by yournow, you can watch us in. tonight, on c-span. acting commissioner of the irs addresses accusations that his agency targeted conservative groups. house debate on blocking implementation of the affordable care act. senators tom harkin and dick durbin hold a town hall meeting on immigration. acting irs commissioner daniel werfel testified at a hearing about identity theft that quickly changed topics to accusations of political targeting of conservative groups. here is part of that hearing. >> however, i have some frustrations today. as you know, a number of months ago, the president made it clear that the behavior that occurred

that isolated bases in cincinnati was unacceptable. he charged that we would get to the bottom of it. we have gotten to the fact that it is not isolated to cincinnati as was said. it is not isolated to washington. it goes to your chief consul's office. discovery, do our that is where the rub is. you promised us full cooperation and yet the office of chief consul apparently has 70 attorneys delivering for documents a day per attorney, and they look like this. print, 6103.inute documentss working on , four pages a day or lawyer -- her lawyer. per lawyer.

this minimal reduction is required by law? >> i have a couple statements. take --take lisi -- to redact information specific to taxpayers. all information, bottom line, whether redacted or unredacted is delivered to this congress. >> you have delivered less than one percent -- six use me for standing but i have to get over your stack. you have delivered less than one percent of the documents to the committee. >> i disagree with that conclusion. >> that is what chairman cap put out. >> i disagree with that. if i am allowed to explain i can provide -- >> here is my question. terms.uced 63 search you added some search terms. i am not disagreeing with your

adding. that is fine. i want more, not less. you came up with this. it added up to about 80 search terms and unilaterally, your people, the office of chief consul, reduced that down to a dozen. they are not searching on the terms we have asked for. our request is for all information related to this. when you eliminate search terms, you are obstructing us i limiting the scope of discovery. do you understand that? >> i do, but i disagree with the premise of your question. >> did your people that the search terms below the search terms that were delivered? >> we are prioritizing searches in order to get you more documents more quickly. the amount ofe, document production that we have been able to produce has increased traumatically. that doesn't mean we have eliminated search terms

permanently. a m modif>> that is not your c. let's go into detail. what is interesting is, i understand why you have removed taxpayer specific. this information is being delivered without headers. if the names were there, i was still wouldn't know what those numbers are. somebody deliberately printed out information in which they stripped out the meaningful data . thismr. connolly would say doesn't look like a spreadsheet he has normally had. spreadsheets say what is on top of them. additionally, we asked you for information. we set the priority if you're going to slow roll us. you are. >> that is not true. >> mr. werfel, you frustrated this committee. you promised to do things and you are not. the office of chief consul as theas we know has made

decision to limit search terms. is that correct, or did you? >> i am working together with the office. we are not limiting search terms in a permanent way. we are prioritizing. if i can make a point. consent foror additional four minutes to explore this. >> i will grant that provided the democratic side will he allowed to respond given that we are now on-topic. i respect the wish and prerogative of the chairman to use this opportunity to query mr. werfel on a different matter and i respect that but i would like you will -- equal opportunity to respond. >> i will grant the full committee chair that time. we grant additional time to the minority. >> i think the chair for his graciousness. >> mr. werfel, let's go through the numbers.

the democrats seem to be carrying your water. -- forrtant facts might me to get out. >> you are obstructing them. >> that is not true. werfel, apparently you were put in by the administration to run cover. it is now my time and i am going to explain to you what this committee has found. months, outin two of 64 million pages, you have delivered 12,100. this is over 2500 of them, completely useless. 6103 iserpretation of so broad that you deliver no meaningful information. we have prioritized a number of discoveries. who took the fifth before our community, we have asked for all correspondence. it has not been forthcoming.

we asked for correspondence with the white house. correspondence with the white house by definition had darn well better not include 6103. reduction is not appropriate. we are not covered by the privacy act. even if it includes names of , quite frankly, it would not be 6103. it would be communication with the outside. your people have unilaterally chosen to redact private information. mr. werfel, you don't have the right to have private communications. on government time and government equipment. if lois lerner or others had private communications, they are not subject to 6103 because we expect them to be referred for from a prosecution. you can have private press -- conversations and released 6103. that would be wrong. as we go through this discovery , slownd excess redacting

rolling discovery, limiting search terms -- you may call it prioritizing but you are not prioritizing as we need them, is my expectation that we should have received communications to and from the white house. anyone whoon between is conducting on 6103 business. we should have received lois lerner's entire packet. these are not my expectations. these are the american people's expectations. your speed of delivery is such that you will be long gone. the president will be long gone. lois lerner will have retired before we receive a sufficient amount of information to be meaningful. you are leaving me no choice. i asked you for information. you are not forthcoming. your own chief consul's office appears to be clearly compromised. lawyers there are included in this investigation. communications to and from those office clearly mean the

of chief consul, a politically appointed office, has been compromised. you leave me no choice. i will be preparing and sending a subpoena for these documents to the secretary of the treasury who will remain on. our expectation is that the treasury department will take over the delivery of documents in a timely fashion, use attorneys such as they see fit that they believe are not compromised, and i would ask you to immediately instruct chief not anyhat they may longer be part of the decision- making. only attorneys who are not part of our investigation. i am deeply disappointed. ouras my expectation with past relationship that you would come in not just wanting to be a caretaker, but to get to the bottom of this. as cincinnati turned to washington, washington turned to , andical appointee offices

the president began calling this scandal phony. understand is how you can think the american people would accept this as phony. this is a real investigation. we need real discovery. if these documents need to be redacted, then by definition you have no reason to deliver them. if you can only deliver me blank pages, deliver them to the other committee. i will tell you one thing. as these pages, which are almost impossible to figure out where they came from, you'd better hope. you'd better really hope that we don't find something there that should not have been redacted, which we expect we will. moreover, i am sad to see you go because i thought you could do something. i am said to issue a subpoena because that is not what i thought we were going to have. we did not enter this investigation thinking that this was some grand conspiracy.

we entered this thinking this was something fundamentally wrong. my democratic friends are convinced that progressives were targeted even though your own inspector general said he found no evidence. he did find evidence of other groups generally called tea party groups having been targeted. we don't want to find only one side. we want to find anyone that is targeted. we want to hold people responsible. today, lois lerner is being given full pay and not held accountable. our job is to find out everyone that should be held accountable and make sure the american people can trust this will not happen again. move forward in this investigation, this will become a pattern of behavior. by the chief executive of the united states or by individuals who have power within bureaucracies such as the irs, epa, osha and the like. mr. chairman, i now 06 minutes to the democrats.

>> duly noted. this point the ranking member of the full committee -- >> i counted seven. >> i will make that determination. at 4:00.d you weren't here, sir. >> thank you for recognizing me, mr. chairman. >> you are recognized for five minutes. i will consult with the ranking member to see how we distribute the balance of the time. >> mr. werfel, thank you for your service. i have listened to what was said to you and i again thank you for your service. week, chairman issa accused you of obstructing the committee's investigation because you were not producing documents fast enough in his opinion. you have produced to congress

tens of thousands of documents. we have interviewed 18 irs witnesses. today is the third time you have testified before our committee and the last two months -- in the last two months. 6103 of a law, section the internal revenue code that prohibits you from revealing information to our committee that identifies specific taxpayer information. is that right? >> that is correct. >> you need to review all the documents you are producing to our committee to first make sure they comply with the law. is that correct? >> yes. >> i am not concerned with your compliance. i have seen it. my concern is the actions of the ig blocking you from providing information about regressive groups to this committee. two weeks ago, you testified

thate ceived treatment similar to tea party applicants and the irs denied at least one category of applicants after a three-year review. is that right? >> that is correct. in this instance, your career experts review these documents and told you this information was ok to share with the committee. that it did not reveal specific taxpayer information, did not violate section 6103, but just as you are about to produce the this -- the ig itervened and claimed that might reveal specific taxpayer information. is that right? >> that is correct. the ig reached out to me and expressed concerns about our pending delivery of the information. >> so you were about to hand us documents.

thsaocumts mr. issa just asked about, but the ig says, no. is that right? >> the ig raised serious concerns. >> when we asked the ig, he confirmed that his effort to block your disclosure was unprecedented. we don't hear complaints from the other side. when we press them on this, he said he was still in ongoing discussions with your office, and that he would resolve this issue with you "sooner, rather than later." the problem is we have not heard a single word from the ig since then. update?give us an has he withdrawn his objection? are your discussions still ongoing? >> they are. concern andd his

indicated that he was still not convinced the information was not -- >> the information about the progressive groups? >> in this case, yes. experts stilleer believe it would be appropriate to provide this information to the committee? >> yes they do. >> i am disappointed that the ig continues to block information about aggressive groups to the committee. representative connolly and i sent a letter to the ig yesterday asking for an explanation. mr. chairman, i ask that our p included in the record. thishave said throughout investigation, our job is to ensure that all applications for tax-exempt status are treated fairly whether they are conservative, progressive or in between. if we do not receive a satisfactory response from the ig by next week, i ask that you go ahead, mr. werfel, and produce these documents.

