over the chinese territory, the islands, by nationalizing these islands and that move broke what existed over these islands in the past 40 years and under such circumstances, one can easily imagine that the chinese side must and surely -- make a response to it. so, the situation may seem complicated, but the whole story is actually a very clear one.

and circumstances continue to move and in undesirable direction. i want to tell you it is because the japanese side denied the existence of such an agreement or understanding, which was reached 40 years ago, and certainly this is an acceptable , ashe chinese side, because i said before, this is a historical fact.

in spite of this, we are still ready to sit down and have dialogues with the japanese side to find jointly away to control, manage the current situation. but the japanese said to us there is no such dispute the between china and japan, and that has made it impossible for dialogues to happen.

china and japan are perpetual neighbors. the two countries have very close business ties. sit downill ready to and have dialogue with the japanese side, but first the japanese side needs to recognize there is such a dispute. of the

whole world knows there is a dispute here. i believe there will be a day when the japanese come back to this table and dialogue. so, how things will go next is not just up to the chinese side, but also up to the japanese side, too. i believe there will be a time when the two sides come together to have serious dialogue and discussion to work out a solution. >> thank you for that comprehensive answer. i would like to take two questions now, and we will see after those questions whether we

have more time. we have a tight schedule in new york. if we can get a couple of questions -- secretary cohen? please. thank you very much for a very comprehensive statements about the foreign policy of china. i attended a conference .ecently in singapore during the course of the conference, i met with a number of your counterparts. the issue was raised during that time -- let me stop here. an issue was raised during that time about the so-called 9 dash line drawn in the south china sea.

and you mentioned earlier of course we need to respect each common interest in the asia-pacific region. the issue that was raised was whether the so-called 9 dash line, which appeared in many maps prior to last year and, now the new maps show a solid line. i wonder, is there any significance between the 9 dash line, which indicate some question about sovereignty tomahawk or a solid line, which which indicates some question about sovereignty or a solid line, which would seem to indicate something different?

>> continue? >> please. >> minister wang, thank you for your candid remarks. i would like to raise the issue of the korean peninsula again, if i could. this is been an issue for many years. north korea insists it is a nuclear state. it continues to expand its nuclear weapons potential and states equivocal he -- unequivocably that it has no intention of giving up its

weapons. what reason should we have for optimism in this case? you have mentioned, of course, six-party talks on the anniversary of the september 2000 five agreement, in which of course china played a vital role . what reasons would we have for optimism for what could result from any presumed talks, and how do you see the united states and test caseerating as a of major power relations? thank you.

>> both questions are important ones. for the question raised by

me, it iscohen, for the first time to hear it, that is the line has been changed into a solid one.

what i can say to you is there has been no change in china's position with respect to the 9 dash line. line shouldnk this become a solid one, but if you did see such a map showing this, i would maybe have to look into it and check it. this line, the 9 dash line, was drawn by the r.o.c. government back in 1948 and this has been upheld by successive chinese governments and i do not think there has been any change in our position on the issue.

second, about the korean issue -- there has been much discussion about this. it is true, i was personally party talks,six- framing the talks. to our deep regret, the six- party talks have been at a standstill for quite some time, which is something none of us want to see. we are also aware of these you referred to -- side.he

but i would also like to tell you there has been new developments recently, some rk says itt the dp does not object to the joint statement and is ready to come back to the statement and to the february 29 deal it had with the united states.

the first article set out in the september 19 joint statement is up all nuclear weapons and nuclear programs. at the same time, the joint statement also sets out the respective responsibilities and obligations for china, the united states, and other parties concerned. another change on the part of dprk recently is they have

said they are willing to commit to the denuclearization because they say that this is the legacy of their past leaders. to achieve the do nuclear station of the peninsula is our common goal. now that the dprk has reiterated it will commit to be de- nuclearization goal, and now is the time for the parties to sit and think how they will

achieve the goal. one of the important items on my agenda of my visit to the united states is to discuss with the u.s. side that we can resume this process to affect acceptable that is to all the parties, affect of all the talks. our position is a clear one. we are firm and our commitment thehe do nuclearization --

denuclearization of the korean peninsula. we believe this is in china's on prk's interesthe d and the interest of all other parties, including the united states. meanwhile, we believe this issue needs to be peaceably resolved through dialogue and negotiation. the purpose of such dialogue and negotiation is to address the concerns of all the parties involved, including the legitimate concerns of the dprk.

i believe our countries, china and the united states, are in agreement with respect to denuclearization and resolving this issue through dialogue. i am confident that as long as we all get ready and be serious and moving forward our dialogue, we will be able to achieve our common goal of denuclearization of the korean peninsula. it is also our common responsibility. i will be open to more questions.

>> ok. we will take one last question. ken, fire away. >> thank you, mr. minister, for formalry informative comments and responses to questions. i was really struck in your speech that you characterized huger u.s. cooperation on avenue forare to rise future u.s. operation on afghanistan as becoming a new highlight of u.s.-china relations. chinese involvement has been very limited and incipient. i wonder if you will share with us your thinking what future cooperation would consist of that would warrant calling it a new highlight of the relationship? thank you.

onafghanistan, -- afghanistan, china and the united states have. common interest. we want to see a stable area after the united states troop withdrawal from the country and we want to assist afghanistan in process anduction neither of our two countries was to see a resurgence of terrorist activity in the country.

now parties are not so optimistic about the prospects of the country post-2014, and i believe that has made all the more important the china, united states, and other countries with close links to that country to advance cooperation. concrete cooperation can involve a wide range of areas. just one example, the collaborative training program of our two countries. it is not a very egg program, but it is a very positive one. at -- it is not a very big program, but it is a very positive one.

next year, china will play host to the issue of afghanistan international conference, the internationalss conference. we certainly hope the united states will participate in it where we can have a more detailed discussion. with regard to the instruction 2014, on the- economic front, i believe both china and the united states can make hundred visions and china can make its own contribution -- can make contributions and china can make its own contribution to reconstruction.

