

we don't know what to do. we send our letters to representatives, we send our e-mails, we call. it feels like we're going up against a black curtain. we don't know what happens then. can you give us advice on how we get going, how do we mobilize people? some suggestions in activities we can all par tills pate in? >> it's a great question -- one of the things i'm trying to do is help and encourage that. for example, the immigration fight, we started a website, securebordersnow.com. for a national petition, we urged people to sign up on

securebordersnow.com to secure the borders first, fix the problem. don't repeat the mistakes of the past. getting involved and engage in that way makes a difference. as you may know, i'm participating in ads that are running nationally to abolish the irs. urging people to call in and sign up together to mobilize the grassroots. and let me give an example of what the grasses roots can do. from much of it -- i'm trying to facilitate that, but to be honest,f no one can do it as well as you can. each of you organically, nothing has the impact like someone you know and trust saying, listen, here's the truth. here's what we need to do. let me give you an encouraging anecdote. so about a month ago, i was in new york speaking at the new york republican party at their annual fund raiser. we had three groups of protesters there. one group protesting on immigration. one group protesting because

they favored gun control. and then we actually had another gun group that was protesting because i was willing to talk to the new york republicans who were not stout in defending the second amendment. it was interesting to get protesting from both ends of that. a group of liberal activists decided they were going to do what's called a "twitterbomb" that at the time i was speaking, they were going to launch liberal activists all over the country to tweet, "you cruz, you lose." in response, a group of conservative grassroots activists decided they were going to counter it. they were going to do a twitterbomb of their own. the campaign at 5:30 wednesday night, same time as the liberals were doing it. they were urging people to tweet, "cruz to victory." by 9:00 wednesday night, the #cruztovictory was trending number one in the united states and number two worldwide. [ applause ]

and the liberal attack didn't make the top ten list. now, the beauty of that was -- that was entirely organic. we didn't prop that, we didn't organize it, we didn't do anything. that came from the people. i got to tell you some of y'all may have seen a senior republican sometime ago referred to me and to rand paul as whackovers. and my response to that was not to reciprocate, not to launch an insult the other way but simply to say, if standing for liberty and the constitution make you a whacko bird, count me a proud whacko bird. many response to that grassroots activists have begun showing up at events with t-shirts that say whacko birds across the front. in my senate office, i have a picture of daffy duck and the

words whacko bird that a grassroots activist showed up and gave to me. we, the people, when we stand up together can do incredible things. i would encourage each of you organically with your friends, get engaged, calling your local representatives has a powerful impact. and standing for principle, urging them to stand for specific principle makes a real difference. i appreciate everything you're doing. thank you, god bless you. applause plautz -- [ applause ] princeton andt to harvard for law school.

>> shortly after his remarks, reporters. he answered questions about his possible presidential run and calling for a national review of stand your ground laws. >> representative peter kahne today said you were considering running in 2016. direction the party is moving in with officials like yourself and rand paul. >> i don't know mr. king. he's certainly entitled to his opinions. on the politics, but on the substance. i think our country is facing our nation, the future of of my kids and grand kids. we have to preserve our liberties. the obama administration has sadly followed a pattern of disregarding the law and undermining our constitutional

number two, we have to restore economic growth and opportunity. year on average. the only other period since world war ii of four consecutive years of less than 1% of gdp growth, 1979 to 1982. coming out of the jimmy carter administration, the same failed policies of spending and taxation. stagnation. luck ofhurt the most are the most vulnerable. people, hispanic, african-americans, single moms, back so that people who are struggling to climb the american -- the economic ladder opportunity to achieve the von martin.

martin had been white, it would have been different. both the act and the aftermath. >> any time you have a teenager who loses his life, that's a tragic event. number two, i think the entire proceeding had some unfortunate a butthere were some in the political sphere who tried to take a tragic encounter between george zimmerman, an hispanic man defending his neighborhood and trayvon martin and turn it into a racially polarized battle. that's unfortunate. that's corrosive to the political discourse.

i will say to the president's credit, following the verdict, he said the same thing. he said we need to respect the jury's verdict. and i appreciate the president saying that. i'll say more broadly that there's no doubt in the african-american community that there are great challenges because many children in the african-american community are facing less opportunity than they would like and that they would deserve. they're often in failing systems where their chances of getting a job, of climbing the economic ladder, of achieving minimized. and i think we ought to have far more passion for improving the hope and opportunity of young african-americans, young throughout the country. we ought to, for example, seek far more competition and school choice so that young kids who are trapped in schools that are not teaching them that are failing have the opportunity to

go to a school and learn because education is foundational to achieving the american dream. and i'd love to see a renewed sense of passion for how we can expand opportunity in the african-american community, the hispanic community. the two best ways to do so are improved education and educational choice, and economic growth, an environment where small businesses thrive and prosper because economic growth means there are jobs for people climbing the economic ladder. >> the president called for a national review of stand our ground laws and suggested this is part of the problem. >> it is not surprising that the president uses it seems every opportunity he can, to try to go after our second amendment right to keep and bear arms. it's unfortunate that this president and this administration has a consistent disregard for the bill of rights. whether it's the first amendment and rep stricting the rights of

our servicemen and women to share their faith and not be gagled, whether it is the second amendment right to keep and bear arms for law-abiding citizens. whether it is the fourth and fifth amendment rights of american citizens to be secure from unreasonable searches and siezure and be protected by arbitrary targeting by drones. this is an administration that's undermined the bill of rights. that's unfortunate. >> are you putting serious body >> are you putting serious thought into a presidential bid in 2016? >> i'm here because i'm focusing my time trying to make the argument and when the argument that number one, the free-market system of the united states of america has been the greatest engine for prosperity the world has ever seen. number two, there are constitutional safeguards, our bill of protect our god-given rights are foundational to this nation we need to get back to the constitution. i've been in office all of seven

months. prior to that, the last elected office i heard was student -- i held was student council. it has been quite the whirlwind. in the seven months, i've been over -- to over a dozen states, have ready five events across the state of texas doing pretty i can to make and help win the argument that we need to get back to our free-market principles and our constitutional foundations. >> is that a no or yes? >> that was my focus right now is not on politics. i recognize that in the media, everything likes to be put through a political lens. i can tell you what i tell folks on our team every day, let's focus on substance. good policy makes good politics. let's stand for principles and free markets and let stand for the constitution and the politics will take care of itself. >> are you focusing on early

voting states? >> i've been to a dozen states. this is a chance to in grade -- to engage grassroots activists who are a critical part of the national dialogue. but let me say something on the election of 2016. we just had an election a few months ago. as a voter, i think it is premature to decide who we should support. as a citizen and voter, who i will support in 2016 is who ever is standing up and leading, whoever is effectively defending free-market runcible's, whoever is defending the constitution, whoever is making the argument that there is another path we can go down to return to the prosperity and opportunity this country was built on. that is what we should be looking at an right now, the senate is a battlefield. i'm trying to stand for principles in the senate and if we focus on substance, the politics will take care of

itself. thank you very much. with the senate not instead -- not in session today, some live coverage on c-span two this afternoon at 5:00 eastern, former president jimmy carter will be joined by the former president of finland and the former foreign minister to algeria for a discussion on the israeli-palestinian conflict. the carnegie institute is hosting this event. following the news israeli and palestinian officials reached a tentative agreement for resuming stalled peace talks. that is live today at 5:00 on c- span2. the houses back in session at 2:00 eastern for debate on on a suspension bill scheduled for four: 30. one deals with weapons of mass destruction information sharing. later this week, house will consider the 2014 defense

department budget. also, two separate environmental bills. one focused on coal ash regulation and the other on epa rules. you can see the house live, here on c-span. the while, the senate gavels back in tomorrow at 10:00 eastern and will begin consideration of a bill dealing with funding of the department of transportation, housing and urban development. watch live senate coverage tomorrow on c-span2. on this morning's "washington managingwe talk to the editor of "the hill" before congress departs for its summer recess on august 2.

>> what to priorities do the house and senate want to get done? >> the house this week is going to be working on a defense appropriations fell. that is interesting because there could be a number of amendments that could complicate the passage of it, whether it's on egypt or syria. the house meeting tonight to discuss what amendments will be allowed to that will be a spirited date, we don't know what the rules committee will allow as far as amendments. ae senate is working on transportation appropriations bill which is fascinating because in committee, six republicans voted for spending levels that went beyond president obama's budget and beyond what the house republicans proposed. republicans are split on the bill. the big thing everyone is watching is immigration. what will the house be doing on immigration? the senate passed a bipartisan bill and there's a lot of

rusher on the house. looks like the house will be passing narrow immigration measures and going to conference, but we don't have word on when that will be, and it's not going to be this week, so it will probably be next week. , which havee bills been approved by the judiciary committee, will all be voted on the same day, but they will not vote together on one big bill like the senate bill. then go into conference and that's when the real negotiating starts. speaker john boehner was on "face the nation" talking about the immigration bill. i want to play a bit of that now. "video clip" a bill that allow provides a path to citizenship? >> what we are going to do in the houses we are dealing with this is a commonsense, step-by- step approach. we want to deal with this in chunks the members can deal with that grapple with and frankly, chunks the american people can get their arms around.

we don't know the specific timing of when we are going to see these chunks? think he will be next week. house says they are not going to vote on a senate bill and that's not going to be happening anytime soon. but they feel some pressure to move something. >> does that pressure come from the vote score was? guest: they feel that the ball is in their court. it's interesting what john boehner said there. he is not going to propose or endorse any type of bill. he has been critical of the senate measure but he also backed the farm bill before it went to the house floor. for is a tough challenge speaker boehner. a lot of his numbers don't want to pass anything like a pathway to citizenship that was in the senate bill.

as a party, the gop feels like they must pass time -- that -- must have some sort of in the -- some sort of immigration bill. if the bill is going to get to the president's desk, it must happen before the election year. this all is going to be very busy. we're going to be dealing with a possible government shutdown, dealing with the debt limit showdown, so other things will be grappling for attention on capitol hill. schieffer pushed the speaker several times in that interview to try to say whether he would support specifically the past to citizenship. the speaker did not want to say his personal opinion. talk about the dynamics speaker baiter is dealing with and why he would not want to give away his personal opinion. he has a lot of conservatives worried about primary challenges who don't have a lot of hispanics in their district and don't trust the obama administration to enforce border security provisions in the senate bill.

toy think it is worthless the obama administration is various things have deviated from what congress dictated, including the health care law where congress did not authorize the one-year delay of the employer mandate and the administration went had. republicans say this administration has started congress. boehner is in a tough position. the other thing to watch is majority leader -- majority leader eric cantor and another member are crafting legislation that would be the republican version of the dream act. republicans say it's not going thee dream act, but children of illegals who come here dealing with that, we don't have that language on that now. i don't think it's going to be passing or be introduced over the next week, but that could he coming into play when house and senate go into conference. you talked about spending bills and what's coming up in the next two weeks.

how is the process working this year in the face of possibly more sequestration cuts to come? guest: the committee is holding a hearing on sequestration, something from the headlines showing democrats are trying to put the emphasis back on sequestration. as far as the budget's us, there's not a lot of optimism on capitol hill because what the house passed and said it past as far as allocations for appropriations bill are vastly different grade they could not agree even to get into conference between house and senate spending levels. some people are saying there could be some type of government shutdown, but there is very little hope that appropriations measures, at least a lot of them, will be signed into law anytime soon. >> you talk about the vast differences between some of the

bills moving on capitol hill. here is a story from the hill talking about the transportation housing and urban development a living forward. the difference between house and senate version is about $10 billion. the senate will consider a $50 billion bill and houses weighing a $44 billion bill, a cut of $7 billion from last year. the differences between these this timethis unusual around in how far apart they are? >> yes and no. they are more far apart than they have been in previous years with republicans controlling the house as well as democrats controlling the senate. we've seen these differences and some of the spending comes across, grants in the senate bill are for high-speed rail. there side

when they debate the transportation bill on the floor. there's no doubt they will be noting that six republicans voted for it. that could split senate republicans from house republicans. whether it gets a deal i think is unlikely at this point. >> i want to read a little more from the hill story on why the transportation housing -- transportation, housing and urban development is moving toward. senate chairwoman patty murray, who serves as the chairwoman overseeing the bill, says the bill was chosen because it would impact sequestration across the country on infrastructure and economic seeth area are we going to a return to the impact of sequestration messages coming out of senate democrats and from the white house? guest: i think to some degree. but a lot of democrats, some republicans and democrats say

that the white house overplayed its hand on sequestration and republicans mocked the white house for saying the sky would fall once sequestration went into effect. , the economy would be humming along better and the white house says we are not there yet, but this is one of the messages about the economy. democrats are trying to make sequestration about the economy. a takeover the long-term that this will have real effects. republicans say they don't like sequestration and i don't like the defense cuts, but at the same time, they want cuts one way or the other and that is why they've gone into effect. host: here is an article from ."day plus "baltimore sun meat cleaver budget cutting is hurting marylanders. --says in his piece

are we going to be seeing more of these types of editorials coming from democratic members? was talking to a

member last week very concerned about suicide in the military and says there have and cuts to mental health services to prevent suicides in the military. whether it moves congress to actually get some type of deal, that's not going to happen before the august recess. maybe sequestration to some degree is altered, revamped during the debt limit discussions later this fall. host: we are talking to bob q sat, editor of "the hill errico -- "the hill." our lines are open. if you are outside the u.s., it five-38 23.

we have a call on our democratic line. i would like your yes to take a look at what i am fixing to say. the clinton presidency and obama presidency, if you look at them, congress is trying to do the same thing. bill clinton got a tax increase and that's all he got, but look at all the bad policies put in the, -- doma, and at glass-steagall, the same thing with obama. he got a tax increase and now what they are trying to do is put in all these bad policies, bad abortion policies, trying to destroy the government. they put bill clinton through impeachment. if the democrats did not realize this, they are going to lose in the midterm because like people are not going to come out and represent. we are not automatically going to vote for hillary. it is not progressive than we are not going to support hillary

clinton because she might bring back the triangulation of bill clinton. i forgot they will fare reform he cut grade -- welfare reform he cut. let's bring a bob q sat act and how president obama and the policies he's pushing might affect that great how are you seeing that? of theat the beginning cycle, after the election obama won and convincingly won over but romney, he was eyeing winning back the house and he wanted to aim for that. that is a real uphill climb right now and there is talk about how democrats could lose the senate grade -- lose the senate. > is brian schweitzer

not running in montana. democrats hoped he could succeed max baucus and he opted not to run. inc. that the math favors republicans in this cycle. it does not favor them in 2016. democrats are defending a lot more receipts -- a lot more seats. as far as the house, democrats need to pick up a large amount, and right now democrats had to worry about their seats as well as republicans. few think that democrats can win back the house in 2014. let's see what the implementation of obama care is free of that goes smoothly, democrats will go well. it does not, republicans will do well. the other issue will be the economy and both parties want to get out their base in midterm elections. host: in recent midterms, we have seen wave elections, a big

wins for one side or another. what is the prediction for this upcoming midterm? will this be closer? guest: it is a little bit too early to say. history has not been kind. they called the six-year itch . but presidents are in their second year election. president obama had a tough midterm election in 2010. it was a shellacking where republicans took back the house and cut into the democratic majority. here for senate republicans, this is probably their last shot to win back the senate for a while. the math in 2016 will not be good. republicans will be defending a lot of c street can republicans win back the senate? yes, they need to pick up six seats which will be challenging. at the same time, i think it's too early but because of history, most people think

republicans will pick up seats. host: we are talking with bob cuasck of "the hill" newspaper. i will ticket to a policy issue. how important is energy, carbon credit -- guest: i think the house will try. there are two energy bills on the house floor this week that deal with the economy. republicans say they want to cut back and energy regulations so that would help the economy. one is by congressman bill cassidy running against congressman landrieu and the other is offered by congressman david mckinley and that is the coal-ash bill which has been labeled a hazardous material.