the chairman just said, he wants the documents. let's get him the documents, even over the objection of the ig. we will follow up and let you know if we hear from him. look forward to hearing from us. >> thank you. , i aman just make a point not exactly familiar with the procedures of the committee. i would like an opportunity to respond to each of chairman and's allegations questions. a lot of them weren't corrections of fact and clarification. i wish he was here for me to respond directly. at some point during the course of events, i would appreciate the opportunity to respond. --may i use >> if you would like. you have six minutes. >> thank you. thingsfel, one of the

that i remind my committee members is that when people come in here, it is public service, they give their best. family, everybody is watching them on c-span. made and theye never have an opportunity to respond. me.eally bothers i want you to respond if you may and try to leave me a few more minutes because i want to ask you a few more questions. >> first of all, the notion that we are obstructing is completely false. the opposite is true. we are involved in a thorough comrades of effort to fully -- comprehensive effort to cooperate with the committees that are asking questions, asking for witnesses, asking for documents. there is substantial evidence that demonstrates our full cooperation. keep in mind, i have been in seat for nine weeks. this process is moving forward and we are getting better at

producing this discovery on a day-to-day basis. i have more than 100 employees working on the document requests that chairman issa raised concerns about. this includes 70 attorneys working full time to review documents. we are producing documents on a weekly basis. -- as ofittee has over today will have over 16,000 pages of documents delivered. todayss as a whole, as of , there will be 70,000 pages delivered. what is important about the redaction process -- and that is what is very important to make --e the public understands is that these documents are being produced to congress. we operate within legal constraints in terms of what we can deliver to who and when. we have to protect taxpayer information. there are rules and acted by this congress that certain documents can only go to tax committees. >> if you violate 6103, what

happens? >> it is criminal. >> jail time. >> exactly. >> with the gentleman yield? , the very same chairman who just railed against mr. werfel in his tenure, did he not say on june 18, in defense of the inspector general, that in erring on the side of caution, that was the right policy? therefore, withholding of documents was justified. , mr. cummings, that the list of search terms submitted to mr. werfel by the majority on this committee includes 81 items? audit?"of the terms " might that generate a lot of paper? >> i'm going to get to that

point. let me get through some of the to make sure there is an understanding about the amount of discovery. >> you are losing i think you said 8000 employees. >> we take this very seriously. out of chief counsel's office, we have 100 lawyers working on this. there are now 70,000 pages of documents as of today that will be delivered to congress. these have relevant information that was requested by the committee. you asked for the spreadsheets, we got to them. you asked for the e-mails, we got to them. you asked for training materials, e-mails of self- appearingy witnesses for interviews. all of those were delivered. we are responded to 41 matters from the committee including today's hearing.

irs officials including myself have appeared in 15 hearings since the ig report was issued. available employees for a total of 99 interviews. supporting -- 29 interviews. supporting all of this is hours of work. the trend is that document production is increasing. this week alone, we have increases. the reason is because the last few weeks we made important changes to that process. i added more people. we are making technology enhancements. getaps most important, to to one of chairman issa's most critical concerns, what happens is when we get 82 search terms, it produces a large amount of documents, a majority of which are nonresponsive. you have to look through every document. if you produce an enormous amount of documents to look through, it takes longer and

longer to find those responsive documents and give them to you. roughly 75% of documents being pulled based on 80 search terms were not responsive. staff time was being eaten up going through each document. what we did is try to help the process along, not by permanently saying we will not search them, but i saying if we can take the search terms and ensure that we have a higher response rate in this information, then we are going to get the information that this committee wants quicker. no unilateral decision has been made to alter the search terms in perpetuity. we have made an adjustment to the search terms in order to increase the number of documents you get sooner. the fact that i am able to deliver thousands of pages today is because we have made these improvements. it doesn't mean that we are not fully committed to getting all these documents. >> you are trying to obey the

law. is that what you're telling us? >> i am trying to obey the law. , the letter to chairman issa from mr. werfel. i would like to have entered into the record. >> objection so ordered. that concludes the time of the gentleman and i will recognize mr. jordan. you have 25 seconds in addition to the five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. werfel, 81 search terms, 12 search terms, 2500 pages of redacted -- whatever. monthsbeen almost three since lois lerner had a question asked where she told the world that this was going on. we have been asking ever since that happened for lois lerner's

e-mails. you guys won't give them to us. that is not redacted. we just want the correspondence from the person at the center of the storm and you guys don't give it to us. -- 1600 to me that is lawyers, why can you give us a question mark >> i don't know that that is the case. notur staff told me we have got me most from lois lerner. >> i received a letter recently which attached a e-mail from lois lerner which we produce. we are producing these e-mails. >> we want the e-mails from anyone at the irs, why can't we get that? >> we look at those two. -- we look at those too. in some cases, there were no e- mails. this is the point. we have a particular request, give it to us.

>> william wilkins, we are not getting his e-mails. >> that is also not true. two things, if i could. we are producing because you made a specific request. if you want to put something at the front of the line, please put that at the front of the line. the other thing about wilkins is we have offered to interview wilkins before this committee. your staff has not taken us up on this offer. i hope you do because this is not about obstruction. this is a -- this is about offering as much information as we can. i know you have questions about their wilkins. we want to get you those answers. you haven't taken us up on our offer. >> i want to be clear. every single e-mail of lois lerner's that we have asked for, you sent to us? >> no. hundreds of her e-mails. again, this is a process.

>> no, no. it is simple. you go to her and cuter and get her e-mails. >> it is not that simple. >> it shouldn't take three months. you said you did send us all the didrmation and i asked you you send us every single e-mail, and you said no. which is it? did you send them all or not? >> we sent many lois lerner e- mails. >> that is different from what you first told me. you have to be square with us. we want every single e-mail. we would like any correspondence between the irs and the white house. you haven't given them all to us. >> here is my answer. process. we are providing information on a rolling basis. we are getting it as quickly as we can. you had a specific request. we will do our best to put that at the top of the priority. bit ofant every correspondence from lois lerner

and you won't give it to us. here is the lady who broke the story. the lady who took the fifth. the lady who is at the center of the storm, we want every bit of e-mail from her. you won't give it to us. for the past three months. >> i will tell you what we are committed to. reviewing every one of lois lerner's e-mails. some of it has to be redacted. some has to be reviewed. >> why would lois lerner at 6103 6103ls -- six at -- information in her e-mails? normal for be very lois lerner to you know someone inside the irs. >> you go back to the office today. can you tell those 70 lawyers among the 6100 you have -- 1600 you have, can you tell them to focus on every single bit of correspondence lois lerner has

sent to anyone on the planet? we want that information given to this committee. >> i will go back and ask the team to prioritize that over other document requests that we have received. that is part of the partnership. >> if you guys want to get to the bottom of this story, why wasn't that done back in may when this story broke? here is the lady who broke the story and try to blame it on rogue agents. why wasn't that done the very first day you came on the job? you say, here is the lady at the center of the whole thing, but get every bit of correspondence to the committee. if the president wants to work with congress to get to the truth, i would expect that be the first action you take. here we are, three months later. you're telling us, we have only sent you some of lois lerner's e-mails. why wasn't that done day one? don't you think the american

people would like to have that information? >> a couple responses. lois lerner's e-mails are on the top of our list. >> we want them and we wanted them in may. >> we have produced a lot of information that is high reliable and -- highly relevant to your information. >> mr. chairman. may i have 10 seconds? the gentleman just said that we haven't received documents with regard to william wilkins. we have received them. not all of them, but i have them right here. if the gentleman would like to have them, i will give them to him. >> gentleman yields back. i think we have even time now. the gentleman from ohio can be recognized now. >> first off, let me join my colleagues in being outraged at the fact that the irs at the beginning it not tell the truth.

we are not dealing with the irs coming forth and saying this is what happened to the american public or the committee. the irs came first with a fiction that this was done by rogue agents. now we are learning that it is not. they are not being forthcoming. it is astounding to have both members of this investigative responsibility to this committee and yourself, mr. werfel, to spend -- defend not giving us information. the chairman has said, luckily, we are not dependent on your good graces. the chairman is issuing subpoenas. we have the full ability to use the federal government authority to compel your answers since you have not chosen to. i look forward to the fact that that is coming. it is hysterical that you say we are doing this on a rolling basis. your rolling the american people and this committee and it is going to stop. back on topic, the issue of

identity theft is very important. it is one that the irs can have an affect upon. commissioner, i appreciate your testimony. i appreciate you working with them. it is important for us to look to industry and the ways in which some of the data processing and mining efforts can be used to detect issues of identity theft. mr. werfel, the financial industry has made recommendations to improve the irs also protection from identity theft. the irs has started to bang tax forces. one positive step is the irs is an insurance of algorithms.

american coalition for taxpayer rights has also worked with the irs to ensure members can send real-time reports of fraud to the irs. werfel, the financial industry has important expertise and has taken steps to combat identity up. -- identity theft. i was the irs working on this problem? the state of georgia has utilized the private sector to identify potential fraud. describe this? how have you worked with companies to help them identify consumer fraud and identity theft? >> we have a very critical partnership with private industry. at thee often developing cutting edge of sophisticated solutions to deal with fraud. have are companies we working at the irs right now that help inform on our filters,

help inform on schemes that we can help capture. benchmark and see what other companies are doing that face similar challenges, whether it is credit card companies or other types of entities in the financial service industry. i think that we have a robust partnership with private companies and experts. i think if we are going to tackle this issue effectively, we have to stay very close with our corporate partners because they are the correct -- -- interface 20is the private sector and the irs. not just looking to how industry can be applied to your internal bureaucratic operations, but how also to get through the collaboration, identity theft identified.asily

>> i agree. there are a lot of dimensions to this problem. technology is going to be a solution that helps us stay ahead of it. what we have been describing is a problem that is emerging quicker than a solution is to tackle it. technology is the key. >> turning back to the irs scandal, when you first came on and stood in front of these committees and gave everybody your statement, you don't get to just decide that. you have to prove it. the fact that you're not standing in front of the committees and readily disclosing information that would establish what happened and that you are stopping it and correcting it is a tremendous amount of arrogance. i hope that you will become forthcoming. >> it is not true. we are providing the information. >> i yield back. >> we are doing it in a robust and legally appropriate way. and he indication that we are

standing in the way of discovery is not true. >> the gentleman recognized now from north carolina, mr. meadows. >> i thank you mr. chairman. mckenney, ifd mr. i can direct your attention. as we look at tax preparation in the industry and addressing the issue of tax fraud, what are the recommendations that have been made that have not been addressed or that were failing to address with regards to the ig? we are seeing that it is growing. what have we not addressed? perspective, the main concerns are three areas. one, as the tax return comes in the door, make sure it comes from the right taxpayer.