on the domestic lyrical reconciliation process, it is a tough one. i believe on this, china and the united states can play a role, too, and we can work together with pakistan and other neighbors with afghanistan in this regard. now all people are talking about yria, but probably

in the latter half of next year the most important topic we will talk about is afghanistan. i think it is important to see into the future. the brookings institution is a very forward-looking economic institution. i believe it is very important to consider what afghanistan will be like post-2014 and how china, the united states, and other countries can work together on this. thank you. forhank you, mr. minister, providing us a very productive and enjoyable evening. those of us who have worked with mr. wang throughout the years know him as a gentleman who is pragmatic, who is fair-minded, therienced, and i have had pleasure of meeting with a chinese gentleman who was not in the government the other day who said what he really appreciates in hisr. wang

appointment is he is tough. i believe we heard all of those traits displayed tonight, although the toughness is described by a velvet glove he wears. i would like everyone to show our appreciation for mr. wang's address and his willingness to deal with difficult questions tonight. by -- show your appreciation by giving him around of applause. -- a round of applause. [applause]

>> if everyone could please stay seated for a moment while mr. wa ng leaves. he has to catch a plane. feel free to head for the attics and go watch the rerun on c-span after mr. wang is gone. [laughter] thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

>> tonight on c-span, members of congress debating and passing a bill to fund the government through mid-december and defund the health care law, followed by remarks from the house republican leadership. then the epa administrator jane mccarthy revealing new rules for carbon solutions. today, the house debated and theed a bill to fund

government through mid-december. it included language that would defund the health care law. the final vote was 230 in favor, 189 against. now it moves to the senate, which is scheduled to gavel back in on monday. next, debate from the house floor. >> madam speaker, i ask that we have time to include material on the same. , it isout objection recognized. >> i healed myself five minutes. >> the gentleman has five minutes. >> madam speaker, the resolution we look at today will keep the into next operating year. it is straightforward, clean,

short-term, continues reductions in federal discretionary spending, but most importantly, madam speaker, it will prevent a government shutdown. the legislation also includes an amendment to the base told which two the text of hr 28 680 the defund obamacare act of 2013 807, the fullf hr faith and credit act. it will fund the government for yearirst 76 days of fiscal 2014 until december 15, 2013. it provides 986 when 3 billion dollars in funding, approximately the same rate as the current post sequestration level with some minor adjustments. the basic bill is extremely clean. additional provisions

were only added in a very limited number of cases where adjustments were needed to prevent catastrophic shortfalls tounintended disruptions critical programs or services. it simply keeps the lights on in our government to provide for the safety, security, and well- being of all americans. myould like to remind colleagues, madam speaker, both in the house and the other body that a government shutdown is a political game in which everyone loses. shirks one of our most basic duties as members of congress and puts our national security at stake. to be clear, if this legislation is not enacted, and we embark on a government shutdown, the consequences are severe.

our brave men and women in uniform do not get paid. our recovering economy will take a huge hit. and our most formidable citizens, including the elderly and the veterans who rely on -- our most vulnerable citizens, including the elderly and veterans to rely on government sources, will be threatened. the shutdown, even the threat of as to the, so american people that congress does not have their best interest at heart. this continuing resolution keeps this congress moving in the right direction. it gives us time to solve the urgent fiscal issues facing our nation, finding a balanced and that eliminates sequestration, implements careful reforms for both

discretionary and mandatory spending, and keeps our economy growing. it is my hope that the house will pass this bill today and the senate will act in short order so that this matter will be wrapped up well before the deadline of the 30th. so, i urge my colleagues to do their jobs as members of the house and to do what is best for this country and vote yes on this bill today. i reserve the balance of my time. from kentuckyan reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. >> the gentlewoman is recognized. >> i will oppose this continuing resolution. introduced the cr

and a statement noted this bill is free of controversial writers and does not speak to changing existing federal policy. how things have changed. unfortunately, this new package will attach not one, but two politically motivated ill- conceived, doomed provisions. one directs the president to pay certain debts, but not others in case house republicans are determined to default on america's allegations. the other would defund the affordable care act. defunding the affordable care act has far-reaching consequences for all americans. enacted, no cr is funds could be used to administer payments calculated on the basis of aca provisions. hospitals,octors,

medical suppliers, and other health providers would all experience significant disruptions. many of the improvements to medicare made by the aca would also have to be suspended, such as better coverage for preventative services, lower costs for drug benefits, stronger tools to combat both care fraud. most importantly, undermining the implementation of the aca only gives our medical choices that to the insurance companies and keeps health insurance costs much to live for too many families. ' defaultrepublicans plan is flawed as well. the majority proposes that if it forces a default on federal

debt, the u.s. should pride towards payment -- prioritize bondholders, the majority of which is foreign owned. while we pay back china, the majority of americans would be pushed to the back of the line. troops, -- active-duty troops, three .4 million disabled veterans who served their country with honor, one point one million doctors and others who survived -- you provide health care to seniors with medicare, 32 million children in schools that need payments to continue serving 44,000ous lunches, national institutes of health grantees conducting life-saving medical research and providing estimated 500,000 jobs.

we, my colleagues, should be focused on jobs. putting people to work. instead the republicans want to play games of brinksmanship on the budget and the debt limit, even though the foreseeable consequence will be plummeting stock markets and businesses freezing their hiring. plan isblican budget self shows a change of american jobs and infrastructure, results in education and defense layoffs, closes headstart and afterschool programs, and divest research. and the sequester, cbo tells us, will cost the united its economy over the million jobs next year. i hope at some point we are able to agree on a bipartisan cr they -- enacted. it

the one before as unfortunately is not it. unfortunately, we will be back here again next week facing the same crisis. i yield back and reserve the balance of my time. yorke gentlewoman from new reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. to theeld two minutes chairman of the energy and water subcommittee on appropriations. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. >> madam speaker, i think the gentleman for yielding. i rise in support of the resolution. i rise with no small amount of since we worked on the energy and water bill. --s was a tough, but allen's balanced bill.