this is a bipartisan bill level that they house floor. as you see gas prices rise, you always see more talk on capitol hill of energy. it is no surprise in the east of the summer that house republicans have scheduled a couple of energy bills. host: in his big speech on global warming issues, environmental issues, president obama talked about doing things through the executive branch and not through congress to lower carbon emissions. is anything happening on capitol hill right now that has -- that have been -- that members have tried to move on carbon emissions? guest: the president has failed to try to get climate bills through. one passed the house. nancy pelosi was able to muscle a bill for the lower chamber and installed in the senate.

president obama is going to use his administration powers to address climate change and they will be a series of rule making that they will issue. congress can overturn these rolls through the congressional review act but they have to be final rules. for the congressional review, you don't need 60 votes. host: they are talking about carbon pollution from power plants. guest: yes, there is a question of when that rule is final. it would move through the house. would the senate passage? president obama can veto it even of a gets 51 votes but i'm sure the white house does not want to be in that situation. there are democrats nervous about what the administration is doing an energy and climate change. the administration has made it clear that they will draft -- they will address this through rulemaking. host: we are taking your calls on the congressional agenda.

bruce is up next, independent from baltimore, maryland. caller: good morning. i'm a registered independent. i have drifted more conservative than one of the things as immigration. i have nothing against people who are legal immigrants i'm totally against any type of comprehensive immigration reform because of personal experience. i had a number of illegal immigrants that have moved into my neighborhood that have made no attempt to simulate -- to a similar engine and a respect for the neighborhood. host: the immigration bill is being broken into pieces, are there pieces of this bill you do agree with?

did we caller: i am so frustrated. there is a house right next to me with illegal immigrants coming with different license plates. they have had code violations and it took me years to get an inspector out there. they don't care about law. what host: do you want to see from congress? caller: i am conservative now and i will vote republican. conservative republicans have to stand up for this stuff. host: we will go to kenneth from our as some of our democrat line, good morning. caller: i'm from marianna, arkansas. i would like congress to look into the standard ground lost. many people don't know that in

1947, jackie robinson got ran out of the sanford, florida. he had threats against him. the citizens there got together and the mayor caved in and they had to moveable ball to him out of sanford, fla. to daytona beach to complete their training. there is something wrong down there with the jury that was picked to down there but congress needs to look into these laws especially stand your ground. the citizens that ran jackie robinson out of florida probably had children sitting on that jury. they need to look and see the relationship of what is going on how these jurors are picked. people looking for a fair and impartial jury. host: talk about the standard ground laws that were brought up because of the trayvon martin case guest: that is an issue that will be talked about

especially after president obama's extraordinary press conference on friday which was totally unexpected and his reaction to the verdict which was nearly a week after the verdict came in. democrats are definitely echoing that call. they say we need to have hearings to take a look at the state lost republicans, for the most part, are saying is an issue of state power and states want to pass their own laws, they are free to do so. you will see a lot of reaction to what the president said on friday. congress was out when a add that press conference. host: host: congresswoman marcia fudge from ohio was on nbc's "meet the press."

she is the head of the national black caucus and talked about the trayvon martin case and the larger issues. [video clip] >> you look at what has happened in 2013. we've got the trayvon martin case that everyone is talking about and this is happening across the country every day. you look at the fact that we have a supreme court that just gutted the voting rights act. they are trying to dissenting with affirmative-action parade you look at the house of representatives that last week took food stamps out of the farm belt. look at this past week when they started to block grant 1. we are being attacked from someone decides when you have to decide where you have the most impact host: the different issues that she brought up there, are any of those coming up in the next two weeks having

to do with the supreme court voting rights or the exclusion of food stamps in the house farm bill? guest: definitely the voting rights act. there is a big hearing in the senate where congressman john lewis, a democrat from georgia, a civil rights activist, and jim sensenbrenner from wisconsin both agreed that congress does need to address the voting rights act after the supreme court decision. house republican leaders have not indicated what they will do on that just yet. at the same time, there is some bipartisan calls for that and as far as the farm bill, debbie stabenow, is ready to finish the farm bill is the house passed a farm bill after much difficulty as well as the senate but the food stamps as was mentioned was not included on the house side. house republicans indicated they may pass a separate food stamp legislation and will not go into conference until that is done.

the farm bill is something that is pending but probably is not going to be settled any time the committee after the congressional recess. host: charles from connecticut of our republican line, good morning. caller: good morning, i question is probably more economics than politics. we have this suppose the debt limit. why do we have a debt limit when nobody ever pays any attention to it? i will get off the line listen to your answer. guest: the united states has debts and we borrow a lot of money. some members are kind of confused as to why we borrow money from other countries when foreign nationals cannot contribute to politicians.

in order to pay our bills, the united states needs to lift the debt limit. this has been going on for decades. usually, the process is just to schedule a vote with a clean debt increased republican said we are not doing that anymore and we saw that in 2011 with a major showdown. republicans said we will need some spending reforms. finally, a deal was brokered. of the credit rating agencies after that downgraded the united states credit rating. now we are facing that again. it is not clear exactly when the date will be. has been moved back because the federal government has received more revenues partially because of the fiscal cliff deal that was reached in january. within the next several months, the debt limit will have to be raised and the president has said he is not negotiating like in 2011. it was an ugly time in washington but republicans are saying that the boats are not there for a clean debt increase and we need some spending reform. it could get quite ugly again.

host: we are looking at a fall timeframe? guest: or possibly late fall. will looks like it will be this year but the treasury department is reassessing how much money they have and how long they can keep going. at some point, they will say that we need the debt limit raised. there has been no progress on the grand bargain the president has been doing a charm offensive on republicans mostly in the senate have credited the president for getting together and having these dinners whether it be at a restaurant in d.c. or at the white house. they have not yielded much as far as negotiating some type of a grand bargain whether it is on medicare, medicaid, and the debt limit. that is probably not going to happen. host: could you talk about detroit and a bankruptcy?

guest: i saw a press release from john conyers from michigan. it is big news that the city has filed for bankruptcy. it says it's the only way it can survive. this has angered a number of constituents in detroit. i have not seen a lot of what congress will be doing but certainly, as this moves forward, a lot of people think it is an easy way out whether it is for individuals or cities to file for bankruptcy. others say it is absolutely a must in order to save the city. host: chris from waltham, mass. on our independent line. caller: first of all, i don't know how supporting the billions

of dollars of unfuinded pension liabilities would help detroit get back on the right track. i was thinking that the democrats and republicans do the same thing. we are still talking like this is a professional wrestling match, blue verses read, republicans versus democrats when we have seen for the last 10-20 years the illusion of our civil liberties and our economic decline. you talked about the debt limit. it is basically magic paper that we just pull out from under the bed and say take this money or we will shoot you. host: we're talking about priorities of congress and the short term.

-- in the short term. what do you think their priorities should be? caller: to ask themselves some very difficult questions about why they are doing their job the way they are doing it. and to absolve themselves. host: let's go to mike from beaverton, ore., on our democratic line. caller:hi, i am concerned because i am autistic and i wrote a speech at and make people cry because i was talking the truth. my new speech is -- in any

religion, in any country, man's inhumanity to man. basically, the americans have a national debt, a gross debt of $17.40 trillion. and it is expected to be $18.20 trillion in fiscal year 2014. this means that the federal debt per person is about 52,006 of its $71. -- $52,671. there are companies like chase manhattan bank that have not paid taxes in 15 years. i know this for a fact because i do my research.

host: the president this week is going to be giving a series of speeches talking about the economy, the pivot back to the economy as it has been described. will he be talking about these issues? guest: a think you will talk about what the economy looks like and it is getting better at a slow pace. that was the message of reelection campaign is that we averted economic disaster after the implosion of 2008 and i think president obama will talk a lot about that as far as the debt. you talk to some democrats including senator charles schumer who has said we are on an unsustainable path. whether it is a long or short way out, there are different opinions about how quickly the u.s. needs to act. at some point, it needs to act because of the ballooning deficit.

the president has had a rough six months for a lot of his agenda items other than immigration reform and gun control died in the senate. they are trying to revive it. immigration reform does not look like is a sure bet to pass. gun-control and immigration were his two top priorities. on the economy, there are signs of life especially in the housing sector. it is not surprising the white house wants to talk about that. host: this is a positive place he can go to? guest: exactly. host: also important is presidential nominees. what about the deal that was reached last week and is there a time line for moving them? guest: they had the nuclear option, the threat of nuclear option plastic and it went down to the wire. this was senate majority leader harry reid threatening to change the rules of the senate so that for executive branch nominees,

not judicial and legislation, he would change the rules of the senate so that it would clear with a straight up or down about and they cannot -- the threshold is 51 votes. there were seven nominees that were in dispute. that is what harry reid kept saying. they said republicans can avert the nuclear option if they let the seventh through. in a deal negotiated senate republican leaders and john mccain was in the middle of that deal, they reached an agreement to avert the nuclear option. the democrats gave a good deal. they gave up two nominees for lead nlrb which is the national labor relations board which is one of the most important agencies for organized labor. because of the gridlock in washington and a lack of approval for these nominees, the nlnb and powerless. there was a court ruling that

ruled that the nominees that president obama, there were unconstitutional because of how their recess appointee. democrats said we will withdraw those two nominees. president obama quickly nominated two replacements after the deal was reached and they will go through the committee, that health and labor committee this week and should be on the floor as early as next week harry reid got the nlnb working but got richard cordray confirmed. that was a major battle between the parties. the he still has the power if he was to go back to it. host: it sounds like you are

saying this is day win for democrats. guest: absolutely. some republicans were divided on the deal. at the same time, the republicans say that those two unconstitutional picks are not going to be at the nlrb. they say they got that but overall, harry reid had more lovers but also got a good deal. host: john is from michigan on a republican line. caller: my outlook of what will happen in the congress is we are just going to be looking at more gridlock. my next question is to the commentator. i watch c-span pretty much every morning. i noticed that the republicans get skipped in the process quite

often. my other comment is i also noticed that of your callers, i don't know if you realize it, but only 30% of the population is black in this country and you are pretty much adding 40% of how much the call in. host: are you concerned about the numbers? we want everybody to call in on c-span and give their opinion. are you concerned because we pull them up as the calls come in. caller: i have called and every morning and don't get through. i get through maybe once per year. i noticed that even this morning, you skipped a republican in your process. instances where you had 10 callers, two were republicans.

host: we have a rule on c-span of 30 days before you can call in again. if you're concerned you do not get through, try every 30 days. we'll continue our discussion about the week ahead on capitol hill, the next two weeks ahead before the august recess. from texarkana, texas, independent line. are you there? caller: yes, sir. [indiscernible] democrats are for about some republicans are for cheap labor.

can we get this straightened out? will the people from -- with the most money when? --win? host: campaign finance and emigration. guest: there are legislations that democrats have introduced on public financing of campaigns that is not a top priority on capitol hill. as far as immigration, the big difference between the debate now and the debate during the bush administration when immigration bill passed the senate but did not get to his desk is that big business and organized labor are on the same page 3 organized labor back then had major concerns that are members would lose jobs. this time around, labor is on board and the chamber of

commerce is on board and there are prominent republicans ranging from grover norquist to karl rove who are for comprehensive immigration reform legislation great in the house there are many conservatives who don't like that bill. host: virginia from port orchard, washington, on our democratic line. caller: i'm a very old lady. i like the quality we showed to the poor and the people who are ill and the black people. it is time that congress, especially the house, changes the tax laws. some immigrants came on a boat or an airplane or some walked. i wish there was a little more humanity and the republican side. they need to see the hundred people.

congress need to see how many people are overweight. host: she brings up tax reform in her comments. do we see anything moving forward on a comprehensive tax reform? guest: the push for it will happen in the fall. the senate finance committee chairman max baucus and the winds and means committee dave camp have a good relationship and have been going on the right and think they can defy the odds and bring together a tax reform bill even though the parties don't agree. at the same time, camp and baucus worked well together and there will make date -- they will make a major push. host:bob casack, managing editor >> thehe hill" is paper.

houses back in session with several bills. later later this week, the house will consider the 2013 defense department budget and two separate environmental bills. one is focused on coal as regulations and the other on epa rules. you can see the house live your on c-span. meanwhile, the senate dabbles back in tomorrow and will begin consideration of a bill dealing the department of transportation, housing and urban develop it. that's coverage tomorrow on c- span2. two-dent obama begins a month series of speeches focusing on the economy and jobs as congress works on spending bills ahead of the new fiscal year beginning in october. on wednesday, the president returned to an illinois college

he visited as a freshman senator. he will speak wednesday at the university of central missouri in warrensburg. vice president joe biden is beginning a six-day trip to east asia with a focus on trade and security ties. the vice president will focus on ways to expand bilateral trade. then he will meet with business leaders in mumbai before heading to singapore on wednesday. , the in washington brookings institution hosted a discussion on immigration reform and what it would mean for america'. here's a look. i mentioned detroit and i don't know a ton about the tripos economy other than what you might read in the national press. i would say comprehensive immigration reform is not the only thing that's going to help detroit comeback to be the great city that was, but it is

one of the things that will help make that happen. anytime you have a group of people living in the shadows, afraid to access law enforcement or maybe not able to pay taxes or given the education they , thatnot having english the problem. that creates a subset of people living in the shadows and that will drag down any community. immigration reform, comprehensive national immigration reform is not the only thing that will help detroit, but it's one of the things that will help detroit, and every city no matter where you local economy is. >> let me add on to the detroit thing. detroit has a lot of immigrants -- most are living outside a longy but the city has history of immigration that was one of the big gateways in the

early part of the 20th century to the culture of immigration there. the groups have changed over time and it is strong. they are strongly participating in the economy at all different levels and it tilts toward the higher end of the scale because immigrants have been there longer. those kinds of occupations and industries, there is an initiative called global detroit affiliated with global michigan. the main mission is to attract and retain support in michigan and it has a number of the within thatgies and it is something that has become an important part of an initiative throughout the great lakes to develop these kinds of programs because of the energy and investments that immigrants bring. you can see the entire

discussion from the brookings institution on immigration a little after 2:00 eastern after our live coverage of the u.s. house of representatives trade that's coming at the top of the hour. to take us there, more from this morning's washington journal. a discussion of repairing -- a discussion of what it would cost to repair and replace the systems that carry the nation's drinking water and what could happen if these systems are not updated. week in this segment, we look at how your money is at work in a different world program. a recent environmental protection survey estimated the u.s. will need to invest about $384 billion to repair and replace the countries aging water systems great here to help us walk through these issues is the deputy executive director

of the american water works association. talk about this water situation in prince george's county that came up last week and made headlines outside the region in d.c. and around the country and what it tells us about the state of water systems nationwide. guest: thank you. i'm pleased to be here with you this morning. i'm not familiar with the details of the situation in prince george's county outside of washington dc. i can say reflects a much rawer problem with the state of america's water infrastructure. first, let's reflect for a moment on how critical this infrastructure is. it supports public health, hygiene, fire protection, our economy, and our quality of life grade week light literally cannot live without it. iser infrastructure critical. there is no question that we face a significant need to increase spending on the reinvestment, rebuilding,

refurbishment of this infrastructure. what is the american water works association? who do you guys work for? >> that is a good question. we are a nonprofit educational society dedicated to solving water problems. our historic focus has been on safe drinking water, but we also deal with wastewater of a storm water about water reuse and conservation. all water issues, frankly. we have about 50,000 members and in the united states, our utility members serve about 80% of the american people with safe and affordable water. we are talking about how federal dollars are at work come above most that role -- most water systems operate on local rates and fees, correct? that is correct.