when they validate the income and withholding, they need to run that against income withholdings to verify that. where they deposit into a bank account that needs to be authenticated. those are the three areas we believe need improvement. >> mr. werfel, why do you think we have not been more successful in addressing that question mark is this a lack of -- in addressing that? is this a lack of working with the taxpayers? >> we want to achieve what we can given time and resources. the problem grows quicker than we want. one of the things that the ig has pointed out is that we can do more to use the standard authentication procedures that they use on credit cards. if you are authenticating yourself, they might ask for your mother possum maiden name or something that the -- your mother's maiden name.

we have developed this program called the out of love that program. we are implementing those types of procedures. we are finding that it takes resources. >> so it all gets down to money? >> no, just an example. it is a combination of knowing about the solution and having the resources to effectively at lamented -- implement it. >> so let me go with this. you have said that this is increasing. have -- and iwe have talked to some of the groups that are actually working to solve this in the private sector -- if it is increasing, and they are making recommendations on how to fix it , where is the problem? are they making ineffective recommendations? are we are just not implementing it at the irs? who is at fault? >> i don't want to say it is a

fault. it is an inherent reality that the problem grows quicker than our solutions can track it. >> if it is growing bigger and it -- i have talked to some of the stakeholders and they have recommendations. they would indicate that y'all are not acting on their recommendations. and you agree with that? or are they just -- >> i would want to take some time before i concur. aware of any times where they have made good recommendations that you have not implemented? in preparation for this hearing, did you say, we should have done that? >> i didn't see any. let me talk to the team. >> let me go on a little bit further. in recent years, we have seen instances of hundreds of direct deposits going to banks. going to the same bank account.

what steps are we taking? that seems like that would be a very easy programming issue to deal with in working with financial institutions. yet, i heard of one that had 400, another had 1000 going to the same account. how can you not address this? we are absolutely addressing it. effective with filing season 13, we have put in place new filters to identify redundant bank accounts. as mr. mckenney testified, he gave some of the facts of what an impact that is having, i would have liked to have caught that before. this is one of those things where a scheme emerges and we can hit it as soon as it emerges or we can be up front -- >> i would encourage you to work closer with thoseholds

to do problem with obamacare coming in and with the subsidies that are about to be of saying,- in terms i qualify. do you not see schemes that could come out of that that would make this pale in comparison? >> certainly focusing on potential risks of fraud. >> yes or no? >> i see but there is one point to make about the affordable care act. when people get tax credits on the affordable care act, they don't get the money. the money goes to the insurance company. if i am an identity thief, i am going to prioritize -- >> so you're saying we should get rid of what we pay people when they haven't paid any taxes? that would get rid of all of this? suggesting is that

because the affordable care act is structured so that you get , that is ac benefit disincentive for identity thieves to defraud that program. is no point where they get taxing hand -- cash in hand. that doesn't mean that in the entire lifecycle of the affordable care act there aren't certain vulnerabilities to work on. i just am suggesting that that is a critical part of irs's role. you have something in place to disincentive eyes tax fraud. >> i think the chairman. >> in agreement with ranking member, we divide the remaining time aside. mr. connolly, you can divide your six minutes.

i recognize you at this time. >> i thank you mr. chairman. say, speaking for myself, mr. werfel, i apologize. up and that could be construed and that could be construed as an intimidating act. one can use those history of comics to hide the fact -- blockonomics and documents. oatheorge testified under in response to questioning to me. he could not ascertain whether progressive groups could be included in the number. the 18thequently, on

under oath again, in response to questioning from esther cartwright, he said -- from mr. cartwright, he said that he had been apprised that there were blows for aggressive titles as well before the hearing. best,view, that is at most charitably, and elusive answer. we now have the inspector general blocking documents being made available to this committee in an abundance of caution with respect to 6103 according to your testimony. described as unprecedented by the ig on the eve of producing documents. i don't hear outrage about that. the general counsel is the problem. i say it is the inspector general that is the problem.

i say the inspector general has not provided objective analysis. i say he is compromising his integrity and credibility as a witness in this trumped up so- called scandal. the fact of the matter is, based on everything we know, the irs messed up in cincinnati. lookout"ted "be on the to screen an avalanche of tax- exempt application. some of them were clearly lingered -- triggered by the united states court. they tried to create a filter. they did it badly. they were cautioned not to do it. wrong, and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are right to criticize the irs. you came in in the midst of that to try to clean that up and get to the bottom of it and i congratulate you in trying to do

so. i have no evidence that you have done anything to obstruct or block. unfortunateit is that we could not go forward on a bipartisan basis. understand that both groups were tired of it. that is wrong. the idea that there is some that isng scandal here political and goes all the way to the top while indeed, the narrative before any facts are known, it was wrong. i am not surprised at the drive- by shooting nature of some of what has taken place here. i regret it because i do not think it is worthy of this committee. i think we could have and should have had a bipartisan analysis is of what went wrong.

mr. cummings, i would be glad to yield to you the balance of my time. >> thank you to the gentleman for yielding. let's go back to the letter that i introduced a few minutes ago. -- to hear this. more than 16,000 pages of documents to the committee, within 70,000 pages of documents to committees authorized to receive information, is that correct? given the importance of protecting confidentiality, can you explain what additional steps are required for the irs can produce responsive documents to our committee and what you have done to assure this process is expedited? >> under the law, we are required to make sure that no information specific to a disclosed tobe

anyone that is not authorized to receive it. chairman camp, chairman bunk bunkis, andrman they are the only ones that can receive that information in congress. >> i want to address something. >> one example i want to give. it is easy to pick up a document and say you have redacted everything. some of the documents requested by the committees are taxpayer case files. taxpayer x. icked want everything associated with it. we grab the file and give it to them. because it is a taxpayer file, the entire file is protected under 6103. it would be a crime to disclose that. someone indicating, look at all these pages that are completely blacked out. what i want to make sure is that we get the facts out.

those documents are coming to congress. we are working furiously to get them up here. the fact that they are blacked out is not obstruction. it is legal responsibility. there are concerns about the way in which we are redacting. we should talk to the chairman. they have authorities to provide that information to other members of congress. there is a checks and balances program in place to make sure that the right discovery goes to the right hands. i want to make sure we are leveraging those checks. -- i think my time is run out. >> a congressional hearing investigated the national park service's mismanagement of firearms inventory when an audit found weapons unaccounted for. utah congressman rob bishop questioned national park service commissioner about the issue.

>> mr. jarvis, you get a nice spin there. you didn't answer his question. who is responsible? >> i am the director of the park service. >> what about ms. chambers? >> the is c -- she is the supervisor. >> hundreds of guns were missing. 2008, 2009 reports showed problems. all of you were on the job. to jarvis, what did you do implement the findings of the 2009 report? >> i was unaware of the 2009 report. >> it came under your watch. >> i was the director -- >> you were a director after this report was taken. what did you do about it? huge -- what should you

have done about it? >> i should have held my supervisors accountable. , you're throwing everyone in your apartment under the bus? how much accountability should you hold? >> all accountability. >> have you taken full accountability? what is your action? immediate -- the most has been to elevate the position of the firearms manager. >> what about your response ability? so that -- >> it is my responsibility. >> i yield to the gentleman from michigan. >> on the next washington journal, a look at what members of congress will be doing during their august recess. political reporter ginger gibson. we talk about the national governors association meeting with gary herbert. recent government accountability office report found over 3400

cases of misconduct under tsa in 2012. we were discussing the report. washington journal begins live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> this weekend on c-span, live coverage of the national governance association meeting in wisconsin. the governors discussed national infrastructure and the global economy. sunday, live at noon on c-span two, both tv's in-depth. ben carson.r author span3, 1968, from the assassinations of martin luther king jr. and robert kennedy to the tet offensive, sunday at 1:00. is a littletol hill healthcare jennifer abercorn.

deals withular bill irs tax penalties and the prevention of the irs from imposing those penalties. what sort of penalties would citizens face under the 2010 law? >> one of the many features required is insurance. court -- the mandate. if you don't buy insurance, it is going to be a $95 fee. that fee will eventually go up. >> news reports indicated this is somewhere around the 40th attempt to block the healthcare law. have any of these bills seen any traction in the senate? if not, why do republican leaders continue to put them before the house? >> a small handful have gotten in. does are very minor things. forms made it

through the senate. that was largely bipartisan. that is something that was recognized, not a great provision of the laws. bigthe most part, these are pieces of the law. even if they did come up, they would never get past the president's veto. to repeal all are part of the law, there is no sign that that will stop anytime soon. they want to make clear to the to continuehey need to send that message that it is a bad idea. >> here is the debate prior to the house voting to block the irs from implementing parts of the healthcare law. it begins with michigan congressman and chairman dave camp.