we raise the cap set for the south wall funding our nation's critical priorities -- strong national defense, the work of the army corps of engineers, the work of the department of energy. all of that work will be thrown away unless we deal with sequestration and get back to what we call regular order. coming up with an approach to manage or perhaps eliminate sequestration is going to take some time. our nation must be kept open for business and the government must abide critical services. shuts down,nment many of those services will not be funded. military personnel will not be paid and their families will suffer. and this will be an importable breach of trust to our men and women in uniform under the jurisdiction of the energy and water bill -- many activities will grind to a halt and that includes the dredging of waterways critical to american jobs and businesses and

work on flood control structures such as levees. and in our national laboratories, critical and time sensitive work to maintain the reliability of our nuclear weapons would also slow down and that would be unconscionable and our work overseas doing short our nuclear weapons materials are kept out of the hands of those who would do our country harm would also be curtailed. colleagues, the continuing resolution before us is a temporary measure which includes no objectionable provisions and ensures our government keeps its obligations to the american people. we encourage its passage so the senate can quickly begin its consideration of the measure. i thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yield back. the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized. >> i am very pleased to yield five minutes to the ranking member of the ways and means committee, mr. levin. >> the gentleman from michigan

is recognized for five minutes. >> [indiscernible] >> without objection. >> this bill defines -- the more than theds affordable care act. it undermines medicare. it would in improvements in prescription drug benefits. increases costs for those with medicare advantage. and it hurts children covered by disabled.ell as the but this measure has still more peril for our country. we in the house are like two ships passing in the night. house republicans will pass this bill. it will sail off to the senate, surely to return, after the

senate has stripped off the effort to defund the affordable care act. up then it will be squarely to the speaker of this house. will he act as the captain of the entire house of representatives, or remain a captive of his right wing republican mates? acts, worryhe mainly about the risk to his speakership, or the risk to our entire nation? republicans taking the ship over the cliff would take the nation's economic well-being with it. ofs is the inevitable danger the course being chosen today by house republicans. and only those blinded by rigid ideology can fail to see it.

i yield back the balance of my time. yield back.eman the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> been speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman for homeland security appropriations. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. german forthe yielding. her years i have pushed for the return to regular order. this cr would do just that. it would give us time to finalize a broader budget deal, fund as through the fiscal year 14 appropriations bill, and get our fiscal house in order by getting the budget process back in regular order. our budget process matters. it matters for the oversight of the sprawling federal bureaucracy. it matters to control our government. thes a basic duty of

congress that is explicitly spelled out in the united states has to duchenne. united states constitution. this is necessary. we must avoid the disastrous government shutdown that no one wants, especially our men and women in uniform. to pass thisnate as soon as possible to avoid a devastating and avoidable government shutdown. this response to the will of the american people by defunding obamacare. it must be repealed. mr. chairman, i thank you for your leadership on this bill, and i thank you for your commitment to regular audit -- regular order in ensuring over the next few weeks, we wrap up

the fy 14 process the right way. crrge the house to pass the to keep the government running and avoid shutdown. i yield back the balance of my time. kentuckyntleman from reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. i am pleased to reserve and yield to my good friend, chairman rogers. >> the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. twoadam speaker, i yield minutes to the chairman of the veterans affairs appropriations subcommittee. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. >> madam speaker, today the

constitutional conservatives in the house are keeping our word to our constituents and our nation to stand true to our from thes, to protect most unpopular law in the history of the country, obamacare, that intrudes on most sacredy, the right of americans to be left alone, and we have also kept our word in this continuing resolution to ensure that government will continue to operate while we negotiate in good faith with the president and the senate to find a way forward. containt-term resolution funds every aspect of the government and in fact, it is important to remember that the senate has had the military construction and veterans affairs bill for three months. they could've passed that along time ago. the senate has had the defense appropriations fell since late july, so they could have passed that bill a long time ago. and put it on the president's desk. we could have been sure our military would be paid.

the senate has had the department of homeland security bill since early june and has done nothing. the senate has had the energy and water bill since july 10 and done nothing. we have done our job, we in the house. the constitutional conservative toority have kept our word find the essential aspects of the government and ensure we have done everything in our power to protect our constituents from the most unpopular piece of legislation ever passed in the history of the congress, obamacare, permanently and totally defunding it well protecting the core functions of the government. it is necessary to ensure we have the ability to defund the claims backlog, to ensure we have the resources for the build facilities around the world to ensure that our men and women have

everything they need to protect .his great nation i urge the members to join me in supporting this continuing resolution. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> i am very pleased to yield five minutes to the outstanding member of the defense subcommittee on appropriations. >> the gentleman from indiana is recognized for five minutes. appreciate the gentlewoman for yielding. at the beginning of my remarks, i want to acknowledge i have made a mistake and that i have been wrong for the nearly three decades i have served in the united states congress. i regret to have to admit that. this morning in anticipation of today's debate, i took a look at

i of the constitution and realized in article i, iction nine, paragraph 7, have been misreading it all these years as a member of the appropriations committee. the paragraph reads "no money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of a continuing resolution." the constitution says nothing about appreciations -- appropriations apparently. this chamberr 07 and the united states senate, congress could collectively -- congress collectively, should have acted, made discrete decisions, thought about legislation to read 84 appropriation bills. actede individually in nine. -- enacted 9.