the u.s. conference of mayors estimated that last year, total spending on wastewater and water infrastructure in the united states was a little over $111 billion. wast $45 billion of that for investment in new or upgraded treatment plants, waste facilities and pipe networks. the balance was maintenance expense. the federal government offers no help at all for operating and maintaining utilities and we think that is probably appropriate. of the capital investment that is made, about 93 % of of that is local money. the federal government does offer some loans through a number of rogue grahams and about one percent of that total spending is in the form of federal grants, which are targeted exclusively to very small, very hard-pressed communities without substantial

grant assistance would not be able to do the job. host: talk about this epa $343 million for fixes and upgrades to the water system. is the local fees and local rates not going to be able to keep up with that level of funding? guest: i think local spending will have to keep up. it probably means some water bills are going to go up in the future. i would say that figure is considerably low. the american water works association did an experiment and we looked more increasingly at the kinds of the spending local governments will face. the epa lifted a subset of that spending. just for drinking water infrastructure, we face a

reinvestment in need of about a trillion dollars in the next 25 years and we can confident that wastewater needs are about the same. our viewerswed some stats on the epa estimate of re-hundred 84 billion dollars. i want to show you some stats about u.s. water systems in general. about 264 million residents are served by 54,000 community water systems. an estimated 1.8 million miles of water lines around the country. 485r systems break about times a year and clean water 1.7s from hypes, about trillion gallons of clean water leak from hypes every year. we are talking about water issues with tom curtis and we want to hear from you if you have questions or comments for tom curtis. there is a story about water have a storyou

about a water system in your community. we're are going to split them up by region, eastern and central ..s., mountain and pacific give us some information about the average age of the water systems in the u.s. and the average lifespan of water pipes. guest: that is an important question. unfortunately, it's hard to get a national average age of water pipes. ,t is true that an early systems in the northeast and some parts of the upper midwest are older than some systems the west and south, but age is not the only factor that determines the life expectancy of a pipe. it's an important factor, but by no means the only one. pipe size, material, the way it was buried in the ground, the bed it lies on, the operation

of external forces like vibrations from overhead traffic, all of those things are critical the job that utilities have you do is understand the systems to do what we call advanced asset management where they assess and continuously monitor the condition of their pipes. pg countyactly what showed. they took how active steps to avert what might have been a very catastrophic water main break. >> this is the front page of ."e "washington post beingictures of those affected by the repair work

being done there. we see a picture of a pipe actually being replaced here. if we can go to a question on twitter talking about those pipes -- what percentage of pipes are ceramic and plastic? guest: i don't have information on what percentage might be plastic or ceramic. i can say that every type of pipe has a place and there's a ,se for every type of pipe where the pipe is placed, what kind of job it has to do, it is almost impossible to say there is one best type of pipe. host: is there a certain pipe being phased out or a worse type of hype? i don't think so.

in our nations history used almost exclusively cast iron or wood. those materials are not used. wood is not used anywhere. . of their favorite morning --

with a cup of their favorite morning beverage in front of them. remember, no water, no coffee -- >> we will leave this portion of washington journal to return to our live coverage of the house. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. we give you thanks, o god, for giving us another day. we ask your blessing upon this assembly and upon all to whom

the authority of government is given. encourage the members of this house, o god, to use their abilities and talents in ways that bring righteousness to this nation and to all people. ever remind them of the needs of the poor, the homeless or forgotten and those who live without freedom or liberty. may they be instruments of justice for all americans. may your spirit live with them and with each of us and may your grace surround us and those we love, that in all things we may be the people would you have us be in service to this great nation. may all that is done within the people's house this day be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof.

pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 thejournal stands approved. pledge of allegiance will be offered by the gentleman from texas, mr. burgess. mr. burgess: please rise. 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: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx. ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, the white house announced this week that president obama will be returning his focus to jobs and the economy. but he's not planning to do this by removing red tape from job creators, withdrawing his opposition to the keystone x.l.

pipeline, or by repealing obamacare. he's planning to do this by giving speeches. speeches don't turn the economic tide. speeches devoid of policy proposals won't help the 4.3 million americans who have been without a job for more than six months. speeches also won't undo the damage obamacare is already dolling out to small businesses nd working families. the particularly lethargic recovery our nation is dredging through is the economic signature of the obama presidency. rather than blocking american energy or defending obamacare, the president should try something new -- working with house republicans to advance our plan for economic growth and jobs. the american people deserve a thriving economy and economic growth. house republicans have a plan to there. the president should take note. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. burgess: i ask unanimous

consent to rise, address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. burgess: mr. speaker, this week the energy and commerce committee, subcommittee on health, will begin a markup on legislation to fix the problem that congress has been struggling with for over a decade. that's fixing what's known as the doc fix or the sustainable growth rate formula. the proposed legislation is bipartisan. both sides of the dice agree that this must be done and incorporates the feedback we've received from over 80 stakeholder groups. the legislation proposes and replaces the problematic formula with an improved system to increase the quality of care for medicare patients and streamline the costly and complicated process in a fiscally responsible way. most importantly, the legislation ensures that medicare patients will continue medical ccess to service. by providing incentives for doctors to continue to treat medicare patients or putting the health of our seniors first. i'm proud to be part of this commonsense solution. i look forward to speaking to

this house more about this in the weeks to come as it works its way through committee. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? without objection, so ordered. mr. wolf: today i ask a question about benghazi. why was the -- was the c.i.a. security team repeatedly ordered to stand down for more than 30 minutes after the attack began? where did the order to stop the team from responding originate? was it directed by the c.i.a. or someone else in washington? if the team had been allowed to respond immediately, could the lives of ambassador stevens and sean smith been saved? last year news reports indicated that the c.i.a. security team in benghazi was repeatedly ordered to stand down or not respond to the attack at the consulate by agency chain of command. trusted sources have confirmed this report. saying that the security team was ready to respond within

minutes after receiving the initial call for help. but the c.i.a. repeatedly blocked their departure for more than 30 minutes. ultimately disobeyed but by then it was too late to save stevenness and smith. will we ever, ever find the truth? we need a select committee. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from nebraska seek recognition? without objection without objection. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to honor my constituent, jack hoffman of atkinson, nebraska, and the team jack foundation. at only 7 years old, jack has inspired millions of people from around the world while raising awareness and funding the fight against pediatric brain cancer through the team jack foundation. many of us remember when jack, after surviving brain cancer, made his now legendary touchdown run during the university of nebraska's spring football game. the video of that play was voted the top play on spen.

last week jack's touchdown was during espn's espy awards. this award was well deserved. mr. smith: but more importantly, jack has used his newfound fame to further the team jack foundation, which is committed to helping find a cure for pediatric brain cancer. i hope all of my colleagues will join me in honoring jack, not only for his award, but also for his continued efforts to fight cancer. thank you, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, so ordered. mr. sessions: mr. speaker, thank you very much. today is a very important day in the life of america. as we recognize that republicans are back in washington to try and grow our economy and bring jobs back to the free enterprise system. mr. speaker, for 12 years republicans worked hard on doubling the size of g.d.p. and we did that, from a g.d.p. of

$6,500,000,000 to over $14 trillion. over the last 5 1/2 years, we have seen our president embark on an agenda that will reduce not just g.d.p. but jobs and job growth in america. we now stand at a g.d.p. at just over 1%. mr. speaker, this means that jobs, as we saw this last month when we saw the jobs report that came out, some 700,000 jobs that have been created in america this year, of that number, about 600,000 are part-time jobs. america cannot make ends meet. as workers, as families, as communities, if we have a president who stands in the way of the free enterprise system and job growth. mr. speaker, i urge house republicans to continue their work on behalf of the american people for american jobs and to grow our economy. thank you very much.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 4:30

entertaining with style. that was her heritage and she did it again in the white house right after her administration, during the johnson years, the whole world erupted. we have women who went to work and get divorces and demanded equal rights. we had flower children, free love, and free sex. i missed all that. [laughter]

the whole world changed and it became a whole new concept of women. i think that today she represents the new woman. >> as we continue our conversation on first ladies, patricia baldwin, social secretary to jacqueline kennedy, talks about the role of the first lady and how it has changed, tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span. a new wayk of this as of thinking about how people will consume television in the future. it is an online platform that is direct to consumers. people can get access to live broadcast television on their tv are device. -- on their device without a cable connection. the key piece of the technology is a micro-antenna. think of it as how we used to

have over the years antennas in the past that were large, we miniature rise them. i think it is a desire to create competition, to have choice. >> streaming broadcast television signals to any web enabled the vice tonight on "the communicators," on c-span 2. >> the brookings institution today opened a panel be hosted a panel discussion analyzing the impact on -- analyzing the impact of immigration on cities and communities. the white house domestic policy director provided opening remarks during this 90 minute session.

>> good morning. >> good morning. >> welcome to brookings. we really appreciate you joining us this morning for a discussion about immigration inorm and its implications major metropolitan areas. i want to set the conversation today and why we are focusing on cities and metropolitan areas, particularly as we focus on this important topic. recently released a book co-authored by bruce adn jennifer [indiscernible] ambitious subtitle, "house cities and metros are fixing are broken politics -- how cities and metros are fixing our broken politics." "leaders in cities and

metropolitan areas across the country are stepping up with innovative, often bipartisan solutions to some of the super size challenges of our time, such as reviving the manufacturing sector in northeast ohio, one firm with one university partnership or industry partnership at a time. in denver through primarily local funds, or through boosting exports and trade at the point of production, such as in portland, oregon." today's forum is about local leadership in another super sized issue, managing the flow and immigration of immigrants. now, this morning we will hear how leaders in regions of -- as diverse as silicon valley, salt lake city, and new york are moving forward to advance opportunities for immigrant families, workers, and employers in the absence of comprehensive

immigration reform. to be sure, regional leaders must leave because they know the unique assets of their economies best, but they cannot go it .lone a strong and transparent partner goes a long way to enabling on the ground social and economic success. panel today will remind us why comprehensive immigration reform matters to strengthening regional economies and opportunities. i also hope that you will learn that if washington cannot make inroads on immigration reform, there does remain a silver lining, that progress is still possible because of the hard work and creative collaborations and regional

leaders. we had the good fortune a hearing from one key federal partner. psyllium melos, director of the white house domestic policy council. she has long been a champion for immigrants rights, both prior to anding the administration now, where she has been working tirelessly within the administration and with members of congress to get a program that -- programmatic and legislative reforms done. as a test of it, she received the macarthur genius award in 2000. i also wanted to take note that cecilia was born and raised in detroit. her father works as an engineer digit work as an engineer at the ford motor company. -- work as an engineer in the

fold -- ford motor company. time permitted we are hoping to get a window into whether there is a short-term role for the federal government to get out of its fiscal crisis and emerge as a matter -- mighty center of innovation and production, but in the meantime let's focus on the topic of today. please join me in welcoming cecilia moonunos. [applause] >> thank you very much, amy, for that introduction. i am a big, big fan of brookings and this is an incredibly important forum. thank you for allowing me to be part of it. have workedheard, i on immigration policy for over 25 years. while this issue is discussed and decided upon, the impact of the discussion around the

with thedealing implications, helping them become fully integrated into american life, as you heard i know this from personal experience. i am from detroit, the daughter of immigrants from bolivia. i grew up surrounded by communities populated around the world. the neighbors were from the ukraine, finland, from all over. this is very much part of the detroit story as much as it is the american story. chicago, building coalitions. immigration and integration happens in local communities. when i started at the white house before i became the director of domestic policy council, it means i managed the white house relationship with

governors and mayors across the country. in that role i worked closely with local leaders as they struggled to recover from that recession. many of them from both political parties understood and understand the role they play in helping them grow the local economy and get through difficult economic times. i can tell you that president obama understands this as well. the president developed a view that immigration reform was not just the right thing to do, it was an economic imperative. ago bipartisan immigration reform bill that passed, it was a significant -- there will be a significant cost to our country if congress fails to act. let me just give you a few of the highlights.