>> mr. speaker, i come to the floor in support of hr 2009. legislation that will prevent the irs from getting involved in american healthcare. the irs is out of control, abusing its power to tax and audit the activities of honest hard-working americans. the irs has betrayed the trust of the american people. irs 47 newented the powers. including giving new confidential information to other departments and applying new taxes and penalties. well before the irs started getting involved in healthcare and forcing people to pay more let's look at the job the irs is already doing. in 2011, i investigated claims that the irs was threatening donors with higher taxes. it turned out to be true.

the irs was abusing its authority and harassing conservatives. that was the tip of the iceberg. we soon learned of more accusations of the irs targeting americans for political elites. what we have found so far and we just have three percent of the documents we have requested, what we have found is that the irs did leak confidential information. ofy did delay applications groups supporting conservative causes. they did threaten conservatives with higher taxes. democrats want to give them more power? they want this agency involved in america's healthcare? no way. watchdogagency's own says the irs can't handle the job. , the inspector general stated they are not 'snfident about the irs

ability to protect confidential information or protect fraud. neither am i. by any indication, neither are the american people. it has been three years since the healthcare law was passed. in less than two months, the administration claims it will be ready to implement the law. in the face of all these , more americans than ever want this law to be repealed. it is simple. increased healthcare costs to families and individuals. it has stifled individuals from expanding. it has forced job creators to cut hours. just yesterday, a key official could not confirm that the healthcare law was lowered in my home state of michigan. wasn't this the signature

propolis -- promise of this administration? premiums would be lower. the administration cannot make good on that promise. with so little time before , it ises are set to open extremely concerning that the administration cannot tell the american people what their health insurance will look like, what it will cost? put, this law is a failure and ought to be repealed. it didn't have to be this way this was the only legislation scored by the budget office. it was the only bill that actually lowered the cost of health insurance premiums. it didn't give the irs a single new power.

it kept the irs out of your healthcare which is exactly what this bill will do. keep the irs out of your healthcare. we should be cutting the irs. we should reduce its power and authority and ability to harass and abuse americans. that is what this bill does. i urge my colleagues to join me in voting yes on this legislation. >> i yield might have such time as i need. on jobs, nowhere on immigration reform. owhere on most appropriation bills. obsession so republicans tod vividly embraced by the chairman

our committee and his words. e are trying to destroy the bridge built by the president and democratic congress to vital putting all americans in charge of their own healthcare. this is nothing but an effort to appeal the affordable care act. republicans have chosen to spend the last day weeks.recess for five ell, it is so clear the republican mission is to dest y destroy not implement, health care reform. leading on the issue, house republicans have years he last two-plus trying to mislead americans

under ealth care rights a.c.a. and now we can expect more mis and the statement of our chairman is loaded with it. 13 states, for example, have published preliminary premiums marketplace coverage. within those states americans will be able to purchase price that is on verage 20% below what the c.b.o. estimated. 14 in michigan there will be insurance carriers in the market place. and someone comes up here and reform is care failing. so, to the american people, be for more scare tactics and other misguided efforts from to convince constituents that applying for ealthcare coverage will be time-consuming and cumbersome.

of be prepared for all kinds misstatements about the powers of the i.r.s. this should be said i.r.s.ically, either the nor the department of health and access rvices will have to medical records or other history. no access whatsoever. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman's time is reserve. gentleman from michigan mr. camp. >> i yield such time as he may distinguished member of the ways and means committee the gentleman from ask ia dr. price and unanimous consent the gentleman rom georgia control the remainder of the team. >> the gentleman is recognized. to comment the chairman for his bork on this in so many sraoufrlt areas on the healthcare in our committee and thank him for the

time and opportunity to bring forward. republicans' goal in healthcare s to make certain we have the hight quality health care in the world. that is our desire. it to be patient centered health care, not government centered health care. and familiestients and doctors ought to be making medical decisions, not washington, d.c. the bill grows out of i.r.s. activities that have come to light the past couple of been doing a have lot of oversight hearings in our committee. the american people have drawn a about the i.r.s. at this point. that conclusion is that it trusted now. mentioned, the i.r.s. has targeted groups that asking for i.r.s. tax exempt status for their political ideology. they have leaked donor information to those groups.

and i think lieve it will come out the i.r.s. has targeted donors to those groups to those individual americans. mr. speaker, this is chilling internal rom the revenue service. the american people have lost he ir favorite and trust in t intern internal revenue service. this is a simple piece of legislation. that pages. all it says is what the american people believe is that the i.r.s. shouldn't be charged and have the authority to either the ment or enforce affordable care act. over 140 co-sponsors from this i want representatives to commend them for being co-sponsors. e have hundreds of citizen co-sponsors from crass -- across the country. say this is not necessary. that it is not going to accomplish anything, there is no i.r.s. would want that information anyway. the fact of the matter is that s exactly what they said about what they did for the tax exempt

groups. not for them to get that information about olitical ideology or belief or prayers, that prayer groups were offering. either.sn't necessary if that was not necessary how can the american people have aith and confidence that the i.r.s. won't do something that also is unnecessary, and that is engage in implementing into that trusted relationship between patients and physicians. piece of evidence i would suggest is the is individual who is running the i.r.s. division, that is charged with the enforcement. sarah hall ingram. look far have to tpwhabg she was in charge much he tax exempt group in the i.r.s. at the time the challenges it the i.r.s. have been focused. the overwhelming percent of

the american people understand i.r.s. reciate the shouldn't be involved in the healthcare of this nation. we believe patients and families and doctors ought it make medical decisions not and certainly . not the internal revenue service. >> the time is reserved. gentleman from michigan. >> i yield two minutes to of washington. >> the gentleman from washington is recognized two minutes. without objection. >> mr. speaker, i would remind distinguished colleague from g. of a story in the bible about a king who was very famous and one day noticed on the wall some writing and he had someone come thend interpret for him and writing said your days are numbered upon the earth. days are numbered on this issue.

you have 59 more days. bring up a bill every single day to try and repeal it. announced there will be two more. but it will not work. law on 1oing to be the october and it is going to go into effect. spoken.eme court has the speaker has actually said it is the law of the land. this hopeless strategy and it is worst than is weak and it is mean. because what you are saying is ou want it take from people what they already have. questioned issue, coverage for to age 26 and lifetime limits are again. all of that you want to take away. now, have a great break. because you are going to go back districts and explain you will not y provide health care coverage for america.le of i hear there's a bill, a myth

onfidential bill with 141 signatur signures. the republicans have been running the ways and means 16 out of the last 18 years and we have never had a in front of us. for a vote. it has never been through the rules committee. to the floor. you have no plan. you have a piece of paper that but you won't go out and defend it. the president came and put a passed itere and away and we are defending it and it is going to go into effect and all americans want, security if they get sick. to know they will be covered. they want to know they won't be bankrupted. today and we n will be back after the break for a few more no votes. gentleman's time has expired. members are advised to direct heir comments to the chair respectfully. the gentleman from georgia. >> i ask unanimous consent from the senior coalition be upport of hr -- 2009

inserted i yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from texas mr. carter. >> he is recognized for 90 seconds. i thank you for bringing forward this bill. i would be willing to bet if you a poll in think household in america and said who do you or your e i.r.s. doctor, doctors with overwhelming ly overwhelmingly be trusted. he i.r.s. would be overwhelmingly distrusted. i don't understand when we laws in this congress restricting the access health care information and bring severe penalties on our care providers for releasing health care these hipaa and laws and they have been around for a while now i would say. we write a bill that turns this, the entire health

system's administration over to the one agency that the american people hate american agency.r now, some of the democrats like it because they like to get other people's money and spends it but the rty i the i.r.s. is trusted ed, wasn't before the events that have been described here today. oday they are totally distrusted. in fact they are totally feared of what they can do to the lives of american citize citizens. this bill speaks for the people, and they say don't let the i.r.s. get their health care. they will destroy us. they are the one agency that immediate a to burden of proof. they require the public it meet proof.den of >> the gentleman's time has expired. gentleman from michigan. i yield myself 15 seconds.

saying that the entire hasnistration of healthcare turned to the i.r.s. is a big lie. lie.s a big the i.r.s. will not have access or he medical records personal health history of a single american. i yield that minutes to the distinguished colleague from oregon oregon. >> the gentleman from oregon recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, mr. speaker. this is a fitting conclusion it week that has shown the republican li legislative agenda. his is the time we were supposed to be voting on budg s budgets, but the republicans even bring themselves to allow a vote on the budget that themselves have machine indicted. so, we are not voting on the h.u.d.rtation in we are not voting on interior.

hey refuse to allow a conference committee to be appointed so that we can on the e differences budget. etting up a showdown over a shutdown of the government next month. nd now we are dealing with healthcare for arguably the 40th , me that they are going to repeal it. they have repeatedly demonstrated at our hearing an means that ys my republican khraegs don't even - colleagues don't even understand how the bill they are opposed, they don't understand how it works. to ave not seen any attempt improve, to refine. hat we have seen is an unprecedented effort to sabotage to ma i can -- make

it not work for the american people, to confuse, to undercut something that is unprecedented of my knowledge in what we have had in the congress in the past. what more fitting illustration of a group that is ideas and bent on force theirpting to way for an agenda that is so they cannot agree to bring it to the floor to vote it. i urge rejection of this charade. >> the gentleman from georgia. >> thank you, mr. speaker. unanimous consent the group let freedom ring be inserted in the record. i'm pleased to yield minute and a half it a fellow physician of er from the great state michig michigan. gan is seconds.ed for 90 >> mr. speaker, i rise in

keep the hr-2009 it i.r.s. off your healthcare act and urge my colleagues to this legislation. the bill will keep the internal revenue service from of the ting any aspect president's hesitates care law. with the revelations that of the i.r.s. targeted u.s. citizens based on political we keep is imperative the i.r.s. from being further involved than it already is in of the american people. this legislation would repeal individual mandate and mployer plan date and help to shrink the i.r.s. i have been taking care of years.s the last 3 i know putting the federal tkpft between patients and doctors disastrous. many families in northern michigan agree and want this law this.ed is a good step toward rolling back this massive expansion of power.l government i'm proud to be a co-sponsor of

this legislation and urge all of join me in voting in favor of it. i yield become the balance of my time. >> gentleman from michigan. >> it is now special pleasure to yield to the gentleman who presided over the passage of years ago and has worked on health care issues his historic career. state of l from the michigan. >> he is recognized. >> for a minute and a half. >> the gentleman is recognized o1 1/2 minutes. >> i thank my friend for i rise tohis time and ask aren't you embarrassed to go a fruitless, hopeless act? we have he 40th time tried to kill the legislation. million every time none of which has been

successful. my republican colleagues have with a me forward proposal which they have presented in this house but they railing and e complaining about what is going on. they take the rights of the american people for protection conditions, xisting they will take away from the american performance all kinds protections which we've in the affordable care act. speaker the other day said the republicans were the party repeal. i think he is right. i suspect we don't want to call any more, publicans but i think we ought to call repealicans because hey have never been able to racew repeal anything and can't enact legislation. bills i think this congress has sent to the white house, and there are very small prospects of more coming.