i am appalled that in late july, every member i have talked to in this chamber on both sides of the aisle, if we and new, have said could only do a continuing prevent thewe could shutdown of the united states government. today the united states congress, we consider it a success if all we do is pass a continuing resolution to do what , what in fiscal year 13 we did in fiscal year 12, what we did in fiscal year 11 and 10 and nine and eight and seven. we are governing this country by looking back towards -- backwards. we have a responsibility to make

decisions. i want to remind my colleagues just on the defense portion of this bill, some of the initiatives, the initiatives will not take place because of the continuing resolution. under the leadership of chairman young and the members of these subcommittee, one of our 100ions is to cut -- cut -- $53.5 million for unjust cost growth of the strike fighter. one of the initiatives we would like to enact and cannot under we continuing resolution. 131 million dollars for carryovers and cost scripts. --t we would like you to do what we would like to do to legislate in this body is trim $104 million. imagine that.

cutting by $104 million. jammer, 94neration point $9 million. because of poor program execution and contract delays. we would like to reduce that and cut it by 110 million dollars, but let's do a continuing resolution. let's not make a decision about the national park what about the u.s. copyright office? for god sake, what is there to fight over? funding the copyright office. what about the bureau of engraving and printing. there must be some catastrophic because theyhaving

will be under a continuing resolution. concerned and what to make it clear that i profoundly appreciate the leadership of chairman rogers and the ranking member for trying to be responsible and get the job done . but if this continuing resolution is passed as is until december 15, i have a profound will bet our colleagues by lurching to another crisis that we will never go back to doing a governance of this country. i yield back my time. time isentleman from expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two

minutes to the chairman of the initial services appropriations subcommittee. >> the gentleman from florida is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you very much, madam speaker. thank you for your time, chairman rogers. thank you for your leadership in this very difficult appropriations process. i think everybody agrees the appropriations process is one of the most important functions of the congress, if not the most important. while we would all like to be here having finished all the appropriations bills, there just wasn't quite enough time. all we are asking today is for adopt this to continuing resolution. it will continue funding the government for the next three months at the same level it was funded last year. that will give us the time and the body to finish all the

appropriations bill. some have passed these subcommittee and the full committee. some have passed the south. , know the subcommittee i chair financial services, we had a number of hearings. members worked hard to set priorities, past the subcommittee, past the full committee, and ready to go before the house. there are some very important things in that bill. i think we have all heard stories about the iressa and how it singled out individuals and groups based on their -- i think we have all heard stories about the irs and how it singled out individuals and groups based on their political affiliations and we were outraged. in our bill, we have resolutions to hold you accountable. no more of this. we actually conditioned some of the funding to the irs as to whether or not they put in place the safeguards that have been

recommended to ensure they do not continue this outrageous behavior and also make sure it does not happen again. pass thisk we should continuing resolution, fund the government for this short time, put in place the spending bill makesets priorities that the tough choices we have to make in these difficult times. i urge all my colleagues to vote yes on this continuing resolution. i yield back my time. isthe gentleman from time expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. -- thetleman woman gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> i yield to minutes to the gentleman from idaho. >> the gentleman from idaho is recognized for two minutes. >> i appreciate that. i have to tell you, my good friend from indiana, i agree

with them. most of the people sitting on the floor and the appropriations committee agree with them. we have to get back to regular order. the chairman and our members have been trying to get back to regular order where we pass appropriations bills and get that done. so far we have not been able to do that. though it is necessary to do a short-term cr. i can tell you the last couple days i have heard a lot of talk about republicans trying to shut down government. that is the last thing we want to do. if we wanted to do that, we would not be doing a short-term cr. the reason we are doing a short- term cr instead of a long-term cr is give the appropriations committees time to do their work and do our individual bills. that is what we are working on. we cannot fall into the abyss of a long-term cr. as many know, and i will give you an example -- as many of you we have been on fire. the chairman was reducing the

number of fish in arizona. he saw the effect of the fire and flew out to the west. we were able to get 636 million additional dollars to fund the and firefighting costs. we do the long-term cr, we lose that $636 million. we do short term, we will be able to keep them. we need to get to a long-term stay where we do individual appropriations will so we can have priorities met. some people think that doing a long-term cr reduces spending. i will tell you if you look at where we were last year with the bill we almost got done and then ended up with the long-term cr, the epa is spending about $75 million more this year than they would have with the bill we would have passed. if you think that is a way to save money, it is not. we need to do our job. talking about the forest firefighting service, i have to tell you since i've got a minute

how proud i am of the work that the forest service date, the hotshot crews across the country. i met with some of them from tennessee. i knew they were from tennessee because they spoke funny. but they did an amazing job. we have to make sure they have the resources to fight these wildfires. the gentleman from time is expired. >> past the cr and let the their job.finish >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. poe. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. >> i think the gentleman. got thisaker, i letter. "the affordable care act is affecting my family. i am a single mother. i have raised five boys on my

own. i work two jobs to keep up with my monthly mortgage and utility bill. this is because my primary employer would not hire me to work more than 29 hours per week thanks to a bomb a care. now i have to work seven days i -- 28 -- more than 20 hours a week thanks to a obamacare. now i have to work seven days make a toughad to decision i did not want to make. my son is now living with relatives in another city. i am depressed that obamacare has begun to tear my family apart and has already put an unhealthy burden on me. madam speaker, real person, real tragedy. it is time to free americans from the shackles of obamacare. that is just the way it is. >> the gentleman from time is expired. is gentlewoman from new york

recognized. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes. >> the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you for the hard work you have put into the bills in committee. i rise in support of the continuing resolution to keep the government operating through december 15. we hope this resolution will give congress and the white house time to come together on a comprehensive budget agreement. dates for aus appropriations committee and funding directly affects the u.s. national security. the world has not been a more dangerous place and to cut back our diplomatic activities would

be irresponsible. egypt, israel, pakistan, iraq. this would mean dramatically reducing our presence in key egions like the u.s. and asia. pass this cr could elay implementation of the benghazi accountability review jeopardize ons and the safety of diplomats. pass the tant that we cr today and the senate consider it as quickly as possible. function and responsibility of congress to keep the government open and people who the elected us.