more investments. our economy will grow by an additional 5.4%. if congress acts, deficits will fall by $850 billion, our debt will shrink as a share of the economy. if congress acts, the social security trust fund will be extended by two years and the shortfall will be reduced by nearly half of $1 chilean. if congress acts the recovery of the housing market will be strengthened thanks to stronger demand and homes in neighborhoods hardest hit by the recession. through theacts, permanent authorization of travel promotion that will provide a significant boost to tourism and hospitality around the country. imperative, aoral security imperative, and it is

about basic fairness, but on top of all of that the economic cost of inaction is too high. should add that if congress acts, we can finally address the challenges cities have been facing as they grapple with the symptoms of our broken immigration system. the authorityhas to enforce, local governments live with the results of what congress does and fails to do. because congress has failed to address the broken immigration system for years, local governments wrestle with the challenges of undocumented immigrants within their communities. states and municipalities have to face these challenges in a variety of ways. attempting to engage local law enforcement officials, that is a federal function, to the states that passed in state tuition

laws. police forces wrestle with challenges of building relationships within communities in the fear of context within communities, making it hard for folks to come forward. school districts worked to integrate children through the their parents may be deported. as you might expect, that kind of fear interferes with student performance. the fact is that states cannot regulate immigration. that is the job of the u.s. congress. even if they could, we could hardly say that a patchwork of 15 different approaches is a rational policy. we know that it is happening in states and local governments. i know you are going to hear more about that today, but it

is their job to regulate and in the framework of a rational policy we could be giving states and local governments the support that they need to do this job well. describe theart -- current state of play a little bit, i am hopeful that on june 27, 2013, things will go down in history. i was fortunate enough to be sitting in the gallery as they passed the immigration modernization act, the bipartisan bill we have been talking about for so long. the vote was a result of countless hours put in by a -- an extremely dedicated group of staff providing technical support along the way. no one got everything that they wanted, including the white house. the final bill reflected the president's principles. it was consistent with our history as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. when the time came to vote on

the bill, the senate passed it bipartisanrwhelming majority. but that in perspective, only two places, utah and washington, d.c., give either candidate's the vote. the reason is it is a smart compromise and a good policy that creates a fair halfway the citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants in our communities, a pathway that will require them to learn english, pay taxes and penalties, going to the end of the line behind immigrants caught in the limbo of immigration backlogs. it will put food on our table. these immigrants play an integral role in improve security and it is time that we gave them a path with the citizenship. the bill creates an expedited at four young immigrants known

have lived ino constant fear of deportation. the bill represents the best chance our country has that in decades to modernize the legal immigration system, building on the process of cracking down on employers that exploit undocumented workers, creating a meaningful halfway to citizenship, modernizing the system for families, workers, and employees. so, we know the immigration reform fights has never been easy and we do not expect it to be easy this time. there are folks predicting that we will not get any further, but there is little question in my mind that the senate bill or something like would pass if they had a chance to vote on it. as the president said, now is the time that and how they will

try their hardest to pull this a part to stop common-sense immigration reform from becoming a reality. so, we have work to do. even in today's washington the call for action is too broad, too deep, too forceful to ignore. i believe that congress will listen to a clear majority of americans. they will listen to the business community, the labor movement, the chamber of commerce, leaders from across the spectrum, faith communities, law enforcement, and importantly state and local governments, all of whom are calling for a common-sense immigration reform along the lines of what was passed. and yesterday, david + wrote a joint op- ed with the title -- past the

immigration bill. we are engaged as a clear majority -- "telling them that now is not the time to let up, it is the time to speak up, to make sure that everyone in this city and around the country knows what is at stake. i came to this work because families like mine are still working so hard for the american dream and we have come too far to quit now for immigrant families and communities all over the country. i will not quit, i know the president will not quit. with the help of the voices from around the country, we can get in cities and counties

around the country." i'll forward to the effort of getting to the place where the president signs that bill into law. thank you all very much. [applause] >> thank you so much for being with us this morning, cecilia. she has more or working on those issues for most of her -- professional career. good morning, welcome, everyone. ourll be moderating discussion today. we have to be awesome panelists. i want to ask the panelists to come up and get microphones. i willat is happening say a few words, awkwardly moved

to the sea, and continue the discussion myself. as you just heard, there are many good reasons for immigration reform with many facets to make our system work better and strengthen the u.s. economy. the immigration debate is very much alive in congress as they continue to discuss how to change laws, many of them were just mentioned. with industries and policies around the admission of legal permanent residents. we do not know yet what the outcome of the permanent effort will be, if we will see a lot resembling the package of immigration policies one month ago or if congress will take a like thosepproach, discrete bills being discussed presently, or will they not be able to come to an agreement?

what are the consequences of doing that? u.s.ow several things, immigration policy has not been overhauled in more than 20 years. for thethe act was immigration legalization of about 300 million -- standard thousand undocumented immigrants. the 1990 immigration act followed four years later with increased models that establish priority systems of employment and family based immigration with family based programs such as h1b. with minor modifications along the economy has changed. and others the streets have

diminished. national economies have default -- have developed a broad. there is now a global economy, which is where the u.s. compete. on top of that the u.s. now has twice as many immigrants, more than 40 million today. then they did in 1990. of the pressure of on the united states and to keep a policy that works better with our economy. i am going to make my awkward move to the chair right now. hopefully [inaudible] i will] [inaudible] -- hopefully i will not [inaudible] >> to continue, the discussion

today is about federal an abrasion reform, but today we're looking at it through metropolitan lights. cities, suburbs, the states across the country are already agreement, incorporating immigrants and their children. our three guests are going to help put this into perspective. we have seen many state municipal actions over the years showing the effects of immigration, positive and negative. the success of brought immigration reform hinges on how it is implemented at the local level. since most of american immigrants live in metropolitan areas, the debate over immigration reform happens there as well. cities and metropolitan areas are of course very different from each other. housinge different

markets, skills, composition. they're different from each other. they start businesses, pay to states like arizona and georgia, they have taken measures to make the state's unwelcoming by creating their own enforcement laws. benefits made by municipal governments, nonprofit organizations and benefits -- businesses, they we have three different distinguished guests when it comes to these policies around immigration, they are want to talk about what is happening in their cities. to my far left, from new york

city the commissioner of the mayor's office of immigrant affairs. she has had a number of jobs in city government and beings -- brings the from lack of government work of a city that has more immigrants than any other in the united states. she recently put out a blueprint for immigration. she is a true leader among city officials in the united states and abroad. next to her is jason mathis, lake cityof the salt and its downtown alliance. a pragmatic statement of five principles here to guide the utah immigration discussion, we will hear more about that this morning.

it makes up about 17% of the population. the difference between advancing the knowledge of workers across california. need fors the effective -- unique perspective of building skills applying to workers, the family, and the community they live in. los angeles is the second- largest, about 40% of residents were born outside the united states. these metropolitan areas and many others are focusing on making sure that these businesses, these families with children in schools, the health care can integrate with immigrant communities, helping to build skills, and immigrants

who are ready to naturalize get the help that they need. strategic andmost innovative practice programs around the country. heard, thereust are lots of possible ways that immigration reform my come out over the next couple of months. several measures, discreet bills on certain issues, support measures. we just heard from the administration about what they would like to see. which parts of the immigration reform resonate with you? can you talk about the efforts in your organization? >> first, good morning. thank you. in newto say, whitbread york -- first of all, i have to say that we care most about is

reform meeting to happen. the mayor care is a great deal about this conversation. he started a national coalition that brings together business leaders and mayors. for us, it is an economic argument. the reality that 40% of our city, if we add the children, 60% are immigrant children. nearly half of our labour markets, these are individuals in the system, in our homes, they make the system, they make everything from main street to wall street. for us, ensuring that any number of individuals could come out and truly be a part of our city's economy is critically important. these individuals graduated from our high schools, we want them to realize their full potential, become professionals, add to the tax

base, it is critically important to us. become homeowners of tomorrow. for us, immigration reform is critical. would to say the mayor prefer a program that is not piecemeal. the senate bill does provide a framework for other cities to think about this, challenging us to think about the strategies of english-language acquisition and other opportunities to come out of the shadows and prepare a portfolio that allows for reform to happen. are there particular facets that are more important for new york city? the high school space, in new york we recognize that we are building what we hope to be competition for silicon valley and transforming it into silicon

alley. we have technology campuses coming. we have a number of institutions and universities in new york. clearly, the opportunity to see any number of individuals in these programs become part of the infrastructure of the city give back and allow us to compete globally, that is critically important. that said, you cannot have, if you will, the doctor without having the janitor. cityeed both to make that fundamentally work. we need to recognize what it needs to have these individuals come out of the shadows. i think it is important to recognize this in the community, individuals to build our homes, and maintain our streets and buildings, are very much a part of who helps us maintain the vibrancy. we are a city with over 50 million tourists for year. the reality is having a diverse community be a part of that

city. without it it is very much we are and who we need continue to be. jason, do you want to jump in and talk about the kinds of efforts are lining up in your place? salt lake city is not nearly the size of new york city, much smaller, but many of the issues are really the same. it really boils down to seeing it in simple terms of being an inclusive place, a place where people want to contribute to the community. whether it is high skills or hourly employees. rightk the current system now does not work for anyone. people concerned about amnesty, the current system is the facto amnesty in many ways. the time is now to solve this problem. people from around the country

need to come forward and tell members of the house of representatives that now is a time for a great sense of parts thatthe great they have done to document that. we stand in solidarity. imagine that in some ways, immigration reform is something that we know is going to change life as we know it. somewhat. if we are working with immigrants in certain capacities. in some ways things are going to stay the same. -- you know,pate what do you see in this next move? >> the areas we have already been working on, regardless of what happens, they have been in building success for

immigrant families. education, ending the cycle of languageor children, acquisition really helps with l nfidence, dual location es partnering with california, janitors in silicon valley and downtown los angeles, keeping , diverting waste management -- these issues are really important to our community and are part of this economy. one thing to highlight is that immigration reform is not about what is happening to the immigrant, it is a dual process happening to our communities. if we create a path for not just

legalization, but for workforce development, those of the key indicators of b.c. create successful communities and what we see adapting to communities that adapt to changes virtually, financially in our communities. it is important that we look at language acquisitions regardless was one of the possible requirements on the table, this acquisition, and it was something we were already working on in terms of becoming integrated. turn the question around a little bit. it is clear that a lot of local areas have been doing a lot of work with immigrants who are children in neighborhoods locally. in many parts of the country this is going well.

in new york or los angeles this is a way that these cities have grown, survive economically. in other places there is conflict in their struggle. this,sort of touched on can you talk a bit about what an action that the federal level would mean for fault -- for salt lake city are other places? welcoming and supporting? at this point? as cecilia indicated, there were two places in the country where there was a preposterous to of both in one camp or another. washington, d.c. was close to 70% for obama, utah was close to the other side of the spectrum. that should not come as a surprise to anyone. although there are pockets of moderate and progressive people in utah, sometimes it is

difficult to be a moderate or progressive in a conservative oure like utah, but for state, what it boils down to i think is thinking not just about the economics impact that immigrants have. it is clear that they are a net positive for high skilled and hourly employees, helping to create jobs for americans to contribute to our communities. it really also has to do with the kind of country want, the kind of community we want to live in. the kind of place for people hide in the shadows and make decisions based on fear? or a place that is wealthy and inclusive across the spectrum? recognizing the diversity of talents, strength, and perspective of world views brought to the community by immigrants.

thinking aboutam the history of my state over the past few years, where immigration has been a target and something that people talk about a lot, we went from following the arizona style example a few years ago, through the work of the business community, religious organizations, and citizens who said that that is not the right approach for our community we were able to change that thematically to providing in state court -- in state tuition for undocumented people, a community that is true welcoming and sometimes i do not think has as much to do with the political spectrum. really, immigration reform is not about politics, it is about doing the right thing. now is aestion community, we are hoping for is members of the house of

representatives will find a way forward for comprehensive immigration reform, something critical. not just to the economy or the state, or the nation, but moving forward in a way that addresses our economy in the way we are proud of. be worth talking about the compound -- the compact briefly, maybe mentioning the principal. entire piece was less than 300 words. can you describe how that came about and what the goals of that word? itin 2010, the summer, seemed inevitable that we would pass a law that was similar to arizona. majority of our legislature was moving forward on that path. to my mind it was being driven

by a very small but vocal group of people who felt that this was a priority and wanted to move forward. but the people who really run by state, who care about the state, talk to university presidents or captain of industry, community leaders and religious organizations, they were very uncomfortable with it, but it felt like this freight train that was barreling down the track and there was no way to divert it. every time someone would stand up and there would be profiles in courage, the police chief in salt lake city who said that he would not enforce it, that it was the wrong thing to do to ask people to show their papers -- that they would not be supportive of this. these individual profiles in courage, saying that the arizona approach is not the right one for our community, it got smacked down. we thought that if a group of people stood up at the same time to articulate a simple values

based solution, that that would be powerful enough to change the course of the conversation. over the course of several months we've probably had about 100 people working on this document. 227 words, just highlighting principles that we thought were critical to the immigration discussion. the first is really a federal issue. it is not between utah and the other countries, it is between the federal government and other countries. recognizing the role that immigrants play as taxpayers and consumers, it is focused on law enforcement. we wanted law enforcement to spend their time pursuing criminals, not acting to pursue the violations of a civil code. that that is not the role of police officers and that this aggressive approach really limits their ability to get to know what is going on in the

community. it is not just lip service, we really care about families and we did not want to create policies that separated children from their parents, or as was alluded to earlier, afraid to go to school. just and to live in a free society. we had a wide spectrum of people across multiple organizations who spoke up in favor of this. we had a signing ceremony at the state capitol building, a similar document for people came together to talk about how they would govern their communities. u.s. senator, former congress member, along with several other people signed the document and said that these were the values they were going to use to make determinations

about immigration in the community. it was a sea change, it really changed the tone of the discussion and helps our state to become a little bit more thoughtful, compassionate, and civil in the discussion. our hope is that the federal government will use that, something similar, as a template. whether it is measured by metropolitan areas for cities, i know you are from the largest. personally your cities have been instrumental in terms of city government, nonprofits, and community-based and faith based organizations by and bringing in people,

receiving immigrants and providing the kinds of services that help them to make it and move up. is there anything you want to say about what federal inaction might mean for either of you? in newve to say that york recognize it is a federal issue. they are human capital. for new york much, in particular, they are our past, present, and future. federal inaction is a problem. to makel that we can sure that what we create in new york is a place where individuals who choose new york as their home are welcome to, are able to enroll their children in our schools without

concern or fear, doing all the weekend to make sure that if someone wants to small -- start a small business and be part of our community, there is an opportunity for them to engage. we go out and introduced government to the immigrant community, showing them that they understand we are here to serve and provide services to them. our communities, really understanding that the the needs ofstand the communities. we have had graduating class is of the police department that oversent individuals from 50 different countries. there is a real fabric of who we are. the truth is we have any number of young people in our schools who have graduated from our high schools who have any number of dreams.

in every wayican but a document. inaction is a problem, these young people absolutely want to be a part of our city, we want them to be a part of our city. they can be our teachers, doctors, the next mayor. somethingneeds to be there. i would say that we lose a tremendous amount of human capital in brilliant people coming to new york, creating patents, creating any number of things and want to be part of what is the american dream in our city. we lose that. we recently did a financial services study on immigrants. on one of our fastest growing communities. could them, rank or not,

overwhelmingly articulate to us that they were invested in their children's education and home ownership. every single one of them. at different points they all had bank accounts, every single one of them had absolute investment in recreating their success by these very markers that make a city successful. education outcome and home ownership, right? without action -- we will do all we can to help these communities. >> i would just add that -- something we have been working on in los angeles is the council of immigration, a group coming together, a community-based organization out of the chamber commerce, labor, the sheriff's department, the mayor's department, to come together and have these discussions, they are

all principles in terms of immigrants comprehensive reform, that it is important to have comprehensive immigration reform, it is taking the workers out of the shadows. in los angeles 14% of undocumented workers are business owners, really bringing the economy to the surface and in times when there is the most conflict and when we most need to come together to feel out what our cities need, it might be different in los angeles from salt lake city or new york, and those are conversations where we need to step up and have them, to be able to understand where we have a common ground. 100 words? 200 words? let's start there. that alone can start being the guide.