they interesting to note can't do legislation on jobs. seeing to capable of it that we do the other things that are necessary to help the class. yet they keep coming over here with nonsense like there. the republican party is like the france. of they forget nothing because they never learned anything. >> gentleman from georgia. unanimous consent a letter from the americans for endorsing hr-2009 be inserted >> without objection. >> i yield a minute and a half on this er who has led issue from texas mr. culberson. one ands recognized for a half minutes. appreciate my did i is not complete if we don't get a this. to vote we were sent here to protect the

treasury and keep the government their lives and obama care has more than 20 tax ncreases and gives the i.r.s. unprecedented authority to collect personal health 300 mation from more than million americans and requires all insurance companies to name, address, identification number and type of insurance policy purchased by customer along with a determination whether or not it was government approved. i'm very proud to be a co-authority of dr. price's prohibit n that will the i.r.s. from collecting our personal health care information. the i.r.s. has proven at the be targeted by targeting organizations based on their political affiliation. the i.r.s. admitted this i have heard from so many onstituents who are members of patriotic organizations and tend up to get involved in politics like the texasns ea party, king street patriots and for their -- for standing up

thing they were targeted by the i.r.s. and harassed. spending 80%.s. is of its budget it implement obama treasury secretary said it is approximately 700 full-time staff working on obama care implementation. now the i.r.s. wants to hire an to tional 2,000 bureaucrats continue to implement became care. i urge them to support this bill become the balance of my time. >> gentleman from michigan. yield that minutes to a gentleman from new jersey who issue n a leader on this mr. andrews. >> he is recognized for that minutes. >> i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. objection.t >> somewhere in mark today a family is going to get the that you all ws dread about your children. thatare going to hear that lump in their daughter's stomach

is cancer. hey are going to go whom and have all the agony and suffering and all the unthinkable thoughts in that nts would have situation. but they are going to be faced with another problem. they have no health insurance. oth the mom and dad work, they make about $40,000 a year between the two of them, they and get coverage at work they can't afford health insurance. agony is not just worry about the health of their hild, they are worried about the fact they give the child the lose he needs they will everything they have and wind up in bankruptcy court. act says to e care that couple starting january 1 they can $40 a week have health insurance coverage as good as members of congress do. the affordable care act says. for that repeels that

fami family. those who are prepared to vote should be prepared to answer the following question. to that nt to say family that their concern isn't important enough what is your plan? what is your answer to them? we will hear people have and sent around letters. here are the facts. days been almost 1,000 that the republican party has been back in control of the house of representatives. the number of bills they have voted on to replace this law is zero. zero. it, zero timeseal to replace it. this debate is not about republicans and democrats. is about that family with that daughter that has no health you repeal this law and pass this bill. this is no plan. is no responsibility. and this is no way to deal with he concerns of middle class americans. vote no.

>> the time has expired. gentleman from g. >> i ask unanimous consent to nsert a letter of support for hr-2009 from restore america's voice. part of ut objection the record. >> i yield one minute to the ajority leader of the house of representatives. you.hank i thank the gentleman from georgia. off your support the healthcare act. want to congratulate the gentleman from georgia and his leadership bringing this bill to the floor not only a timely bill the health tial to and well-being of all americans. in response to the gentleman's assertion, the prior gentleman from new jersey, i would say have scare tactics do not a place in legitimate debate on this floor. tactics to say that omehow republicans on our side

of the aisle don't care about people's health care is not true. omnibus believe in washington engineered healthcare. that is what is going on. bureaucrats deciding what kind of healthcare you can can see,ch doctors you how much those doctors and hospitals are going to get paid, havehe insurance companies to act. all of that is in the hands of washington bureaucrats under care, which is why this bill and this law is suffering the minds of the public. patient centered care. rums believe that it ought to be doctor-patient relationship, in the between the bureaucrats and the doctors. about the borrow -- bureaucrats and insurance companies. it start with the patients and families. are not care tactics relevant to this discussion and

they are just that, scare tactics. and re about the health well-being of the american people, which is why it bill is floor.to the recently we have learned that its .r.s. has been abusing power by targeting and punishing their n citizens for political beliefs. and then recklessly spending lavish dollars on conferences and bonuses for its employees. kind of government abuse must stop. we should do now s to allow the i.r.s. to play such a central role in our healthcare. i.r.s. has a role in nearly obama erent aspects of ca care. the agency's involvement is so xtensive that there is a designated office within the bottom ust to implement

care. he i.r.s. will have access to the american people's protected health care information. given that there same agency has llegally disclosed protect the taxpayer information, the by many oncerns raised are legitimate. an un nothing short of welcome big government overreach aspects most personal of our lives. obama care is bad for the and for working middle class families. , impedes es costs nnovation and we know is now turning full-time jobs into part-time jobs, which is why so of both sides of the political spectrum are now in the g to realize words of three democratic union that this law is creating nightmare scenarios in

well-being of millions of hard working americans. before us today would at least prevent the unnecessary intrusion of the i.r.s. into our healthcare. members of both parties should on removing the federal bureaucracy from the the american of people and this act will do just that. thank theould like to gentleman from georgia for his ard work on this issue and i strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill. thank you. >> the gentleman from michigan. >> i now yield two minutes to distinguished member of our committee from texas. gentleman from texas is recognized two minutes. >> the majority leader is bsolutely right about scare tactics. if you are an uninsured american and you get a diagnosis of this morning, or you are

head-on collision or after you child born with a disability, you ought to be very scared. he's also absolutely right about the need for patient centered healthcare. we are concerned about that. we are concerned that patients are ut insurance today centered right in the bankruptcy court. more americans are faced with a health care crisis. this bill has nothing to do with internal revenue service or treasury department or restricting their rights. it is about restricting your rights. a that we finally have chance to protect americans from nsurance monopoly price gouging, from fine print in the contract for those who do have denies rights at the very time that you need them of most, that kind protection about to go into effect along with the right of americans who are uninsured to go to a competitive

marketplace ance and pick the policy that is best for their family. for many americans to have a premium tax credit, a tax credit want to deny to you. offer? what turn do they the best source is the official republican website. you though you will find plenty of misinformation there, gop.gov because you will find one very revealing fact. there it see what the republicans have to offer as obama care, itto says two words. in progress. has been in progress since 2 1/2 years ago when they voted first time to repeal bottom care right up to today when they 40th time to do it. they have only one alternative it is called and nothing care.

it is called do nothing but insurance monopolies to continue to deny rights to our people. i represent in san antonio -- > the time has -- >> another 15 seconds. >> they represent the working families from san antonio to austin. deserve to have some assistance. we have provided it to tell with guaranteed rights. some are in effect now, some about to go into effect. republicans deny those rights to our families and replace it with nothing care. i our families and replace it with nothing care. i yield back. >> the gentleman from georgia. >> like you, mr. speaker. supporting 2009 from the freedom works record. i would be pleased to yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from minnesota. >> gentleman from minnesota is recognized. for think the general men yelling. mr. speaker, the health decisions of individual americans should be made between

patients and their doctors. internal revenues should not be a part of that equation. we all know, all americans know that the irs has inappropriately used its authority to target certain individuals and organizations based on their personal beliefs. 2000 more irs agents, or washington bureaucrats are opening the door. we open the door to more abuse under obamacare. more targeting, more her restaurant of american citizens. best care know the for their patience, not elected bureaucrats in washington. we should be encouraging patients to take care of their own healthcare through consumer directed healthcare plans not ceding control to the government. i would encourage my colleagues to support this legislation, protect the doctor-patient relationship, and do what is needed to make sure that government overreach is not involved in american healthcare. i yield back. >> chairman yields back. government from michigan. >> it is now my pleasure to

waiteriemann its to mr. -- of maryland who has devoted so much time to healthcare in his career. >> the gentleman from maryland is recognized for three minutes. >> i think the gentleman for yielding. what a perfect bill this is. our republican friends don't like taxes, they don't like collection of taxes, and of course none of us to. -- none of us do. they don't like affordable care for our citizens. quality care for our citizens. accessible care for our citizens. with this stroke, they can affect both. spokentleman that just asserts that the american people know. they have made an assertion about the oversight of taxpayers

to see whether or not they are claimingg fraud, i.e. to be social welfare organizations when everybody in america knows they are solely political organizations. and, the republicans never mentioned it was across the board, not targeted. the affordable care act, they don't like that either. they would come as my friend from texas says, still like to have the insurance companies in charge, not the patient, not the doctor, but the insurance companies. mr. speaker, less than two weeks ago, republicans were on the floor for the 38 and 39th time to repeal the affordable care act. the accessible care act. the quality care act. time wehave the 40th have been at this. the american people want to see us working on jobs. they want to see us working on

investment and education. they want to see us being able to compete with the world. what do we do? we continue to beat this -- contrary to my carbon -- republican friend's assertion, the american people say overwhelmingly, when asked do you want repeal or effects to make it better? they opt for the latter. overwhelmingly. as the with gentleman from texas said, go to the website, that is two-and-a-half years -- not two- and-a-half years, it has been seven years since 2006 when we started working on this. there is no fix. no fix on the website, no fix on this floor. today, newfound populism is nowhere to be seen as they vote to repeal tax credits and subsidies designed to make healthcare more affordable for

those same people, working families and small businesses. they haven't been able to get insurance and are left at risk without the security of it. suddenly, the party that never met a tax break it didn't like is pursuing a tax increase of more than $1 trillion on small businesses in the middle class. as a result, they are making healthcare more expensive. millions of americans will no longer be able to access affordable healthcare. one more minute. >> how about an additional 30 seconds? >> 30 seconds. >> republicans single focused quest to undo health reform at the expense of every other pressing challenge we face as a nation. it is shameful, mr. speaker, that this house continues to waste the american people time on healthcare repeal votes that won't go anywhere and they know