colleagues on both sides to vote yes and i time to the chairman. >> we reserve as well. >> the gentleman from kentucky. madame speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the on mmittee on appropriation. > i want to thank chairman for removing this field. providing continuing appropriation for the initial of fiscal year 2013 through december 15th. this needed to keep vital serve eusz operating past the of the fiscal year of

september 30th. s the gentleman from kentucky has stated they have made significant progress. additional time is prompt o allow for the completion. his resolution continues for discretionary program that the post sequestration programs. down the federal prison system. working withthat's regards to benghazi, also working on counter terrorism. weather forecast. we have seen major storms hit in the ion all the way past year, to shut that down and the warnings and the satellite upon ms that they depend and also for the continued evelopment of nasa and space exploration, our nation is in

serious financial trouble and is the time that we put verything on the table, including enentitlements and on a long budget solution. hopefully the 76 days provided the e resolution by chairman will be enough time for an overall agreement to be allow us to lso to pass regular prop ration bills fy-14. i urge my colleagues and all my members of the congress to avoid a he cr and government shut down and create toindow of time for congress ulfill a basic constitution duty. thank you, chairman. expired.man time has from kentucky is recognized. i yield two minutes to the

agricultural e appropriations. >> thank you, madam speaker and for giving me an opportunity to speak in support hjres 59. i think it's very obvious by the comments that republicans have made on our side this morning need to keep the overnment open at its current sequestered funding level and rovide the vital services that our constituents have grown to expect and make sure we don't government shut down. s chairman rogers mentioned, i chair the appropriation agriculture and some may ask why is it so mportant that we keep the government open? go withust go -- can we

another long cr? > i'd like to provide some reasons why the bill that passed the committee provides a great taxpayer and why we don't need to go to year long don't certainly why we need to do a government shut down. one thing i hear a lot about is regulation.l bill we want to provide more lexibility for local school districts as they implement these new school regulations for students.the we recognize the commodity

uture trading come mission to develop cost benefit analysis of that are ovisions deemed to be duplicative and costly. encourage the usd a to an inspection rule th. can tell you representing that a lot of hat grows poultry that is very important. i fully support h-res 59 and ask for my to do the same. from california is recognized for two minutes. member and anking madame speaker, i arrived in

to this position radical right wing effort to a cliff economy off of and cause a government shut down. on the my colleagues other side to wake up from this ideological wet dream and come back to reality. it's time for us to talk about what we can do to avoid a shutdown.t it takes health care coverage away for millions of people by obamacare.nding for this is the 42nd attempt to do weand there is absolutely as all know zero chance of it happening. we paid china first efore we paid people in this all know how this should end. there's a way to fund the thisnment which would pass chamber with votes from both

sides of the aisle. can only open that the republican leadership will -- pleas andflee pursue this bipartisan effort. until then i urge all members to yield this bill and i back my time. thank you, the gentleman from kentucky for yielding. of this in support bill to continue to fund government while defunding the law and ensuring the country does not default on its debt. criticized this effort this is not a republican idea. that the law is destroying the middle class family. himself has acknowledged this law that his calls author of the bill a train wreck when the president

ays he wants to delay components of the law but only for the privileged. we're fighting to give that same families.all american this law's unworkable and killing jobs in america. causing people to lose good health care they have today n louisiana alone our families are facing over 50% increase because of this law that's devastating economy. it's not ready for primetime and it.press has acknowledged he signed seven bills to repeal components of the law itself. it's time this house takes action and the senate does their as well. kes action >> gentlemen's time has expired. entlemen from kentucky reserves. is gentle work from new york recognized. >> gentleman from oregon is for two minutes. >> i appreciate the entslewoman's courtesy as i appreciate the hard work of the

appropriations committee that an impossibled in situation. the tea have pending hut bill. people were serious about government spending and enforcing the republican budget. be having appropriations bills on the dealing we would be with them. we're not because the appropriations committee was an impossible challenge. they were given funding levels -- the house -- the house will never approve. republicans in the house will never approve. sitting here with obamacare as sort of a sideline. forward.g everybody in this chamber knows that the president would not and it's not going through the senate and that train has left the station. is what we need to be doing getting down " -- i heard my

about in indiana talk real things. the appropriations committee if hey were given real spending limits and time on the floor and egular order, these are accomplished distinguished people who care about the of government. they could work it out. if quickest way to do it is the republican leadership would committee on ence the budget. his is what has handcuffed the appropriations committee is hey're operating under this unrealistic ideological document that won't pass the house. republican leadership somebody we could work with the senate and pass a budget and work something that then we won't d ave the hard work of the appropriations committee and the staff off into the netherlands

cases. can get down to it doesn't have to be this hard. let regular order work. show. he side >> the gentleman's time expired. does the urpose gentleman kentucky seek recognition? >> i yield two minutes to the colorado, mr. gardener. >> gentleman from colorado is for two minutes. i would like to thank chairman rogers for his deadation and all ngness to work with members when they're states are impacted by natural disasters. receptive and i appreciate your efforts. right now in colorado we're major ly experiencing a flood and impacted 15 counties crossing over approximately miles.quare certain areas have received over 19,000 s of rain and homes have been destroyed and the destroyed counts is above

2,000 homes. areas are still in crisis and because of the vast devastation the management unable to provide an accurate damage assessment 30 days.ast the colorado department of transportation costs could $100 million cap which would accede the state event cap funds in the disaster relief act. devastation caused necessitates a response from the government. onsider working with me and other members of the colorado delegation to help our state rebuild from this tragedy. the rst i want to thank gentleman from colorado for -- all of his efforts to through all this turmoil, terrible disaster and flooding.rom the i'm aware of the dire need to

accesslorado and provide to emergency resources including access to emergency dollars.tation and i look forward to working with the gentleman to address funding matter as quickly and expeditiously as possible. for all of speak the house when we say to the people of colorado that our are with you and our prayers are with you and thank you for your great service. i yield back. > the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentserwoman from new york is recognized. yield three ed to minutes to the distinguished member of the appropriations from connecticut, mr. lara. the gentleman from connecticut is recognized for minutes. arrive in strong