for us the work that we started doing in terms of this council is really helping to set the frame and building of a collaboration. education, information for not just the immigrants in our city, but everyone else in the city about immigration. all madek that you important points and i want to highlight the distinction that was made that immigration really is a federal concern. but immigrants live in places. people that live in places with institutions in those places affected by immigrants and immigration policies. so, now i want to ask what kinds of services are you already helpful,g that my be

extended, preparing you for implementation, for some kind of immigration reform. whether it is around the legalization of the undocumented population, widespread verify systems for unemployment verification, or temporary work visas that would bring different kinds of workers in and out of your cities. what kinds of challenges do you see ahead? you can choose to talk about anything that connects. >> some of the work we have been doing for the last eight years or so with building skilled partnership is our vocational esl program. we do this in partnership with employers and our curriculum is really based on the need in terms of providing better greener service,

economy, and in new york the maintenance worker, the janitorial work force, what is needed, moving to cleaning in language acquisition skills. we have been working on this partnership. talk about bringing different aints of view together, it is labor-management partnership, often they are on opposite sides of the table with competing interests in terms of the bottom our and who can sell on thing is that the industry needs to gather for labor-management. with over 40 janitorial companies, from the small, family companies to the largest international companies, sitting down together to see the program that is needed to do work and development that will add value

to my company. also value to the quality of life of the workers being invested in. that was all. of those workers being invested in. my employer, my industry is investing in me. i have also brought in client companies that contract these companies -- biotech companies and commercial real estate owners, who are also at the table, saying, this is what i would like to see in my building. a janitor has them cleaning my office for 30 years. what have we invested in that person bringing the quality of service to my bottom line, in terms of being productive? being able to bring that together. but we also provide computer literacy skills. we also provide citizenship classes, and wellness, and health education.

a lot of the training and partnerships are at work sites. you will have a building that has seven janitors in one building, 200 in another. workers are so red out everywhere. and trainingice center is kind of our hub where we go out to work and train the workers of a variety of employers. we are set up to have that access and that relationship to reach some of the hardest to reach folks. these are folks who are immigrants. may have language barriers. they are also working late at night, when most of us are offices,leaning our keeping our area safe and clean. they are the hardest to reach. that arethe cuts happening, particularly in california, with adult education and other programs -- this is nonexistent. these opportunities would not exist for the workers and these

families if we were not reaching able to reach not over 2000 workers throughout the state every year who are part of our programs. i think that is where we are , ifady set up in terms of and when immigration reform happens, the additional investment in the work force -- what that means is these workers can come up to be higher-level probably service workers, and create opportunities. these are union jobs with living wages and some form of stability , and access to healthcare. , reallycritical important for the workforce that is going to be coming out of the shadows. >> i will add to that thought. services are you providing that directly relate to reforms? anticipating in terms of scaling up or investing

in core services you are already doing? , lookinghe impact ahead, on budgets and the like? say deferred action for childhood arrival was a really good case, for us and hopefully many other localities around the country. in new york, we estimated that we had approximately 80,000 young individuals who would be eligible for deferred action. the city of new york made a conscious decision that we would create a partnership within our city agencies, a task force, to figure out what documents any child would need so that we could put out a message on, if you need school records, immunization records, if you are part of an afterschool program, if you got married and needed a marriage license. we put a process in place that would tell you. my colleagues were wonderful champions about this.

we all did really well. several communities around the country said, can we borrow your model? we were happy to share it. we learned a lot from that experience, which mainly was, in the state of new york, where we estimate 100 8000 -- we cannot get it down to the city level -- about 26% of the eligible population has applied. dreamers essentially who would get temporary relief of deportation and work authorization. work authorization being a big one. we narrowed down the data set to figure out what is going on. we realized there were a number of individuals that might have dropped out from school. they were on the pathway to a ged, but disconnected for some reason or another.

an english- started language class, but had to disconnect. for us, this was an area of concern. we estimate 16,000 people fit into this category. bringing these young individuals out of the shadows is critical. there is an economic argument there. say week, i want to wednesday, we were able to announce in new york city that $18 million is being invested specifically for the population of young people eligible for deferred action, and we were going to try our best to reach out to provide additional in which classes, additional pathways to the ged and enrollment in ged programs. perhaps you can get into a certificate for graham. and legal services. the first time a concentrated amount of money is being put into an audience like this, which is undocumented. need six times that amount of

money to do what really needs to happen for our undocumented population. english-language acquisition is going to be a big one. i want to talk about the legalization process. legal services will be one of the greatest challenges we will witness with this reality. we in new york are very a tremendoushave number of law firms and law schools. community, aprofit network that has robust legal services. a lot of legalte minds in the city of new york. the reality is, we have one immigration lawyer for every 10,000 immigrants. the realities of immigration fraud and the number of individuals who hang shingles to say, i am here to help you, pay me money -- we see this now.

putting outviduals messages that we can help you. we have had to put out counter messages to say, there is nothing out there. do not pay anyone a penny. we started a pilot two years ago with law students, where we engage law students and trained them in a curriculum to go into high schools and talk to immigrant youth in high schools, english-language learners in particular. it is a pipeline process, we think. we are embedding in law students a bit of information that we can hopefully engage them in thinking about maybe becoming an immigration attorney. when the process happens, they may be lawyers. we can call them back to do additional work to help us around legalization. it also gets high school students talking about their rights, their responsibilities. undocumented youth get stopped by a police officer, decides to

mouth off -- that could result in a young person being arrested , questioning their good moral character. for us, it has been a preventative strategy for the , and a recruitment strategy of the legal minds. we also did a similar program around citizenship, focusing on pro bono attorneys in the private space, engaging in working with them to help naturalize new yorkers. ourant any number of families to connect to banks and start bank accounts. we have started a number of relationships with banks to recognize that consular id's can be a secondary form of i.d. to open a bank account. in the studio new york -- the city of new york, it is a state .d., so it is not

something we work on. we have created tools that can be used by volunteers to work on conversational english skills -- in libraries and houses of worship. withe going to be working the largest volunteer service, new york cares, to start training volunteers to help run english classes in response to what will be the reality for immigration reform. and we have done a great amount of work on civic leadership, engaging individuals in our communities around being trained around leadership. they are our ambassadors. we have gradually help develop over 200 of these individuals. we think these folks are going to be our ambassadors. we need to get messages out there. ethnic press matters, but so does a local voice. to your point of the challenge, how we scale this up -- we are trying all we can using human

capital and neighbors, using new yorkers to help us do this in a volunteer space, but money matters. we are going to have to be really creative with money, and have to lean on tax dollars and philanthropic dollars, and we are going to have to argue for some money for the federal space. needs more money, i do not know what other places are going to do. >> one of the issues you brought up that my distinguished panelists did not mention was either a five. -- was e-verify. there is no penalty now if you do not do it. there has been a push by some legislators to create a penalty, so if you are found to have hired someone who is here without a per is, you would lose your business license. our organization said that is inappropriate. that is not a fair solution, and does not do anything to address the problem. one of the things that argues

for a comprehensive solution is e-verify. we are not opposed to a system that has some teeth, but it has to be a national system where every state has the same system, where our state is not disadvantaged. this is a critical point. fisas to come along with reform, so employers can have the workers they need. it has to come along with recognizing a legal status for people who are here existing currently. you cannot just cherry pick one aspect of immigration reform and say, we are just going to enforce e-verify or visa reform. any of these things do not work in isolation. it is a complicated problem, but the answer has to be a simple one. you have to do everything at once. none of these things will work on their own. they are all related to one another. it is not just a comprehensive reform is important.

comprehensive reform is essential. the business community of utah, we are tired of waiting. the time for reform is now. we need to make sure our representatives understand that. my organization has taken up multiple full pays -- full-page ads. we have had press conferences from business leaders around the state saying this is not just important -- essential. there are lots of things we could do. we could do infrastructure improvement. we could reform the tax code. all kinds of things we could do to improve the national economy. some of those take resources. immigration reform will require a little bit of money, but it is a decision we can make right now that will have in norma's positive economic benefit for the entire country. they're frankly is no excuse not to move forward on this. the time is right and the time is now. we take audience

questions in a few minutes, i want to give each of you a minute, starting on this and, -- , to say, what is one or two things you are doing that you think other organizations could learn from the way you are doing it? >> i think what has worked for time thanr a longer we thought, is collaboration. and to collaborate with folks who may not be a more traditional partner. through collaboration, i think it is surprising how much further and faster we can get things done, being clear and putting principles and guidelines on the front-end. inhink that helps us a lot, terms of the work we have done within our industry and in our organization, to the point where it gets everybody to trust each other, to work together.

we understand we can respect each other's point of view, but we still have one mission in mind. sometimes, we have a different strategy of getting there, but those we can discuss and try out. those strategies might change, but our mission does not. just in terms of building an organization and being able to grow so fast, and build our capacity -- those are the elements that come to mind, in terms of the work we are doing within the city and the council of immigrant immigration. i think it is the same thing of being patient with ourselves and really taking those small but solid steps forward, and really the collaboration. >> i hope congress hears this. that is a really important issue. >> i would build on that, and talk about the issue of trust. it is about trusting people. i really do think there is a well of goodness, decency, and compassion in the country that

we have to rely on and have to go back to. i do not care what political persuasion you have, what your feelings are. americans are good people, deep down. we need to go back to that and trust each other, and trust ourselves to do the right things. i think that aspect of trust is so critical to collaboration. work tosomething we build in our organization and throughout the community, a sense that you can trust other people, and that ultimately, as you said, it is about getting too larger goals of what is going to be the best society for us to live in. trust is integral. without trust, nothing gets done. with trust, you can accomplish anything. but trust is critical. >> i think what we have learned in new york is that our city has absolutely realized its economic reality because we invest in our communities, and we

fundamentally believe that when you invest in communities, they invest back in you. we are now working with cities across the country to help them realize they do not have to wait for immigration reform. they can do a tremendous number of things right now with immigrant communities, recognizing the breadth of the assets of their communities, and the needs -- recognizing what they do for every resident in their city and how they can respond to the needs of the community. that can bring so much capital. mentioned this. we created, essentially, a toolkit, a blueprint for immigrant integration, a how-to guide. anyone across the country can borrow this. one thing that is important is, when cities start to engage in this, we will be able to collectively say, this is what we have been able to benefit, the benefits are cities have realized. the federal government, we can say to them, or to it, you

cannot ignore the reality that in our localities we have the opportunity, the responsibility, and we have been able to do this. economically, we thrived. i would like to see a way to pipeline money to help support some of the innovations that happen in cities, because that is where communities live, and that is where opportunities matter. the money will go to the state. a do not know how it will pipeline into suburbs, where many communities are living and are staking their claim as their home. for me, i think our space now has moved into really helping the work we have been able to do in new york lost some in other parts of the country. because i agree the time is now. >> i think those were three really important and clear messages. collaborate, trust, and investment.

really should drive the discussion and the legislation forward as we listen to local areas where local immigrants live and work. there are some microphones in the room. when you get them -- right here. please say your name and affiliation. from a groupa involved in the global partnership. organize for a dialogue. similar to the ones we are having here. i will touch base with you later. you were talking about the and how in different parts, they were doing the same investing in houses and some

firms, and having some say. is they approach the community banks. they do not go to the other banks. there has been new legislation in the united states and the uk, where community development banks, even the ones working with migrants, close to. especially for the somalis. they have stopped them from sending remittances, because according to them, it is money laundering. we would like to see your views on that and how community development banks in new york are dealing with this approach. second, in terms of the dais for , we have seen countries help revive them some legal services. they have community groups here where they provide

legal services. maybe you can approach some of the diaspora. >> hold onto that thought. we are going to take another question. right there. the redskins fan. >> i am with the dhs. you guys have been talking about -- you're cities seem pretty stable economically. i see how immigration reform would benefit your cities. but when we talk about a city like detroit, that just filed for bankruptcy, how is this going to give them a spark so they can become the city that once was? >> we will take one more question for now. right there, in the back. >> good to see you.

shama,tion was for ms. about interagency cooperation in new york. it seemed there would be challenges scaling that to a federal level. i was curious about what she might think the challenges had been in new york, and how such cooperation could translate on the federal level. >> we have banking stuff from sonia. we have the detroit question. and in upscaling question. i guess we should start with you , but everybody else can talk. i would would, say our local credit union community has been incredibly, incredibly responsive. i have to also admit that many of our big banks have them. it is aced at the branch level. in some ways, it is a lot of handholding.

but we have a robust financial empowerment network that works with the community development financial institutions as well as local branches. there are challenges when you look up the line. what we also learned in this study is that individuals feel more comfortable doing remittances the traditional way, and not through financial institutions. they prefer to go the route of western union. but i think it is a learning process. the second question around diaspora -- in new york, we celebrate where people are from and where they are today. everyone in new york is comfortably identifying as a hyphenated american. we have any number of immigrant associations that are ethnically affiliated -- the latino bar association, the asian-american or south asian -- it can go on. when the time is right, we will activate all of them to be critically important to us.

i want to answer the question on interagency. i think leadership matters. when the mayor makes a statement, like, my expectation is you are all going to do this, i can follow on the mayor's mandate. two of my colleagues will push back. few of my colleagues will push back, because it is an articulated decision from the mayor. i think you said this. there are lots of good people. lots and lots of good people. not just in the city of new york who work in government, but across this country. the reality is, this is the time for us to come forward and work together. will say that in absence of having a point person in the federal government, whose job it is to coordinate all of this stuff, you might have a challenge in who has ownership of that role. in the city of new york, we have

toerson whose job it is think about -- literally, the definition of my job is ensuring the well-being of immigrant new yorkers and their integration. although challenges? absolutely. have we overcome them? there is always a challenge to overcome. >> i do not know a time about the economy of detroit beyond what you might read in the national press. i would say comprehensive immigration reform is not the only thing that is going to help detroit comeback. but it is one of the things that will help to make that happen. anytime you have a group of people living in the shadows, afraid to act as law enforcement, who may be unable to pay taxes, who may not be getting the education they need, not able to learn english, that is a problem. that creates a subset of people living in the shadows. that will drag down any

community, to have these groups of people. comprehensive national immigration reform is not the only thing that will help detroit. but it is one of the things that will help detroit and every city, no matter where your local economy is. this is something that will help everyone. >> detroit has a lot of immigrants, metropolitan detroit . yes, metropolitan detroit. most are living outside the city, but there is a long history of immigration. it was one of the aid gateways in the early part of the 20th century. there is a legacy and culture of immigration there, although the groups have changed over time. theremigrants that are are participating in the economy at all different levels. it tilts toward the higher end of the scale, because immigrants have in their longer and found ways to stay in those kind of

occupations and industries. there is also an initiative called global detroit. its main mission is to attract and retain important immigrants. it has a number of different strategies within that. it is something that has become an important part of initiatives throughout the great lakes to develop these types of programs, because of the energy and investment that immigrants ring to these places. >> i want to add that there is a really in-depth center out of usc that did detailed work around these indicators and scorecards of immigrant integration. civic participation, the ,rajectory to becoming citizens and the naturalization process,

the economic status of immigrants, the trajectory of their economic status, and how welcoming the community was to immigrants. the higher the score of a community, the better they could adapt to changes that happen. a lot of times, our economies change. the whole community needs to adapt and change because of the economy and situation. the cities who had higher scores for being able to integrate immigrants into their communities were more successful in making these changes. thatust that alone, but shows the type of environment overall. it was more collaborative. there was more trust. there was more investment overall. i think those are very important indicators. being ablehas shown to adapt and change. aboutr, we were talking