it. the senate will not pass this bill and the president will not sign it. we have pressing business before us that needs immediate attention. complete our work on the budget. provide a balanced alternative to the sequester. taking action to create jobs. that is what we ought to be doing, not this contingent bullish and us. i yield back the balance of my time. >> time of the gentleman has expired. gentleman from georgia. gentleman from georgia has 13 minutes. -- gentleman from georgia has 16 minutes remaining. gentleman from michigan has 13 and a half minutes running. >> think you, mr. speaker. i yield and minute and a half to the gentleman from oklahoma. >> gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for one and a half minutes. >> thank you, mr. speaker. it is interesting that the minority would like republicans to help fix this bill

considering that they weren't interested at all in republican input when they passed it in the middle of the night with a pure partyline vote. i think everybody understands that the problems of obamacare have been early -- thoroughly discredited. the worst is yet to come. the authors of the bill promised it would bring down the cost of healthcare, but renames have gone up substantially. a promise that if you like your healthcare plan and your doctor, you can keep it. now when you go to the president lthcare.gov, it says that depending on your plan, you may be able to keep your doctor. many argue that the bill would create jobs. has teamsters president said that the bill will destroy the 40 hour workweek. a small group of members in 2010 has a chance to and viably granted obamacare to be used for paying for abortion or abortion

inducing drugs. unfortunately, they caved. companies are being forced into court to prevent obamacare from requiring that they provide healthcare services which directly violate their conscience and their religious principles. values and rights that are enshrined in the first amendment. the irs has irrefutably proven the political nature and intimidation tactics of the work it performs everyday, and attitude that will be under shadow of a doubt carry over into its tagteam efforts of enforcing obamacare. 009.s pass hr-2 i yield back. >> the gentleman from michigan. >> i yield two minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin. quick sentiment from wisconsin is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, mr. speaker. be a silly out to exercise turns out to be an insane exercise.

we find ourselves for the 40th time debating repeal of the affordable care act. we understand we don't like it but i this each my colleagues on the other side to start working on us for a -- working with us for reform. let's make adjustments as we learn what works and what doesn't. let me inject a few facts in this debate for the benefit of the previous speaker. since the passage of the affordable care act, u.s. healthcare spending grew at 3.9%, the lowest growth rate in over 50 years. medicare beneficiary spending rose 0.4%, the lowest rate since it was created in 65. medicaid beneficiary spending 2012 andy 1.9% in according to the congressional budget office, medicare and medicaid will now spend $1 trillion less over the next years than previously projected. nearly $15 billion in fraudulent medicare payments have been

recovered under the affordable care act. hospital readmissions under medicare have fallen for the first time on record resulting readmissions in the second half of last year alone. more than 250 new organizations serving or than 4 million medicare beneficiaries are getting paid according to the quality of health care being delivered and no longer the quantity of services rendered. of premiums growth has also slowed. annual premiums increased by only four percent in 2012, the smallest increase in the last 13 years. we still have more work to do, but this debate and effort to delay and defund and dismantle and destroy the affordable care act is not where we need to go as a nation. i encourage my colleagues to this ill-conceived

legislation. i yield back the remainder of my time. >> time of the gentleman has expired. gentleman from georgia. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the comments from my friend from wisconsin chastising us for voting to repeal or change portions of the affordable care act is curious. the gentleman himself i believe supported one of our efforts to weeks ago on delaying the employer mandate. hope springs eternal that he will be able to support our efforts in this endeavor. i reserve the balance of my time. >> gentleman from georgia reserves. gentleman from michigan. i now yield a minute and a half to another distinguished member of the committee, mr. thompson of california. >> gentleman from california is recognized for when it happened. >> i think the gentleman for yielding. it actually should be called the 40th time we have wasted the

taxpayers'time and money act. this is a bill that is not new. we have seen it before. 39 times as a matter of fact. we know how it ends.this is juso dismantle the affordable care act. you have wasted too much time and too much money on this already. what we should be doing is working to make the aca better or spending our time trying to help pass some jobs legislation. cruelill is particularly because it hits the poorest among us the hardest. we have seen that movie before also. we saw it play out -- that is why we have this legislation. this is in response to a national crisis. this didn't come about by itself. hospitals and doctors and clinics -- all of our districts, they provided $100 billion a year in uncompensated care.

families were one layoff away from not having access to healthcare. people with pre-existing conditions that occurred through no fault of their own -- maybe they had a bad lock with cancer or gave birth through a c- section -- a pre-existing condition and they could not get coverage. people in all of our districts were in the life -- given a lifetime cap on their healthcare. this was no accident. it was in response to a crisis. that get to work. the existing improved. this put people back to work and stop messing with this foolishness. >> time of the gentleman has expired. gentleman from georgia. >> thank you, mr. speaker. 2009tter of support in hr- to be included a part of the record. i reserve the remainder of my time. >> gentleman from michigan. a minute and a

half to another member of our committee, the gentleman from new york. >> gentleman from new york is manning -- recognized for one and a half minutes. >> mr. speaker, i am in support of america's working families and against this bill. away a taxd take credit -- tax credits that help working families for the first time in many instances afford insurance? does majority seems to have never met a tax for a didn't like. at least not until today. the republican majority defends special-interest breaks. tax breaks provided to its corporate agendas. subsidies for big oil. even as they are laying off american workers and moving more operations overseas, where is that zeal in defending middle- class tax cuts for the class americans?

maybe i shouldn't be surprised. this majority has repeatedly tried to undermine this tax credit since conception. they have even sought to require hard-working americans to pay the entire credit back. if they get a slight increase in pay or a bonus for good work. my colleagues, the majority has crossed some bizarre thresholds today, going from principled opposition to dangerous obsession. some republicans will say that doing this because they have issues with the irs. should we expect the bill on the floor when we come back after the august break to stop the irs from people -- from sending people income tax refunds? no. is is an excuse. is about denying americans access to health care. in new york, 1.5 million people will be denied tax credits if this bill is enacted. my colleagues, i am tired of this dog and pony show.

members returned for a few weeks. this is not what this country needs. we need congress with a vision for tomorrow. a vision focused on creating jobs and strengthening our economy, not a 40th boat on a new way to on a repeal the affordable care act. i yield the balance of my time. >>, the gentleman has expired. gentleman from georgia. >> i ask consent to include in the record a letter enjoy sing -- endorsing hr-2009. i reserve the balance of my time. >> can i ask for the amount of time on both sides? >> gentleman from michigan has eight minutes. gentleman from georgia has 14 minutes. >> if i may, mr. speaker. does the gentleman yield? >> yes.

>> i have more stickers coming, but at this point i have no other stickers on the floor. i am prepared to close at any point. >> we have other stickers. thank you. i yield two minutes to distinguished gentleman from new york -- gentlewoman from new york. >> the gentlelady from new york is recognized for two minutes. >> i think the gentleman for yielding. sadly we find ourselves in another redundant and unproductive debate over the affordable care act. $1 estimated cost is over million paid by hard-working taxpayers. instead of focusing on jobs and economic growth, we are wasting time and money on denying health coverage to small businesses and their employees. not even half of the bills have

been passed yet republicans continue their attempt to undermine health reform. this obsession must end. starttime to move on and targeting the challenges the american people care about, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs and the economy. andking the irs from limiting provisions of the affordable care act does nothing to help our nation's small businesses. rather, today's bill will keep small employers from taking advantage of the small business healthcare tax credit which has already helped over 360,000 small employers and 2 million workers. this bill prevents businesses from utilizing the 50% tax credit in the new exchanges next year. that is why today's vote is

responsible and out of touch with americans. we must continue to ensure quality health coverage is available and utilized by the businesses that are the cornerstone of the american economy. i urge members to vote no. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. >> gentlelady yield back her time. gentleman from georgia. >> i continue to reserve. question them and reserves. gentleman from michigan. >> it is my privilege to yield one minute to the person who led our efforts in the health care reform as a testimony to her career, the gentlelady from california. questioned a lady from california is recognized for one minute. >> i think the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership. the creation of jobs, growing

our economy, and in the case of what is on the floor today, the healthtempt to harm the and financial well-being of the american people. 40 is a number that is fraught with meaning in the bible. 40 hours, 40 days, 40 years in the desert. it is fraught with nothing when it comes to overturning the affordable care act as they are trying to do for the 40th time today. when our republican colleagues vote for this bill, they vote to put insurance companies back in charge of people's health. when they vote for this bill, they vote for an initiative that deprives patients of their rights, of ending -- making breeding -- the existing conditions a reason for discrimination. that is what a vote for this does. that is the joy of the affordable care act.

no longer will being a woman be a pre-existing condition. people with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied coverage. annual or lifetime limits are eliminated. insurance companies must spend their money on insurance. that is what people bought. they must to do it in a way that is -- that focuses on health care, not on ceo pay, advertising and the rest. many people in our country have received billions of dollars already because insurance companies have had to refund policy money because they were spending too much on themselves and not enough on employees -- on policyholders. here we are. the 40th time. what is really sad about it is not only the violence that it does to the health of american that enablesolicy them to have prevention and

wellness, and that the health of america not the help of healthcare. what is sad about it is that for 40 times we have had an opportunity of using congresses time to bring a jobs bill to the floor. a jobs bill that says make it in america, manufacture in america. build infrastructure. strengthen our communities with education and public safety and the rest. instead of that, and instead of even passing appropriation bills, the republicans are in this aimless path taking us into chaos as the going to august because in september, the moment of truth will be here. the fiscal year will and on september 30 and instead of preparing for that, republicans are once again on this. ol's errand ofoll's

depriving patients of their rights. challenge that we have is a very serious one. we shouldn't be leaving here today because we haven't done the work necessary to prepare us for the end of the fiscal year. instead, we are wasting the taxpayers time and money. i urge our colleagues to vote no on this legislation. i urge the american people to insist that we get down to the people's business of job creation and to find a budget that will not destroy the full faith and credit of the united states of america. to find a budget that will create jobs for the economy and reduce the deficit. if we don't and we shut down government as some on the republican side of said, what does that mean to you?