opposition. yesterday we saw this majority party line vote rob food from the mouths of over 4 low income americans including children, seniors and veterans. resolution before us would only further punish american accelerate the majority's race to the bottom. n fact, the majority's leadership has been quite explicit about their intentions. in the cuts lock that we have seen to education health programs. they want to make those cuts permanent. opening position. they've also been quite up front they would y way mitigate against these cuts is cuts to social security, to medicare and to medicaid. and even though these deep cuts are producing harmful results

all over the country, the wants to use them as everage for further negotiations. it is about ideology and it is a game to them. seem to lives don't matter. et me remind everybody what is happening all over america because of the across the board cuts. than 57,000 children are losing access to early learning million of and 1 our disadvantaged children would they ccess to the support need to provide the instruction need.they already overburden state and local education agencies are higherorced to pick up a share of the cost for educating ore than 6 million students with special needs. and over 30,000 kids are losing child-care putting their parents' jobs and family

conomic security even more at risk. undreds of thousands of adults mented a ed a /* are losing job training prapltz. biomedical research that saves lives, cancer, diabetes, curtailed.t is being i'm a cancer survivor. the dical research and grace of god have allowed me to tand here today but they would cut off biomedical research. it's either going to be delayed lost. and the list goes on. food safety, public and we economy and the well being of american families and our very future as a nation. instead of working to pass a compromised bill that addresses serious and a responsible matter, they have sed it to try yet again to derail the affordable care act

and deny americans for the 42nd time. these members have health insurance. most americans do not. they can afford. >> recognized for an additional one minute. members have health insurance. people in the nation can't but they would cut it off. they would make it impossible to get preventative care to keep their kids up to their own health insurance coverage and say to insurance companies, go for it again of the you can't deny health care coverage and talk preexisting conditions. are ies all over america struggling. this is designed to make it worse. this is not a game. about people's lives. we have a moral responsibility. to represent the american people not our own

personal agenda and not our own and ideology.da e have to do better and so we must vote against this bill and my eld back the balance of time. kentucky tleman from is recognized. >> how much time remains? the gentlewoman from new york gentlemanutes and the has six minutes. reserve. >> madam speaker i'm pleased. minutes to the distinguished gentleman from georgia. >> the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. > madame speaker, i want to thank my friend and my colleague. madame speaker, this is unbelievable. are here elieve we again with so much to be done,

we could do.that this republican congress wants deny the e country to people the chance to see a doctor. how many times are we going to do this? next? medicare? medicaid? social security? this is not right. fair.is not madame speaker, the voters have spoken and the supreme court has ruled. the affordable care act is the law of the land. constitutional. it is compassionate. is right. it is what is necessary. been made, ress has young people can stay insured under their parents. people will have coverage, coverage to help them see a they need to and coverage that covers.

on ican people are planning us. must keep the promise of health care to the american people. we will not go backward. e have come too far and we cannot turn back. speaker, health care is a right. t is not a privilege for the wealthy. every citizen of the united states should be able to see a doctor when they need to. every single one. this is a resolution that will stop that. the american way and the america that we believe in. we should care for each other. we should look out for one another and one family and one american house, and we shall put the roof down on heads. we shall not pull the roof down win political

points. vote for what is fair and just no. ote >> i reserve >> the gentleman from kentucky reserves. >> the gentlewoman is recognized. pleased to field one oman for one minute for the distinguished woman from california. >> she is recognized for one minute. >> thank you very much, madam speaker. speaker, come to the floor in many ways as a mother, concerned about the children of america as a about all concerned of america's children, but as a other who steps into this chamber to say, this place is a mess. in order.our house we are legislatures and come here to do a job for the people. and that job means we have to

the the government run for good of the people. e are not here to expand government but we're not here to eliminate government. if the idea is to limit together , let's work to do that. brought to the floor today is without a doubt, a doubt a measure designed to shut down government. it could have no other intent. is clear.ase if our colleagues on the side deny that, then gravitye no idea of the of the situation to quote the of the trouble that is contained in this resolution today.

it is a wolf in it is a wolf in wolf's clothing. the underlying bill to shut down government, the cr is reason because object to it a t bill will cost at least million jobs in the course of the next year, will cost a million jobs. will -- not only do that, it investments in the future in education and biomedical research. national institutes of publbu biblical power to cure. to respect the talent and the god-given and the intellect of the science but to we do in this o bill? say no. we cut that. serious damage, doing serious damage to science to not only that to our competitiveness as a nation. vote that guts those

underlying and the bill were not bad enough, if there were not reason enough to are you kidding, no, cloak it in wolf's clothing and saying in their iew they'll defund the affordable care act. you know what that's about? putting mply about their friends, the insurance companies back in george in edical decisions for your families. but it goes further than that. were not bad enough, it strongly bipartisan health program by 70% eliminating an initiative that provides much needed health to children.e that bill passed the united states senate in a with a veto proof majority, a veto proof majority. but that's not good enough for you. you have to slash it by 70% to

harm those children. once again this week. t wreaks havoc on health care for seniors by obstructing ayments for medicare or medicaid. either you don't know what one of oing or this is the most intentional acts of brutality that you cooked up. cuts bills of dollars i say from the national institute of delaying important research and denying medical breakthroughs for future generations. democrats have a responsible reduces that brings -- the deficit under the leadership -- it makes investments in the future and opposedvernment open as to this bill intended to shut

government down. government open and working for the american people. i know my colleague has been very vocal and he'll quote some what they have said about it. us.'t take it from i'll leave him to have the exact quote. to do the enable us work of government. i urge no vote on this continuing resolution. it's a terrible proposition for our families and our communities our country. it's always, always time for us to work together to help ensure and not endanger the economic security and prosperity of the american people. i urge my colleagues to vote no and you'll back the balance of my time. the our country. gentleman fro is recognized. >> madame speaker, i field one inute to the distinguished of the house the

gentleman from virginia. >> i want to thank the gentleman from kentucky, the chairman appropriations committee. inam speaker, i arrive today strong support of this measure continued or the resolution. millions of americans across struggling. are they're struggling to find good bills. jobs and pay and their frustration with government gentleman from continues to gr. these americans -- these hard working middle class americans counting on their elected representatives to show leadership during these hard times. continuing resolution will at the government funded its current level without increasing spending while working on a hes real budget.