-- it is not just about her role law reform. how are we doing integration and workforce development, and making sure there is a path to citizenship? naturalist citizens are actually thanlikely to buy a home somebody who is a native born american. that is a huge indicator of what that can mean for the economy, and stabilizing. .t is investing in workers not just immigrant workers, but all workers, integrating into all of our workforce strategies. >> we have time for two more questions. and i guess we should go away to the back next. i am retired, formerly a -- an economist who worked on urban policy. how can we focus on new

immigration into this country given that we have a declining labor force related to the total population? i wonder whether brookings has done any studies to show that those cities and metropolitan areas which have the highest rates of growth in immigration have had the highest rates of economic growth. in addition to immigrants adding to the supply of labor, they will also add to demand -- buying houses and furniture and services. i think you can show that. i wonder if brookings has done anything in that line. that isike detroit, if the case, shouldn't we be trying to get incentives for new immigration to move into cities like detroit, which have suffered in growth? what policies can we make to stimulate more immigration into those areas without losing the population? >> we will take the one in the back.

student withical the american medical association. my question is twofold. first, in this changing healthcare environment, where we are trying to focus more on moving individuals moving to the united states toward more primary care-based health the future ofis health care for individuals that fall under population of immigrant status? kind of general understanding is that a lot of times these individuals tend to be consumers of the emergency room system, which is what we are trying as a nation to move away from. what is the future of healthcare for immigration populations in the united states? general, whatn in that is most issue

relevant to the population in general? >> we do not have to much time. time. much the we are looking at an aging population. .e are going to become very old we need younger people coming in to take over to bill this before us and build it well. seems to be one of the main focuses for strengthening and maintaining and growing our labor force so that we can support ourselves growing forward. andhe impact of immigration him again -- and immigrant

growth, there is this. -- and immigrant growth, there is this. other organizations have done .ery specific metropolitan work i am speaking of the new york institute that looks at immigration and economic effects across the areas. i'm going to turn the rust over to my sample -- fellow panelists here. >> go ahead. i just want to pick up on the point of incentives and what that could mean for detroit. areas that have had life. the incentivizing of connecting immigrant entrepreneurs and

figuring out two months up there. then they can open up a business. the absolute reality is this changed neighborhood. there is the economic outcome of that neighborhood. i was in minneapolis last week. a very similar story with the mexican community. it is very much aligned around the high crime, flight, the city negotiated giving them a building, american economic development corporations. it to theformed central market. a very similar story with the mexican community. there really is an opportunity

for detroit to think about that. the reality of what is going to be the realization for immigrants is really quite real. they are becoming individuals who are legal permanent residents. in a place like new york we have a large public health system that is fantastic. they already work tirelessly to make sure they make ends meet. they will be doing that and so much more. doing that and so much more. they use the system in a way where we do need to regulate primary care. we are changing a number of our health care centers. it be community-based health centers which we believe will change centers. there is the that is not being discussed. the mayor has a very large voice on this. obesity is a huge issue in america and will continue to be. lack of movement, greater engagementthere really is an opy for detroit to think about that. and poor eating habits, many people know us to care about the size of the soda you drink. and lack of sugars movement and poor eating habits

are resulting in tremendous realities of obesity. and so on. we are officially out of time. >> i think these questions are actually related in some ways. typically emigrate are often younger and less fast than many americans. there is a preponderance of people that do not know where to go for health care until it becomes an emergency. a lot of that is education and making sure people understand there is an expensive way to get health care. this is not something unique to the immigrant population. this is something all americans can benefit from. make sure immigrant populations understand. highesthave the

scorecard for immigrant immigration and all of california. it is due to silicon valley. an investment in higher skills. it comes all the service workers who are also immigrants. we have this program at the biotech programs out there where we do this for the janitors. we have this set up with employees. maybe a higher skilled immigrant who is tutoring in working with the janitor. it is different. being able to work together and teach each other about their experiences and also addressing the language skills and addressing it in becoming part

of this community. you have to set size lake google -- you have this in areas like google in stamford. you have those coming together and learning each other and integrating into the work bus -- workplace. they get to be a part of that community. they are coming out those shadows. they have the highest scorecard of immigrant immigration. recentve a lot of immigrants. panelists.thank our they left us with these important concepts. this was totally unplanned. they do not talk to each other. these are the things that are important when we think about

immigrants and immigration policy going forward. thank you for being here. thank you for being here with us. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] the house gavels in back in to watch on six goals including when dealing with the information sharing.

week, the house will consider the 2014 defense department budget. regulations and the other on epa rules. watch coverage here on c-span. they are going to decide how to handle amendments to the bill. political rights are a number of hundred virtual amendments that gop leaders do not want to see come to the floor. theuding proposals to end in essay collection of phone records and internet data. measure to ban military aid to syrian opposition forces. 630vote is scheduled for eastern. formerve on c-span, president jimmy carter takes part in a discussion on the israeli-palestinian conflict. internationalfor

peace is hosting the event following friday's news that they had reached a tentative agreement for resuming peace talks. that is live today at 5:00 eastern on c-span2. >> jackie was raise as her mother was raised. she was the same kind of wife and hostess, the home, the children, the entertaining with style. that was her heritage. she did it again in the white -- afterht after had her administration. the whole world directed like a volcano. we had women who went to work and got divorces and demanded equal rights. we had flower children and free love and free sex. lloyd was a great for the young. i missed all that. -- boy, was it great for the young. i missed all that. [laughter]

it became a whole new concept of women. i think mrs. clinton today represents the new woman. >> as we continue our conversation on first ladies, the social secretary to ofqueline kennedy speaks the role of the first lady and how it is changed along with the nation. that that is tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span. newe think of this as a way of thinking about how people are going to consume television in the future. it is an online platform which is direct to consumers and people can get access to live broadcast television along with the dvr without the connection, just using the internet. this is a micro antenna. think about it. it is how you used to have

antennas in the past. they were large. i think there is a desire to support innovation. think there is a desire to have choice. >> how to broadcast signals to any device. that is at 8:00 eastern on c- 2.an spoke about the threat cyber attacks pose on the economy. well he talked about how internet attacks from china government hackers have caught the u.s. nearly two dollars true. $2 trillion. this is about 45 minutes. will

>> i assume you can hear me even if the microphones do not work. . am the executive director for well come. -- welcome. any hearing now? definitely. i am the director. congress ms. -- hamerman -- congressman rogers k from an unusual background, different in law enforcement. he was in fbi special agent before coming to the u.s. congress. rolew has a very pivotal in the house as chairman of the intelligence committee. does thettee is

authorizing and oversight capacity as well in this respect. he has done quite well shepherding three bills through to completion thus far. while developing bipartisanship. it is quite a rare and special ring. this is a cybersecurity which has linde very large. it is an issue with which the institute itself i says is closely associated. with that i would like to bring congressman rogers to the podium. as long as hefor wishes to speak and then we will follow up with a question and answer session.

>> good morning. thanks. behind.nning a little someone apparently hacked into my gps. come on now. light enough. i do appreciate the opportunity. thank you for having me here. what i think is probably the biggest national security issues that america is not quite ready to handle. that is cybersecurity, cyber attacks, cyber espionage. as chairman of the intelligence committee, there's a lot that keeps us up at night. my theory is by the time i am done this morning if you cannot sleep that is a good thing. the look around the world that the troubles we're trying to inl with now, certainly egypt in the insurgency there, there is no good option in syria your we are planning for our best to worst option.

a moreve played aggressive role internationally. they have dropped in the waters very sophisticated nuclear substitute -- some rains. a are aggressively playing in the world sometimes to the form of what we think is good policy in places like syria and others when it comes to their blocking in the united nations and other places. when you look at where the chinese are increasing their defense spending since 1889, when people make the comparison about our military versus any other military in the world, our two biggest expenses are personnel and health care in the united states defense department. other countries do not have that. when they say 13% per year increase, that means they are

buying new technology. they are getting leaner and more sophisticated in their military operations. they have aggressively talked about not having the u.s. navy in the child's -- south china there've been there mainly because of 40% of the world's trade goes through the south china sea. we have a whole world we look at. certainly al qaeda in the arabian peninsula are all the news we worry about. a lot of time trying to figure out the counter proliferation issue. that one thing we all understand, they are well seated in history. maybe the locations haven't changed. front is cybersecurity. it is something really unknown in the annals of what we would

understand in normal national security framework. we're going to have to change that. we trying to change that. he think about where we are. activists with political motivations and hacking into sites and bringing them down, trying to make their voices heard through illegal act on the internet. you have individual criminal knockoffs who are trying to get in and steal anything they can. they're trying to get your social security number, your birth eight, steal what they can and move on to the next item. internet crime on the which is a growing threat. the credit card in your wallet will get hit about 300 times a day. for people trying to get in. they will try to get in and

still a block of numbers in a theer way in order to steal personal information as well as your credit card information internet into a profit. we have the next level up. we talked about the chinese primarily as economic espionage. he took it back and repurposed it and competed illegally and asiane u.s. companies which they stole that property. a huge problem. the director of the nsa has called it the largest transfer of wealth illegally. is pushing two oflars trillion in value

lost and stolen intellectual properties. these are the blueprints of companies. they spend as much time as they need to spend. they will waive their as long as they need to to find specific pieces of intellectual property to steal them ring back. i talk about the other chinese but other nations do it. no one comes close to the level in comparison. they have certain sectors of the willmy on which they identify and then pass on to their units who were designed to steal that property. when you get up in the morning if you're the security guy for it manufacturing sector, could be a military piece of hardware. it could be on a tray dear. these are sectors you're supposed to target.

if you are the i.t. security guy that is anonymous piece. the weight of that has got to be overwhelming. you as an individual is eightsible for defeating nations and espionage activities. that is why we are losing this fight. you if aee nationstate dedicates its intellectual capital and resources to getting into your network, eventually they will get in your network. that is the problem we are facing when it comes to economic espionage. let me give you another that piece of news on this. have seen this especially in china or some of these very thatprising cyber hackers are employed by the chinese government steal intellectual property. they are very good to spend

their 10 hours a day doing the work for the chinese government. they realize if you are a company with on that list but you are way down the list, why not pick up the phone? say i am free nights and weekends. for little cash i will be happy to spend my time trying to get in and get that international -- intellectual property. haveof those people decided they're going to do this on the nights and weekends. they have just increased their ability to ward economic damage to the united states. the damaged by 50% overnight. this is a huge problem. the reason they think they can go there is because there has been no consequences i mean no consequences to their economic espionage. a free reign, a free run.

8% per yearto grow just to sustain the economic social programming. they are not doing it by innovation. they're doing it by that. we are the victims of that. we will be likely -- lucky to grow by 2% this year just to meet their numbers. andcan do the math understand where that prosperity is coming from, laces like the united states. very dangerous stuff. ,f you look at the last level we talked about this on the digital pearl harbor or other things to get people to understand the gravity. that is military style cyber attacks. for the sole purpose of in punishingge

their enemies. when you look at where we are so many nationstates are gaining in capability that we had not anticipated or seen in the past their rapid increase in their abilities. some we think is going on their own. some are getting the tutelage and comfort of others, need be -- maybe even nations. we know this this will be with us as long as we have computers. gone.ay has come and there is no turning back. the russians we saw uses in estonia or mr. krugman was upset. this was a devastating and ruinous cyber attack. it was a form of political punishment to the small country of estonia.

it had serious consequences. we sell russians use it again in a military style planning. imagine that is a new prepping of the battlefield. now before any of that happens you are going to see a very aggressive cyber attack to be as disruptive and cause us much chaos as you personally can. gas.e try to get grocery stores will not work. .he electric grid is off ground you cannot get this from your financial institutions. you can imagine what chaos that causes in a very short order. it is troubling. that is with us. -- mandy a man didn't

iant report. they were able to identify a political unit that had in going afteres things like our electric grid to find that were they to get into that system. not because i do not think the chinese are going to turn off our lecture good but because they were just getting ready in case they ever needed the opportunity to shut off. this sounds a bit orwellian but it is alive and well. the chinese have that capability. it was troubling for us that they have been so persistent to fine places to lay this code into our lecture grid. if they ever needed it they could shut it off.

last piece which is concerning which is where you they have more success than we had anticipated they would have. that concerns us. how do they keep their capability where they got it? it was significant. it means their rapidly increasing their ability to conduct mischief around the world. why is that a problem? not a rational actor in the economic stage. they're pursuing their nuclear webs row graham. cyberey are pursuing warfare capabilities. this is a way that is very concerning to their south korean neighbors. veryve seen some devastating efforts.

this cut us a little off guard on their shared capability for a destructive attack. they have been at each other for some time. --re have been some song strong theological differences. there's been a large clearing house. imagine leaving on a friday and andng back to your office seen 30,000 machines are not off. you're not going to turn them off. paperweights on your desk. they're able to get in on a file system and damage it so your computer would no longer initiate. not likely to recover the data. it would be pretty difficult to do.

most likely you'll never get any of that data. a huge problem. also destroy data and then the manipulated it. in other words, this is a me owing you a hundred dollars, it is the other way around. i do not know how you go back and try to do that. theou are engaged in we are turned around. it is very interesting. here is what is worrisome. we know that they have been aggressively pursuing probing actions on the financial institutions. wassheer number of these traveling a month ago. it is more than troubling today. it has gone unabated.

we found it is not their best work. they have the capability they have not use. these were a denial of service. they're trying to shut down the banks transfer of -- transferability. probablyy, they are the best at protecting themselves from these kinds of things because they have been engaged in trying to stop the since jullundur decided he wrought -- wanted to rob banks. in the digital age, remember the tinycheme to round off portions of 1 cent? whoever thought we would long for those kinds of things in bank theft in the united states?