it means to you that your 401(k) 's success is in jeopardy. if you have mortgage interest payments, you probably pay more. your credit card bills will probably pay up. -- go up. it is not right. it does not understand the economic challenges faced by america's families. i want jobs, want to educate their children, want to maintain their homes, want to have secure pensions for the future. it is just silliness and it does not deserve even the time we are taking on the floor much less rise to the dignity of deserving a vote by members of congress. i yield back the balance of my time. >> gentlelady yelled back. gentleman from georgia reserves his time. gentle from michigan. >> the strip eager -- mr. speaker, it is now my pleasure.

the two committees, energy and commerce work closely together. chairs mr. waxman and i were able to work closely. i now yield with special privilege and pleasure to minutes to the gentleman from california, the ranking member on energy and commerce, mr. oxman. >> gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. >> mr. speaker, this is a do- nothing congress. it is absolutely pathetic. there are millions of people unemployed. are we working to create jobs? no. if they don't have jobs, we are not trying to help them, but what we are doing for the 40th time is making sure they can't get health insurance. this is an obsession on the part of the republicans. i was commenting on it the other day when i said it is such an

opposition that the laws become the republican's great white whale. they will stop at nothing to kill it. here we are, the 40th attempt to repeal the affordable care act. i think it is a disgrace. , spend all we have to do 40 separate times trying to repeal a law that is going to bring healthcare to millions of americans who have been denied health care opportunities because of pre-existing conditions, because their employer doesn't provided to them, because they otherwise couldn't afford it? it will give people in the healthclass choices of insurance, the prices will job, the quality will improve. this whole health-care bill was based on republican ideas. including a requirement that everybody get health insurance. that was endorsed by the heritage foundation.

i am astounded that we are back here today, the last thing we are going to do before we take our recess, our vacation and go home and tell people, sorry we can't help you. we are trying again in the house of representatives to repeal one thatthat has been passed can mean so much to so many. i urge that we defeat this legislation. i yield the balance of my time. >> gentleman from georgia. gentleman reserves his time. gentleman from michigan. >> i now yield a minute to the gentleman from washington who is the ranking member on the health subcommittee of our committee. >> gentleman from washington is recognized for one minute. listened toer, as i mr. waxman, it is clear he was

talking about obsession. you might ask, why is this happening? -- this ispening happened before. this is the worst nightmare for the republican party. 1964, the american medical association was flat out against the institution of medicare. when i was in medical school, the president said, boys there isn't going to be any medicine in this country. we are having socialized medicine come in. it is a terrible thing. you know what happened? they made the people so afraid that when they went out to enroll people in medicare, people said, i don't want that government medicine in my house. look at medicare today. nobody on that side would dare take out medicare because the american people found out that what they were told in the advertising campaign leading up

to it was not true. that is what you are getting here today. untruths. vote no on this. >> gentleman from georgia. >> think you, mr. speaker. i ask consent that a letter from 15 or 16 urbanization's around the country endorsing 2009 be inserted in the record. >> without an objection it will be part of the record. >> the gentleman from michigan has two minutes remaining. the gentleman from georgia has 14 minutes remaining. >> mr., are you ready to close? -- i am ready to close. >> i now yield to the german from new jersey. >> the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. >> mr. speaker, thank you. i have sat and listened to the debate and heard the slogan that we hear repeated on this again and again.

i would return to the point that i made earlier. for a family that makes $40,000 a year as two adults working, two children, that doesn't get coverage at work which is true for many americans, maybe 35 million americans have situations like that. saysffordable care act that starting january 1, for about $40 a week, they can buy health insurance from a private insurance company as good as the members of congress have. what is the plan from the other side since they are repealing this question mark this bill take that away. what is the plan from the other side to provide for the family? they talk about build a have introduced and letters they have written. there has not been one now they'll talk about bills they've introduced and letters written. there's not been one big, one vote, one day that would answer that question.

await after 1,000 days of the republican majority, he american people eagerly await that answer. i yield back. gentleman has the expired. the gentleman from michigan. balance ofmyself the the time. >> the gentleman is recognized for one minute. clear to the irs mismanagement called for relouvring of duties of two people. the republicans today irs as a is using the oot strap to express their hatred -- their hatred of health care reform. i want to read this and challenge anyone to refute it. ssertions that the irs will have access to personal health information is wrong, is misleading.y he irs will only receive routine information, name, address, family size, incomes.

status. needed to provide tax credits. that's it. the rest are falsehoods. i yield back the balance of my time. gentleman yields back his time. georgia.leman from >> thank you, mr. speaker, for folks important to appreciate that the republican goal in health care is to make sure every single has the highest quality health care. we believe it should be health care.red my friends on the other side of the aisle support washington decisions. we believe patients and doctors and families ought to be making decisions. what have we heard in opposition to the piece of legislation. republicans have no plan. on the contrary, mr. speaker, we have multiple pieces of legislation. i, in fact, have hr.2300 that's

bill that entered makes sure everybody has they able coverage that have the financial feasibility that gives them the coverage want not that the government forces them to buy. that portable is solved. hat we solve the whole challenge of pre-existing illnesses and injuries but in a in a t centered way, not way that the government forces want purchase what they you to purchase. it provides it for every single american. second. this is not a responsible piece of legislation. people thinks this is the responsible piece of legislation where 80% don't to have a rs ought thing to do with their health care. bill isn't going anywhere at all. why do it? it's a futile attempt. seven pieces of legislation, seven pieces of legislation, ills passed by this house, bills passed by the united states senate and signed into

repealed or defunded portions of his own law. repealed the small business paperwork mandate. $2.2 billion and froze the irs budget. tax payerses $13 another $670 million from the billion. louisiana of the hr.255 made more redictions to purchase that was included in advisory board. the bill on h.r..8. repealed or changed 3330 slashed billions of dollars portions of the affordable care from the slush funds. act signed into law by the the united states. we heard heart wrenching stories from our friends on the other challenges andth illnesses. yes, mr. speaker, there are real challenges out there. can attest to i that spending 20 years taking are of patients bchlt uh the american people don't want washington deciding what kind of or th care they must have can have. we need patients and families and doctors making those preposterous the

assertion that republicans don't quality rdable care, care, accessible care. nonsense, plk. nonsense. what we want is the highest quality of care that respects principles of affordability and accessibility and quality affordableness and quantity. we want patients and doctors to in charge of health care, not washington, d.c. and not the irs. a congressional hearing today investigated the national parks services mismanagement of the inventory. uncovered when an audit found of the agencies' weapons for.ounted mark fish schopp questioned jonathan jarvis about the issue. mr. jarvis, you gave a nice spin there, but you didn't answer his question. is who's ultimately responsib responsible. have you done?

who's ultimately responsible. >> i'm the director of the parks service. you're ultimately responsible. >> what about ms. chambers? supervisor, line she is also responsible. was a 2003 s, there report that was given, 133 guns were missing. a pawnshop. 2008 report that showed problems. showed eport that problems. all of you were on the job then. did you do to ly implement the findings of the 2009 report? unaware of the 2009 report. >> but it came under your watch. > i was not the director until october -- >> no, you were the director after this report was taken, permitted. what did you do about it. even if it came after you took did not, what t should you have done about it? i should hold the line supervisors accountable. supervisors?line you're throwing everyone in your department under the bus.

how much accountability should have. that was his question. how much accountability should you hold? >> full accountability. have you taken full accountability and responsibility for it? >> yes, sir, i have. action, then? >> we have -- the most immediate positionto elevate the of the fire arms manager, the custodian manager. what about your responsibility. >> so i have a direct line of communication. i'm still blaming other people for it. >> no, sir, it's my responsibility. back to the ield gentleman from michigan. meeting in l summer milwaukee and tomorrow they're discuss transportation needs secretary ortation anthony fox and house transportation committee schuster.bud live coverage at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span and c-span.org. >> what are the milestone years for first ladies through history? well, i would say certainly

-- the ms, her period first to live in the white house. opinionated and bright lady, capable lady. on the more social side, dolly melodrama of the burning of the house. you have other first ladies but a period where there aren't many first ladies. up from there to arriet lane, president buchanan's niece. the white house -- everyone would remember some of the old the 20th century would say that's the grandest white house that happened. with white house historian william seale sunday c-span's q&a.on senators tom harkin and dick durbin hosted a imbrags in a middle school in ames, iowa.

of a bill pporters for undocumented immigrants. this is just over an hour. > thank you all very much for coming. move along ctor -- here. all for being here.

importantis extremely topic. just -- i t we good friend my dick durbin, senator durbin from illinois. > 12 years ago when we first started on the dream act. so, senator, thank you so much for your work. [ applause ] as i greet you this morning, i'm reminded of a famous incident involving roosevelt. he was addressing the daughters american revolution and he greeted them with the words "my fellow immigrants. likewise this morning, two

united states senators are hosting this forum. are both sons of immigrant mothers so we proudly greet you "our fellow s immigrants." [ applause ] a very special welcome to those on the stage and in the audience. for two centuries, waves of immigrants have come to iowa to a muchheir own lives and better iowa. my mother as i said was one of them. from a she immigrated tiny village in a country now known as slovenia. the port of n boston with barely enough money iowa a one-way ticket to never to see her homeland again. she was welcome to iowa with arms. today our immigration system is broken. the vast majority of americans know it. imgrants who for

want to build a future for a better america. it doesn't work for our wages and it doesn't work for our need a quality and stable labor supply. iowians at majority of want a better system. they support an accountable that allows families to come out of the shadows, remaining employed, and ontributing to their communities in the economy. that is why the united states senate, i'm proud to say, passed the border security and economic opportunity and immigration 2013 known on act in as the immigration bill on a basis.y bipartisan verify s employers to workers. families undocumented out of the had does and into our community. iowa, our state is using $18 million a year in by not d local taxes offering a pathway to

citizenship. 2010, total business revenue of $216 million. iowa, avelled around small towns and communities, i ee so many new businesses, small business, and main street businesses opened up by our new immigrants to this country and to our state. common sense immigration reform ccording to the nonpartisan congressional budget office will add to our economy. get this, it will reduce the by nearly $1 trillion in the next two decades if we have immigration reform. [ applause ] president obama, he met with us again this week. eager to sign this bill into law. i'm hopeful the house of representatives will take up the bill and get it passed. and with that, i thank you and to turn to the leader on this issue. 12 years ago, he's been on this time, our neighbor, senator dick durbin of illinois.