seeing s are tired of their government spending more and more of their hard earned tax dollars. the first time since the korean war, it will be possible two consecutive years of cuts.tionary spending this resolution will also protect the working middle class effects of astating obamacare. hear stories about how both major employers and are cutting ses back benefits and hours. care law is ealth turning our full-time economy into a part-time economy. of major unions who are once so supportive of wants to see this law rastically change to avoid further, quote, nightmare scenarios, unquote. law now and this protect the american people from

economic calamity. back home are fighting for families and we in congress to washington to fight tore them. for this entire congress, the faith s led on restoring in our economy and trust in our government. we should pass this resolution o the senate can finally begin to do the same. gain i'd like to thank the gentleman from kentucky and the chairman the appropriations and along with the of from the gentleman louisiana for their hard work on the issue and i urge my this gues to support resolution. >> gentleman from kentucky reserves. new york isman from

recognized. i'm very pleased to yield three minutes to the distinguished whip from maryland. >> the gentleman from maryland is recognized. yielding. you for madam speaker, today we are to fund ng a measure government only if the democratic senate and democratic president will agree to the reform law that will millions of americans, access, quality and affordable care. that isn't going to happen. is a blatant act of taking. the republican cr lays a taught rk for a did he on our debt and unthinkable act instituting a pay china first fully embraces it.

enshrines the decent nto an economy destroying national security undermining and ineffective rendering of the and nment that our country our people need. its ajority party with destructive obsession with the repeal of the affordable care its unrestrained hostility toward government has ffered this bill not withstanding republican's hollow irrationality of the equestered policy that party adopts. the majority does so not withstanding their chairmans and i quote the distinguished rogers as quote unrealistic and ill conceived. mine.rds not a policy which chairman rogers i quote again, must be brought to an end.

words, not mine. chairman rogers vote today and the votes of his colleagues will expect do just the opposite. a y will vote to continue itablely t will inive lead to decline and retreat. be party to it. it undermines the security of seniors and the present and future health of our people and he strength training and readiness of our armed forces and the growth of our economy creation of jobs and quality and liability of infrastructure and health of environment and respect for public o labor in the sector and most certainly the honoring of america's debts and obligation. today's bill undermines all those priorities and more. i will not support it. and i urge my colleagues to

it.se and it continues us on the path aptly described by chairman mines again, his words not as lurking -- this lurking path fiscal cal crisis to crisis. i urge my colleagues with wisdom on your side of the 30 e to oppose this bill, additional seconds. i have been and continue to be all my to work with with this es to work bill. hoping and, yes,

praying we will have such wisdom such courage. i urge my colleagues to oppose this bill and commit themselves adopting a bipartisan and this ive alternative to irrational path. and i yield back the balance of time. >> madame speaker, i yield one the gentleman from california. > i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam speaker, it's dead wrong. the full re protects faith and credit of the united states by ensuring our in full and onid time. t is imperative that our creditors know that whatever rage in congress, their loans are secure and it depends on our credit and this guarantees it.

it also addresses two crucial fiscal concerns. getting frantic and heartbreaking calls from folks staggering increases in their health notified this their health is being dropped. wreck.tops that train and second is for limited duration. abandoned this resolution eeps the government open while meeting these vital tests. i yield back. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the gentslewoman from new york is recognized >>. pleased yield one minute to virginia. man from >> gentleman from virginia is minute. ed for one >> thank you madam chairman. >> this is about more than these provisions which we know won't be taken seriously

nd should not by the senate or by the country. but i'm going to oppose it for because i used to be very proud of this nstitution, used to be able to go through my community and many of those who have served as long it was like w what to be proud to be a member of congress and to know that we had improved the lives of our con wets and walk through the had s and proud of what we done for biomedical research and knowing we were improving lives and curing illnesses. we know what the government can do. doesn't allow the can.nment to do what it what this congress ydo.ant to

speaker, i yield one minute to the hard working aprop committee. from mississippi is recognized for one minute. >> i want to thank the chairman for yielding but more leadership.for his the people sent me to congress to help preserve liberty for generations. a single law worse for individual liberty, for job than obamacare. we must get rid of obamacare and with a system that and des choice, lower cost pulgts patients in charge of their health care decisions. today we're standing up for our

and ipals and constituents americans. we'll pass this bill out of the our and i encourage colleagues to take up this fight and stand with us to make sure obamacare. balance of my e time. i thank my friend for yielding. to keep thee trying government open yet the federal overnment is engaged in contingency plans in case of a district nd so is the f columbia because it's budget is here. this $8 billion in local funds congress because the requires it. hours and $131,000 is what

2011 to prepare for a shutdown. speaker newt grinning rich was the speaker of the house, clear, the only down worse than closing the united states government is closing down an innocent not a dime in this fight, the capital city of united states. and the budgetct columbia.ubdistrict of the don't close down the capital. as to the inquire time remaining >> the gentleman from kentucky remaining.inutes yield one peaker, i

minute from the gentleman from nebraska stkpwhrfpl the evidence obamacare is full actually hurting people. constituent several who told me they recently received their notice they no onger have their insurance policy and must go into the exchange and upon exploring that policy in hat their the exchange will cost anywhere have 0% to 100% more and higher deductibles and co-pays, what plan that they can go on and the cost will be. income is on a fixed and is older and she may have to have a policy with coverages she want or need. i hear their heartbreaking this from my onstituent in the metropolitan omaha area. these are real life examples of truly hurting s people and squeezing them.