then they were able to shut down certain banks, one particular ,inancial institution told us and in just the last transaction time it costs the bank over $100 million. one financial institution, one attack. not their best work. that ought to make everybody set up a little bit straighter. now you know why i do not sleep at night as the chairman of the intelligence committee. clear transactions on $8 billionis globally. imagine if someone is successful at causing problems as we move forward. and ild be devastating want to take questions so that we can have a dialogue here. theeople lose faith in internet, it is one sixth of our

economy in the united states today. think about how much you do from shopping to banking to communication on the internet today. it will only get more engaged in your life, not less. what if we lose faith in the internet as a commercial tool? one sixth of our economy happened through the internet and internet-based applications. weamericans say, we're done, do not trust it, and we are going to stop online banking, we have huge problems. and it only takes once. if they're successful, one major financial institution -- and folks are swimming. they're keeping their head above water. the government protect these networks and if you read the

newspaper, the nsa is listening to everything that you do. and i need to talk to you in the back, the fourth row, those e- mails, very disturbing. i'm kidding. that the nsa might that is if they see it overseas first. if we do not create some way to share malicious source code in real time to stop this, eventually will be on the losing end of this equation. and we can only say, so often we are innovative and we're ahead of everyone else and we can just innovates ahead of anyone -- a mcginn just keep innovating ahead of other places against us. or we can allow the federal government to share some very often -- offensive malicious

source code so that they can protect their own networks, not that the nsa would be monitoring those networks, and if they can do this normally, then we can react to protect our garment networks as well as finding out the origin of the particular -- the government nexnetworks as wl as finding out the origin of the particular attack. clarity in our tools and how we move forward to protect ourselves. and protect, i would argue, the last place that would have an open an inch -- energized internet. if we do not do this, that next generation of americans will have a very different attitude toward the internet and will look at it as that one open window in a very dangerous neighborhood. that is no place to be as we move forward. we can talk about anything that you like.

questions. it up to >> please, tell us who you are as you ask a question. >> [indiscernible] >> [laughter] you might want to tell me your story. >> as cyber security, or cyberi ng in general does not have borders, what, in your view, is the most efficient way to deal a way to partner with the private sector here in the states? how tohave any ideas include the private-sector

internationally? because government to government cooperation with the corporations globally has not happened. meetinge just finished is trying to this -- decide how to deal with the disclosures made by snowden. by the way, most of which was just made -- based on inaccurate information. we need to get the facts on the table, is that we're dealing with what the facts are, not we think is happening. what we decided to do is to have a small delegation from here starting with the you -- the e.u. it is the second most internet

commercial the zone in the world. they have concerns about how we partner. we wanted to make sure we get all that worked out. the government cannot do this on their round. the u.s. does not have the kill switch on the internet. i argue that we should not have a kill switch, like argue -- like china, iran, russia, and others. we need a solution, a partnership and sharing and other things. we need to do that here first, we argue. and then at the same time have the dialogue with first, our european friends, and then try to bring as many of the g-20 nations, knowing that some of our biggest cyber adversaries are in the g-20, but you have to start building it out. has been, we are in a cyber warfare -- a cyber war today.

most americans do not know it. your nation felt it, i think, first, bigger and harder than any other nation. i'm not sure it is the history you want to make, but we are in that fight right now every day. and we have not protected ourselves yet. as we go with this dialogue with our european allies, and i met with the chairman of the justice committee that does all of data privacy. we're trying to work through some things and then push it down to the private sector across the youth. -- across the european union. this is a private sector generated economy when it comes to the private-sector -- this is a private-sector generated effort when it comes to the economy. we have to have a uniquely

american approach that protects privacy, protects civil liberty, and still protect our national property and security interests as well. we do that with the europeans and then spread it out through the g-20. that is our plan. for any of the reporters here, you should grab the estonians. they are ahead of the curve when it comes to cyber protection, mainly because they have worked through such tough times of their own. and your ambassador is fantastic. she should show up everywhere she can, because when she does she wins converts. yes, sir? >> my name is mike webber. i'm a native of michigan. dhs report that came out a couple of days ago that was quoted in the "wall street

journal" talking about how this might affect some of the cyber projects that are ongoing, especially scaling back projects -- conferences and other critical infrastructure activity. how does this affect cyber in your mind, and what can we do to make sure it is not affecting our activities in a major way? >> two things. the way sequester works is a terrible way to run a will road. it was heavily weighted in national defense. that was a big mistake. at the end of the day, when you're talking about 2 cents on every dollar spent federally, that is what the sequester amounted to, 2 cents on the dollar. how many people think that we cannot find 2 cents in the federal government that probably should not be spent? i argue that we absolutely can. but the way they did it is that they pushed most of the funding -- in twoe items into

line items for funding items, which i think it's a mistake. is more about authorization of intelligence finding that even defense appeared when you take 17% -- some of these line items get hit 17%, not two cents. . will give you an example one particular place we have a line item for helicopter fuel. ability in this 1 per together line item for helicopter fuel, guess what, helicopters are not flying. that is not good management. it has been harmful. on the cyber things, i have been trying to protect those budgets in the last couple of years. we have grown our investment in cyber, mainly because we know what is coming.

the threat matrix was bad five years ago, worse today. it will be really bad and another five years. we try to protect that in the funding. i think will be ok in the next conference or two. but the effort on cyber will continue to be robust because we want to make sure we have protected that in the budget. knowing that sequester will likely go into effect in the next year. all the way in the back. yes, sir. >> about 18 years ago i issued a report about cyber warfare. that was 18 years ago. what was done in between? the russians set up their cyber command right at the end of the cold war. why have we waited this long?

>> well, we have waited this public about it, which is unfortunate. there were things happening in the last decade or so, but i will tell you something, when i first became a member of the intelligence committee in 2004 and had my first cyber briefing, at that time, the attitude was, we're trying to show you what our threat matrix looks like and we will go through this in some depth. this is a problem, but when we can deal with. oops. i don't know if it was complacency or just lack of interest, but at that time, we were ahead of the game. there was no one even close. that quickly turned. by the end of the first five years of me being on the committee, that threat had "heyed 180 degrees to, come out we are losing this fight."

"hey, we're losing his fight." i think that, a lot of people off guard. wellbelieve that we were ahead of our adversaries. that is no longer true. and then the dialogue of how we get public support, none of this works if we cannot get public support. i think we have seen that with their recent leaked stories coming out. public does not buy into what we're trying to accomplish here, it will not work. it is just not who we are. trying to have the public dialogue -- was it three years ago? my counterpart and i decided we would go out and talk about the world's greatest threat when it came to cyber espionage and intellectual property theft, china. we revised government officials at that time to actually announce to the world that it was china, and we could not find

businesses were willing to go in front of the committee tuesday they had been hacked, even if they knew it was -- to say they had been hacked from even if they knew it was china. because of all of the fear of repercussions and trade issues. it has been difficult to get people to talk about this. it has been a relatively recent phenomena that you can get someone to come out and make a speech about china. the stuff that we deal with in the intelligence committee is awfully important. we're a little behind in the fact that we were ahead, fell asleep, got surpassed, and now we're trying to catch up. we still have to bring the public in. the public generally, because again, they do not have access to the information, is really only aware of the sheer volume and a threat that we face every single day, to our government, our businesses, to your job,

cyber espionage and cyber hacking. it is a matter of changing that dialogue. >> i'm looking at an article from the new yorker from last night. today, on profits, the historical average is closer to 6%, but they are now 10%. >> i would argue that if you look at spending, we've never had more cash from corporations in america sitting on the sidelines and we do today. and we kept waiting to get back in the market, waiting to get back in the market. that is while the corporate balance sheets have been fantastic. one reason, they're not hiring at the same rates at all. and they're waiting to try to figure out what series of regulatory actions, both in

health care and finance, mean to their bottom line. they held in reserve cash. beill tell you that you can sitting pretty well today, but if my innovation, my research and development for that product tomorrow sets me apart, is the next generation of ipad or the next generation of technology gadget is stolen, that is hard to measure in real terms. it is very hard to measure in real terms. but let me just try to do it. many have made public comparison about the f-35 fighter, our newest fighter. in the middle of that whole thing, expenses jumped pretty dramatically. and then you saw pictures in china that looked exactly like our f-35 fighter. that is funny. how did they do that? i don't think it was

coincidence. and across job -- this was a big fight in congress about the cost. someone might want to draw the parallel publicly that maybe if we have lost by cyber theft all of our stealth technology on that aircraft, it was the long gray stealth aircraft -- it was no longer a stealth aircraft and maybe we had to redesign and to keep it is healthy and the most premier aircraft in the world. some might draw that parallel. i would certainly never do that, but some might draw that parallel and that costs real dollars. and you have companies that lost their whole company. there was a company that was supposed to be an electronic certificate, said bct surjit debentures up at your computer and -- that safety

showsty certificate that up at your computer and says this is supposed to be mike rogers, yes, that is mike rogers. the iranians got into that company with something called a man in the middle and hijacked those the certificates. at that time, they were using it for perth -- for political persecution in iran. they wanted to know who people were talking to, so they hijacked the certificates to see to it was. it was the iranians reading your e-mails. that company was gone in about nine months. here is this growing company ,boom, gone. what was the value of that company? hard to measure. name, american superconductor. they decided to do a joint venture in china.

they had a technology that would allow for the conversion of solar and wind and getting into the grid, basically. if the engineers heard me explain it that way, they would probably be all over me. but in a nutshell, that is what it was. the company was worth about $6.3 billion. they do the right thing and do a joint venture with the chinese government. in less than a year, the chinese basically steals every bit of their intellectual property, cancel their contracts, threw them out of the country. $1.6company went from billion in american value to about $170 million. and the only reason it was worth that, the seal was very open about this, was because -- the ceo was very open about this, was because he had some defense contracts that they did not see. they were parcelled off. all the employees, all of the

value of the company, gone. he does not think he will be here in a couple of years. he does not think he will make it. guess what the largest company in china is now. the company that sold 100% of their intellectual property. we say, this is the innovation economy, this is where we are going. bond. those big corporations -- this is where we are going. gone. corporations, hopefully decide to put cash back into the economy. but a understand how they got where they are, regardless of what this intellectual property theft thing is about. >> and from the national board college.

is committing intellectual property theft because there are no consequences. could you outline what some of those consequences could be? >> a great question. and again, talk is cheap. any time we just have a discussion with the chinese government, they deny it. obviously, we will have to change that paradigm if we're going to get somewhere. there are several things that we can do. one is, any bilateral discussion with china, that has to be number one, number two, and no. 3 on the list. mind.that serious in my we should not get to any other discussions before we get to answers on their efforts on cyber a screen -- . and by the way, the united states ever does not use its other part ofy the government to steal intellectual property. it does not happen and certainly will not. that is not who we are and it is not what our intelligence services do.

some notion when they get out there on tv and says, at the u.s. does that. no, they do not. others why we join with nations states who do not steal intellectual property to give it economy.heir private secondly, we have a bill recently that says, let's make this really uncomfortable for individuals sitting at those machines stealing intellectual property. we will make sure they cannot get visas to the united states. that they are put on lists where they are not allowed to travel to the united states. you could start looking at financial issues. make sure that their finances do not travel or transactions clear through the united states. the next level down from that, and once we do this public shaming, if you will, of these individuals, and take very concrete actions -- and these

folks have to understand there is a consequence for stealing intellectual property. the next step ought to be looking at, and we did not get this in our bill, but the next step would be to look at countervailing duties for products of companies that we know and can show clearly have been stolen and benefited from cyber espionage and then repurchased back to the united states. you have a countervailing duty regime to make it nearly impossible for them to compete in the united states. , i think wel peace could have a real impact on this. after the report, i think there were down maybe four days. before that, full organizations back at work. why? a huge benefit, no consequences. >> we've got time for one more

question. >> yes, sir. >> i applaud your efforts to be bipartisan. to the naturees of warfare today. responding with economic stations as a course of action. do you see ron responding in you if our economy was -- see ron responding in kind if our economy is based on the trust factor? making ak they're conscious decision that they feel empowered, now that they have this capability. i am not saying anything, although i would argue that some of the signatures certainly have . hint of muscovite in them

i think they make this calculation that it is a legitimate response to sanctions. that is why they are targeting our financial institutions. i have argued that they have probably made this decision, hey, we had this event that was .ildly successful and they have decided the pressure is on. which is why i think it makes them such an irrational actor on this. our capabilities getting better. we will do these probing attacks in retaliation for an aggressive -- and aggressive sanctions regime. obviously, none of this has slowed them down in their pursuit of nuclear weapons. we would like to have honest conversations with ourselves in this country if, what are the consequences of allowing a country that is already aggressive in cyber warfare and terrorism against u.s. targets,

that is already responsible for aboutst -- dot estimates 600 soldiers dead in iraq and afghanistan because of iranian complicity. this is the nation that tried to kill the saudi ambassador in washington, d.c. and so far, they have suffered the same kind of problem, very little consequence. we will have to have an honest discussion. i know we have a frequently in our space is about what happens next. imagine that nation now it's the umbrella of a nuclear weapon. we should ask ourselves some hard questions about what that means. they are aggressive now. could you imagine that umbrella of a quicker exchange option? which many believe means they could release their conventional and unconventional forces in a we have not even done today in a

way that would be disruptive. partnersalked with our on these issues. they are more aggressive about stopping iran getting a nuclear weapon, clearly, then we are, and i think even than the rest of the world is. this is a very large, very looming problem that will have to -- we will have to get our hands around very soon. they have done nothing in negotiations but by themselves time, and clearly, during that time they have kicked the ball down the field. and these gripping sections have not deterred them. think about north korea. we nearly starved a nation through the years to death because of sanctions. i argued they serve themselves. but the benefits outweighed the consequences. that is a hard equation to break, but we have to figure out a way to do it.

thanks. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> coming applied at t. peake -- ,:00 p.m. this afternoon, former president jimmy carter at the carnegie institute. israeli and palestinian officials reached a tentative agreement for peace talks. that is live and about 30 minutes at 5:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. the house is coming back again in a minute or two to work on six bills, including dealing with blevins sharing and weapons of mass destruction. -- information sharing and weapons of mass destruction. house, an for the update on the rules committee scheduled to meet in about half

an hour at 5:00 p.m. eastern to decide how to handle an amendment to the pentagon spending bill. at issue are a number of controversial amendments that two leaders to not want to see come to the floor. they are related to phone records and internet data, and another treasure -- another measure about syrian opposition forces. for thee're waiting house to come in, looking at 6 bills this afternoon. >> again, we're waiting for live

coverage of the house. at the white house, president obama this week begins a two- month series of speeches across the country focusing on the economy and jobs. spoke -- he will speak at knox college. a focus on trade and regional security ties. the vice president will spend several days in india. later this week, he will meet with business leaders in mumbai before heading to singapore on thursday. again, we're waiting for live house coverage.

nt to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 697 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 99, h.r. 697, a bill to provide for the conveyance of certain federal land and clark county, nevada, for the environmental remediation and reclamation of the three kids mine project site and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, and the gentleman from california, mr. hoffman, each will control 20 minutes --

huffman, each will control 20 minutes. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, h.r. 697, the three kids mine remediation and reclamation act, was introduced by our congressman from -- our colleague from nevada, mr. heck, on valentine's day and it was marked up on june 12 of this year. the three kids mine is located in clark county, nevada, adjacent to the city of henderson. the mine was operated from 1916 to 1961. the united states, through the defense plank cooperation, owned 446 acres of the three kids mine project from 1942 to 1955. the mine site was used to produce federally owned manage

niece or for national defense purposes and was leased by the u.s. until 2003 to stockpile manganese nodules. the three kids mine project is approximately 121,262 acres and includes 948 acres of federal lands managed by the bureau of land management and the bureau of reclamation. and 314 acres of private lands where the mill site and processing plant is located. the site is contaminated withers a knick, lead and other heavy metals and petroleum -- petroleum hydrocarbonens. cost estimates for cleanup and reclamation of the site range from $300 million to $1.2 billion. the city of henderson, the henderson redevelopment agency, the nevada department of environmental protection, lake board development and the bureau of land management have negotiated a plan to clean up and redevelop the three kids mine project site. that includes the purchase of