>> thank you very much. thank you. thank you. it is great to be in ames, iowa, iowa state university. alma mater of tom harkin, proud cyclone. we do have a lot in common. soybeans in and our neighboring states. a lot of immigrants to our it hboring states who built into what it is today in iowa and in illinois. we have a broken immigration system. i think we know this. [ applause ] it's time for us it's time for us to face the reality that f we can fix this immigration system, we can build the american economy and we can do thing.ght ago, a ago -- 12 years young woman contacted my office

in chicago. was tereasa lee. tereasa was from korea. her mother and father brought here at the age of 2. she lived in a very poor family. worked in a dry cleaning shop in chicago. she, even though coming from got a break.ances musicing called the merit program gave her a chance to learn to play the piano. great.sn't good, she was by the time she graduated from igh school, she had been accepted at the julliard school f music and the manhattan conservatory of music. she was filling out the application. that said the line nationality, citizenship. she turned to her mom, what put there. her mom said, i don't know. i brought you here when you were filed any papers. the young woman said, what are we going do? her mom said let's call durbin.

they called our office and we checked the law. the law was clear. tereasa li had to leave the united states for ten years and to come back. it didn't sound right to me. you know, a lot of us drove here this meeting this morning. some of you might have passengers in the car, maybe car.children in the if you got caught speeding, you in the pect the child back seat to also get a speeding ticket. that's what was happening to like her -- o many came here as a child. spent their lifetimes in the of america, pledging allegiance to the only flag they've ever known, singing the anthem they've ever known. and then learning, legally, they weren't part of this country. so i introduced the dream act 12 years ago for her, for tereasa, for a lot of people just like her. i want to tell you the end of he tereasa li story because it's great. two families in chicago took her on her and paid for education.

she graduated from manhattan music.atory of she played in carnegie hall. she ended up marrying an jazz musician,n, and became a citizen herself and ow she's completed her phd. in music. we're a better nation because tereasa li is here. her going to profit from as we will from so many dreamers this n bring so much to country. well, here we are today and e're facing the dream act and its future. here have been be characterizations of the dream act that are just not fafr. said about the young students and young people that just aren't fair at all. the reasons we're here in ames, iowa today. you're fair-minded people in so are we in illinois. you'll look at the facts honestly and you want people to you tell them.at what you want to hear today is that these young people have so much to offer us. included the dream act in

this comprehensive immigration reform bill. strongest version of the dream act ever written and it will give these young people a dramatic make a contribution to this country. i went to the floor of the senate 54 different times to stories of dreamers with color photographs. to be they wouldn't come forward and tell their stories they were hnically, subject to deportation. ut over the year, they stepped up and they realized if this cause was going to be one that america had toa, know who they really were. they've done that. sometimes at great risk. they could have been deported telling their stories. was no knew there chance to move forward on this issue unless they were willing risk.ke the there hasn't been a single issue in american history or any other countries involving civil rights or human rights where young up with the step energy and idealism that really

in us to the right place america. [ applause ] their parents -- they deserve a of applause. scared their parents many times anduse they were coming out telling people who they were. but they did it. who ly we have a president understands that. he passed this deferred action. of applause. round e passed this deferred action eportation order beside it and gave them a chance to apply and get stai in america without fear f executive order. a half a million have done so so far. they submitted the backgrounds to the government. hey know if they haven't graduated high school or have a serious background, they have no chance whatsoever. law and ten into the the executive order.

the suggestion these are petty smugglers, it ug just doesn't square with the reality of the dream act. that's one of the reasons i to come here today. you're going to hear from eduardo rodriguez. you his ing to tell story. salmanca who's here. and they're going to tell you what life is like for a dreamer. are for the eams future. that's what this is about. you, iowa, and the thing, on doing the right fixing the system in a just and fair way. you'll find this isn't an easy the dreamers or anyone who steps forward. first, they have to register with the government. second, they have to pay a fine. $500 and ends up over. $2,000 before it's they have to pay paxes on any dollar they earn. the e end of the day, at end of ten years with no government benefits, they have a

hance -- a chance to become citizens. 2/3 of the people who live in congressional district support a path to citizenship. 2/3 support it. it's goodrns out that for america. not just that we revalidate who we came from re but it's good for our economy. it's going help us grow the deficit, andce our grow jobs. if anybody is surprised by that, we are and at who where we are today. all the immigrants that came to country from far flung locations have made america what it is. those people who ignore our legacy and basically our roots thisy ignore the values of

country. -- i'll close -- i'll close by telling this story. mother's k to my hometown in lithuania. back.ever got she never returned. but i did. church, catholic church where she was baptized a well in thed me illage where all of the villagers drew their water even when she was there. it when the t was family called all of the relatives and friends for the announcement. they decided they were going to leave and come to america. hey heard about some lithuanians who made it to east st. louis, illinois and they pretty well. my grandfather said, if i'm going there first, if i can find kids. bring the he left, found a job, called for my grandmother. he came with three children including the first dreamer in

2-year-old mom. came over in a boat. anded in baltimore, caught the train in st. louis and got out on east st. louis where i grew up. wonder about the people who were sitting around the house when they made the announcement they were going to america. bet you a nickel a lot of them when they left the house walking home saying what is wrong with this family? are leaving their good home here. heir church, their relatives, their family, their language, andure, dog, cat, chickens, going to a place where language? speak the they'll be back. no, they never came back. that's my story. story. my family's that's america's story. there is something in our dna immigrants who had the courage to come up and get here, really to fight against great succeed here.

thank goodness we did. that's who we are today. we should celebrate it. we shouldn't apologize for it. e ought to build on it to make us an even stronger nation in the century. thanks, tom. you.k thank you, dick. thank you. >> well, dick, thank you very much for that and thank you for your great leadership. folks, i want to reassure anyone else n and who may be tuned in on this, that we iowians, we are a welcoming peek. we are a compassionate and caring people. [ ap ]plause >> we do not -- we do not in characterizing people with hateful, spiteful, language. we believe that every human being has worth. who want to ose come here to work to build a

better life are not criminals. people who want to build a better life for themselves and their families and we ought to be finding way help them do that here in america. of iowa.in the state now, senator durbin referred to -- again, i ust want to make a point. there was a poll taken just this ast wednesday by something called the american action network. 68% of the that iowa's n this district, fourth congressional district, support an earned pathway to status. and, again, this poll was take been i the american action network. they?e it's conducted by the tarrant group, a republican firm that this e polling here in district. so that it wouldn't be seen as a other.e way or the in this district, in this

79% of the voters responded to this poll would to allow a path to legalization. 78%.h to legalization, and the poll said nearly 3/4 reform is a ion very important issue. 70% back a path to legal status. in this whelming even congressional district. even in this congressional this ct that people in district want immigration reform. they want this mess cleared up. young dreamers to have a part in our society. onejust because one person, misguided person uses language does not grading reflect what we believe in the iowa. of

[ applause ] ow let's hear from some dreamers here. eduardo rodriguez came to the u.s. from mexico with his parents. he was 1 year old. okay? you're older than that now. shortly after, his family settled in sioux county, iowa, congressional district where he attended and high and middle school before going on to a local private university with a in sociology. permit fromthe work the docket program, he's worked as a youth manager leading for at-risk youth and sioux county. salamanca is the youth outreach coordinator for the service friends committee in des moines. after graduating from dowling my olic high school, again,

alma mater in 2011 and realizing hat he was undocumented, he committed himself to join the movement to pass humane helping on reform and the general december point latino community. to his tireless dedication, he was featured one of 13 people look out for in 2013 by the des moines register. he's studying law, politics, and drake university. he aspires to be an immigration worker. welcome both of you. we're going wo, hear from a senior attorney and at the the partner daift brown law firm, a law firm with offices in ames and point and she represents individuals and businesses in mmigration-related applications. we'll hear from nick harrington, ufc ion representative of local 222 in sioux city.

-- he became a union steward, but he left, went back and hool, took business marketing management and then after his time in school, he eturned to ibp in august of 2001. he was a time there union stuart, a member of the safety committee. and he's worked in all of the and now he's a union representative after 12 years. hear from nick. to reverend barb, we'll turn er, an ordain elder of the united methodist church, prior to that, was the pastorlo faith community for the 11 ted methodist church for years. of latino ion immigrants. duardo rodriguez, tell us your story. >> first of all i'd like to say

for this ful opportunity. i didn't tell a single soul 21 that i was undocumented. to be here and feel so supported loved is amazing and it's a huge blessing. thanks to everyone around this table. i appreciate it. guess my story is i was born broughto and my parents me over to the states when i was a year old. california for three years, but after that, we for the sioux county rest of my time here. that is my home. iowa. up in orange city, i've been there since first grade until i graduated from college. and i loved the corn fields and i love even sometimes the i know. but that -- that is home. that is where i feel comfortable. and it's been great to see the

way the community has changed the years. when i first arrived there, it was me and my cousins that were latinos at the elementary school. as the community has changed and more and more newcomers have become something a lot different and it's i think omething that can be such a benefit to our community as we ee almost one in four students now ool in the local school systems where i live. tortorillas spring up in