948 acres of federal land. the purchase price would be adjusted to reflect the actual cleanup costs of the federal and nonfederal lands where the federal government has environmental liability resulting from the mill, from the processing facilities and the storage of federal-owned manganese nodules. all in all, mr. speaker, this is a win-win for everyone involved. the environmental problems are addressed, the abandoned mine site is reclaimed and the land redeveloped for beneficial use. all at no cost to the american taxpayer. if successful, this could provide a framework for other abandoned mine sites that are near or adjacent to small towns and larger urban areas. so i urge my colleagues to support this legislation. it passed by a voice vote in the last congress. and i would hope that it would do so again in this congress with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. huffman: mr. speaker, i ask

unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. huffman: i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. huffman: mr. speaker, we agree, the three kids mine is an abandoned manganese mine and mill site and this bill designates a combined 314 acres of private land and 948 acres of public land as the 1,2462-acre, three-kids mine project site, and it provides for the conveyance of the public lands to the henderson redevelopment agency. the bill requires the standard appraisal practices be used to determine fair market value for the federal lands to be conveyed and once that determination has been made the bill would require the secretary of interior to determine the reasonable estimation of the cost, to assess remediate and reclaim the three kids mine project site that. cost would then be deducted from the fair market value of the public land that is conveyed. the hend everson redevelopment agency -- henderson

redevelopment agency would pay the adjusted fair market value of the conveyed land, if any, and the federal government would be released from any and all liabilities or claims. the b.l.m. supports innovative proposals to address the cleanup of the three kids mine and we do not oppose this bill. i reserve the balance of my ime. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington state. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i am very pleased to yield four minutes to the author of this legislation who introduced it in the last congress and in this congress, the gentleman from nevada, mr. heck. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. heck: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 697, the three kids mine remediation and reclamation act, which is an innovative solution for restoring our environment, improving safety and creating jobs. h.r. 697 addresses the safety and environmental concerns of the three kids mine as was stated, an abandoned manganese mine and mill site of both

federal and private lands which lie within the henderson city limits and is located across from a busy parkway and ancreasing number of homes and businesses. the site was owned and operated by various parties, including the united states government, from approximately 1917 through 1961. and used as a storm area for federal ore reserves from the late 1950's through 2003. currently the project site contains numerous large unstable sheer cliff open pits as deep as 400 feet. and vols of mine overburden tailings, mill facility remnants and waste disposal areas. to give a sense of scale, the site contains mine overburden mounds that are approximately 10 stories high in some areas and an abandoned waste pond that are and filled t deep with more than one million cubic yards of high concentrations ofers a knick, lead and petroleum compounds.

-- ofers a knick, lead and petroleum compounds. this provides a solution to clean up the abandoned three kids mine sight -- site. in its simplest form this directs the secretary of interior to convey the federal lands at the project site, approximately 948 acres, at fair market value, taking into account the cost of investigating and remediating the entire site, which also includes an additional 314 acres of now private lands that were used historically in mine operations. in return for conveying the land at fair market value, the federal government will also receive a release of liability for cleanup of both the federal and private lands. under this legislation, before the federal lands are conveyed, the state must enter into a binding consent agreement under which the cleanup of the entire project site will occur. this agreement must include ensure assurances to the completion of the remediation and reclamation of the site. the cleanup will be financed with private capital and nevada tax increment financing at no

cost to the federal government. again, this project will be carried out at no cost to the federal government. h.r. 697 is a result of more than five years of work, among the city of henderson redevelopment agency, the department of the interior, the state of nevada and private entities. this public-private partnership solution will finally lead to the cleanup and reclamation of the three kids mine site while at the same time providing for economic development and the creation of as many as 3,000 jobs. furthermore, i believe this innovative solution could serve as a viable model for the cleanup and reclamation of other similar sites across the country. this bill, which has the support of the entire nevada delegation, is nearly identical to h.r. 2512, which passed the house of representatives by a voice vote during the 11th congress, but unfortunately did not -- 112th congress, but unfortunately did not receive consideration in the senate. we want to thank the chairman and ranking member for recognizing the importance of this legislation to nevada and the west and for their efforts in advancing it in a bipartisan

fashion through committee. h.r. 697 is a win for the economy, a win for the environment and a win for the federal taxpayer. i encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. huffman: i yield as much time as she may consume to the gentlelady from nevada, representative titus. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from nevada is recognized. ms. titus: thank you. and thank my friend from california for the time. mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 697, the three kids mine remediation and reclamation act, and urge my colleagues to support the bill. this bipartisan legislation, which has the support of the entire nevada delegation, including senators reid and heller, is critical to the cleanup and revitalization of long dormant land near henderson, nevada. h.r. 697 sets up a public-private partnership to address the remediation of more than 1,200 acres of former manganese mining and re-- lands

for redevelopment. these activities,, as you have heard, date back nearly a century and were critical to our national defense during world war ii. but over the last 50 years, the already nasty, polluted site has become increasingly dangerous. accordingly the cleanup of this land sp a top priority for the nevada state department of environmental protection, the city of henderson and for the thousands of southern nevada residents who live nearby. i support this legislation to clean up the three kids mine for both safety and environmental reasons and to create opportunities for redevelopment of the site for beneficial use and economic potential. so i would urge my colleagues to join me and the nevada delegation in support of this bill and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: i'd ask my friend from california, i have no more requests for time and i'm prepared to yield back if the gentleman is prepared to yield back. mr. huffman: i would tell the chairman i have no further

speakers and am prepared to yield back if the chairman is prepared to close. to hastings: i'm prepared close. mr. huffman: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back his time. the gentleman from washington. haust at half -- mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. as was mentioned, this is a win-win proposition, at no cost to the taxpayer, cleaning up mine. and i urge its support. it passed by a voice vote in the last congress and i hope it does so again in this congress and with that i urge my colleagues to vote yes and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 697 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and

pass h.r. 1411 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1411, a bill to include the point arena public lands in the california coastal national monument as a part of the national landscape conservation system and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, and the gentleman from california, mr. huffman, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. . mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hastings: i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker, h.r. 1411 would d 255 acres to the point arena-stornetta public be lands to the california coastal monument which was created by

7264 on january -- in january of 200. the stornetta family, the namesake of monument, grazes cattle in this area so it's compatible for the long-term protection and management of the monument. public lands grazers in arizona, montana and utah have already been targeted by a few anti-grazing zealots who want to extinct the long-standing practice of grazing on national monuments. during committee hearing of h.r. 1411, an amendment was adopted to ensure that economic activities and uses such as grazing will be allowed to continue once a point arena-stornetta public lands are added to the california coastal national monument. it also limited future land acquisitions to only those done by donations or exchange thereby preventing any unnecessary taxpayer expense.

private property rights were also included by ensuring motorized vehicle access to any nonfederal lands within the monument and requiring written consent of the landowners before their property can be included in the monument. the bill includes provisions preventing restrictions on military or commercial low-level overflies and training activities and also on the department of homeland security law enforcement activities. other routine provisions protecting the activities outside the designation and the prohibiting of recreation buffer zones. i think these conditions are the right conditions when you take land for other uses and i support this legislation and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. huffman: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. huffman: mr. speaker, i am

honored to rise in support of my first piece of legislation as a member of congress. h.r. 1411. this bill will add point arena-stornetta public lands to the california coastal national monument. those of my colleagues who have visited the coast appreciate e true unspoiled beauty of this region and i understand why it's so important we protect it for future generations. this bill will preserve a complex and fragile ecosystem on the coast, approximately 45 miles north of san francisco, and will serve as the first land-based addition to the california coastal national monument and will add 10 miles of connectivity to the california coastal trail. this encompasses 1,255 acres and includes habitat for several endangered species. the bill will also protect the garcia estuary and two miles of the river which is important

for trout. and we'll preserve much of it as a sustainible working landscape. but safeguarding this national treasure isn't just good for the environment. it's also good for the economy. environmental tourism is critical to the economy of the rth coast of california, and expanding this will bring new visitors and new economic activity. tourism is already the number one source of jobs on the manned seeno coast. we get -- mandacino coast. it supports more than 5,000 jobs and generates more than $110 million in economic activity annually. the point arena-stornetta public lands are a perfect gateway for visitors to experience the california coastal national monument, and that's one of the reasons why the effort to protect this amazing stretch of the coast has such broad public support.

from state and local elected officials to the manchester point arena of indians, conservation groups across the country and business and civic leaders in the community. in addition, hundreds of individuals in this rural area have expressed their support by way of petition. my friend and predecessor in representing the north coast in california, congressman mike thompson, initiated the effort to protect this area in the last congress and i'm very pleased that he's joining me as a co-sponsor of this bill. i'm also very appreciative of the chairman on the natural resources committee, chairman doc hastings, and also of the newest member of the senate and our former ranking member, sdrat ed markey. in addition, i want to thank chairman bishop and ranking member grijalva of the public lands subcommittee for not only hearing the bill but for inviting my constituent, scott schneider, who's president and c.e.o. of the tourism bureau to come and testify in support of this legislation.

this bill was reported by the natural resources committee by unanimous consent and i'm grateful we've come so far to preserve this iconic landscape. i look forward to continuing to work with the committee, with senators boxer and feinstein and with my colleagues to ensure we fully and permanently protect this magnificent coastline. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on 1411 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. hastings: i have no more requests for time. if the gentleman is prepared to yield back i'm prepared to yield back. mr. huffman: mr. speaker, i'd yield -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserves his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from the northern mariana islands, mr. sablan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from the northern mariana islands is recognized. mr. sablan: i thank the gentleman for yielding time. from his days in the california state house and now here in congress, congressman jared

huffman has been a leader in protecting our valuable natural resources. h.r. 1411 is a fine example of his commitment and his leadership. congressman huffman's bill incorporates the area into the california coastal national monument. the bill gives permanent protection to 1,255 acres. the area provides hab tits including the mountain beaver and the spotted butterfly. garcia river shelters steelhead and silver and king salmon. i want to commend congressman huffman for his efforts to protect sharks. in the california legislature, he banned the trade of shark fins and led the effort to protest when the commerce department proposed regulations preempting state laws against shark finning. the northern mariana islands,

which i represent, has enacted a similar law. so along with other members who respects state authority, i co-signed congressman huffman's letter asking noaa to withdraw its proposed regulation. again, i comment mr. huffman for his dedication to protecting our natural resources and i ask my colleagues to support h.r. 1411. i thank you very much, mr. speaker, and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. hastings: i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: i thank the gentleman from the northern mariana islands and, mr. speaker, i'd yield as much time as he may consume to my colleague, the gentleman from monterrey, california, mr. farr. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. farr: thank you very much, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. huffman, for yielding. i want to congratulate the committee and chairman doc hastings on bringing this bill to the floor. i was instrumental in creating

the national coastal monument along the california coastline and it had to be done by executive order because we couldn't get the bills out of committee. i really appreciate the fact that the committee's concentrating on this because a lot of these things that people kind of argue against don't realize what the positive unintended consequences are. what this bill does is talk about management of land. as the chairman pointed out, the substance of the bill allows the private enterprise, the agriculture to continue and to have it in a way that will be cost-effective management. this is a win-win for the private sector and for the public sector. many cases the bureau of land management is a very effective land manager. in the west a lot of the land that was never picked up by forest service, when you think of it you think of timbering,

mining, those kinds of things or land that qualified for the national park system. was kind of the leftover lands of the westward expansion. they have a lot of land management responsibility and know how and i -- california coastline is the number one attraction and the number one engine. it's the whole engine of california, really most of the cities and stuff are all along the stuff. anytime you add to an ability to expand access -- and we sometimes forget in congress that the number one activity of interest in this country is watchable wildlife. more people watch wildlife, whether it's on -- in the movies or channels or by gear to go out than watch all the national sports. it's huge business and it's jobs. in the rural area this is key to job development. and since we've created the national coastal monument,

we've had little towns and counties in the rural area that have been identifying the rocks all of whom have historical names from families or ship wrecks and now it gives some attraction to it, some historical attraction which people love to learn about. it's been a great educational tool to teach us about this 1,100-mile coastline in california sort of inch by inch and this addition is just going to be able to build more opportunity for job creation. as people get -- want to hire people to give them access, want to buy pictures, want to buy books, want to buy art that's made from it. and so i really commend the committee on realizing that these things are responsible job development jobs, not just government ownership of land. and, you know, when you say it's taking it off the private tax rolls, remember it was a

private interest that wanted to sell it to the national -- to a public system. and those lands will pay taxes in lieu of property taxes, pill taxes. it will continue the economy of the area, but for the local area, this is pretty rural california, really rural. this will be a huge economic boom to them. so i compliment mr. huff plan. this is the first bill he's brought to the floor. hope he brings very more. he's a very abled member of congress. great member of the california state legislature. mr. hastings, thank you for providing the leadership to get these bills to the floor so we can have an opportunity to vote on them. thank you very much and i urge an aye vote. mr. huffman: i thank the gentleman and would yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, this is a good piece of legislation. i urge my colleagues to adopt it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from washington yields back his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1411 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? mr. petri: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2353. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 117. h.r. 2353, a bill to amend title 23, united states code, with respect to the operation of vehicles on certain wisconsin highways, and for ther purposes. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman intend to call up the bill as amended? mr. petri: yes. the speaker pro tempore: the bill, as amended, is pending.

pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. petri, and the gentleman from west virginia, mr. rahall, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill before us. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. petri: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. petri: mr. speaker, u.s. highway 41 between milwaukee and green bay is slated to become the u.s. interstate system early next year. h.r. 2353 would simply allow trucks that exceed federal weight limits but are currently authorized to operate on this road to continue to operate after the interstate designation. this primarily involves agricultural crops during harvest system, milk, timber, scrap metal and garbage. no new trucks in excess of federal weight limits would be allowed on the new i-41.

this would just maintain the status quo and not disrupt the current flow of traffic. this is not unprecedented. other roads which have become part of the interstate system have received this type of grandfathering include i-39 in wisconsin with no ill-effect. in fact wisconsin state patrol, which is responsible for truck safety enforcement, has issued a statement in support of this bill and is noting the safety benefits of not forcing these trucks off the safer interstate and onto state and local roads which are not designated to carry such traffic. . the bill before us is also supported by republican and democratic members of the wisconsin delegation, our two u.s. senators, many state and local officials and organizations. i ask my house colleagues to approve this bill which is so important