join us in enate to defunding eliminating obamacare. folks get the lp health care they need. >> gentleman's time is expired. gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> madam speaker, how much time o i have remain something >> the gentlewoman from new york has 2 and 1 half minutes remaining. >> madam speaker i yield myself the remaining time. recognized. madame speaker, the american people are counting on us to do together, to work create jobs, to keep the keep the open and to economy running. time or the bill or relitigating health reform or for holding up the

administration's ability to and credit full safe of the united states of america. with the great suffering in the wake of another natural disaster colorado, and my heart goes out to all those families who lost lives and who have ost loved ones and property, this is not the time, my friend, ability of the united states of america to give relief to those losing loved ones, homes and livelihood. republicans refuse to work with the senate and the white house to bring a of tructive piece legislation to this floor today. we consider a bill we for failure in the senate and would be vetoed by the white house. majority has failed to lead.

they have refused to appoint to work with the senate number. line spending they can't even pass their own chamber.bills in this and we remember how the very important transportation and hud had to be pulled off the floor because they couldn't find votes. halt government functions vital to the economy. even when their own ppropriations chairman my friend mr. rogers said we should end the sequester and find a forward just days before the end of the fiscal still playing political games. to oppose olleagues his bill, support the responsible replacement of the sequester with a balance plan to

create jobs and keep our economy moving. do it and i would be pleased to be part of that chair mr. with the rogers. >> the gentlewoman's time is expired. kentucky is from recognized for two remaining minutes. thank the speaker. a cr speak, we are doing even though the appropriations house side the passed 11 of the 12 bills the committee, four of them crossed the floor of the remaining ones waiting for floor time as we run out of time. onsequently this continuing resolution will continue the government past the of the fiscal end

year. ow, we were unable to pass the appropriations bill singly on the floor because of lack of time, but also because the agreed tosenate never an overall number to which we mark. consequent consequently, we were not able because those bills out of that limitation. cr, until we are given aif number common with the senate to mark the eed to individual 12 bills, we will do so. hard working committee. pragmatists. we know we have to pass bills to this he government, thus bill. to ifuá we were intending

close down the government and hut it down, we wouldn't be here with this bill. we would just sit there. the his is an effort by majority party and the house to government and down while we work out the differences on the '14.ng bills for fiscal madame speaker, this is traightforward and it's clean and it's short term and it and federalductions discretionary spending i would it the lastd we cut two years by $120 billion. that's occurred since world war ii. o we're trying to be responsible. this bill is responsible and i congress voted 230 to

189 to defund the health care law. two democrats voted for the bill and representatives jim matheson of north d mike carolina and one voted against virginia congressman. ollowing their vote house speaker and other leaders called on the senate to pass the conference t a news in the capital. this is about ten minutes. good morning and thank you joining us following this important vote. today the house has acted. acted to keep the

government open to control protect people from an unworkable law that is making it harder on them. my colleagues have all voted in favor of this law because it's and dads and moms families and young people and country.ll across this that's who this is all about. when i was home in august, like i many of my colleagues, heard the stories from individuals and families who are panicked over re the implementation of this law the impact it's having on their lives. acted why the house has and today we urge the senate to take action. in the our colleagues senate and our allies on the outside and the american people senate to have this important debate on the floor of he senate because if we are going to take action on behalf of the american people we need debate te to have this on the floor of the senate. [applause]

>> when we started this health debate, the president led with a very big promise to the american people, if you like the have, care that you can that you currently have, you can keep it. headline reads, 20,000 home depot rk for case.onger be the obamacare doesn't allow that. it wasn't just a group of but a bipartisan vote. i want to make sure you write it correctly. a bipartisan vote because we're americans first. it's a privilege to sit in this this,e and i will tell you as a founders who crafted this

they krafted two bodies two bodys to work. house has done their work and we call upon the senate do theirs as well. the house has been fighting to 2009, and are since we have said over and over again to increase oing the cost for the working middle class families of this country and we're now seeing t we said the beginning that this law will harm our economy and we're from a full-time job economy into a part-time job economy. we are doing our job and now it is up to senate to show some responsibility and follow the house's lead. senate republicans have

promised to leave no stone bill and ighting this all of us here support that effort. calling on senate democrats to do the same thing. to know where senate from protecting the middle class. non-profits summer a group in arkansas announced their cutting hours for hundreds staff members to 28 hours a week. about kay in north carolina. does she understand the onsequences that obamacare is having in her state? at the goesry store, the not feasibles it's or sustainable to extend 1100 ge for all the employees that he has. for y have to cut hours

much of his workforce. what about mary of louisiana? obamacare is also hurting her in that ing tax payers tate n july, owner of dots diner, told the senator said he off 16 workers and these are middle class americans meet. to make ends and finally, what about mark of alaska? through obamacareme across the country could be hit alaska it's hock n predicted premiums could rise 30 and 80%. what is the senator going do this? will he vote to keep it in place. we're into the fight and we want the senate to join us.

victory today for the american people. we had had a victory for common sense. law is a r said this train wreck. and it is a train wreck. said if we ident pass this law, health care costs will go down. find out that health care costs are going up for most americans. said if you like the health insurance policy can you keep it. that's not nd that accurate either. in the coming months millions of americans will find out it's not true. listen, this is hurting our and the american people. at a time when the economy is along, wages aren't increasing and new jobs

aren't available and what are we doing? putting more costs and more inconvenience on the american people. say no.e for us to it's time to stop this before it damage to the american familiars and businesses. you have businesses all over the are not hiring because of the impact of this law. businesses that are reducing the hours of their law.oyees because of this and so, our message to the united states senate is simple. people don't want the government toplt shut down obamacare.n't want listened to the

american people. now it's time for the nited states senate to listen to them as well.

>> president, spoke about defunding the health care law. >> there is a faction on the far right of the republican party. it is a big faction. they convince their leadership that threaten a government shutdown and potentially threatening to not raise the debt ceiling if they cannot shut off the affordable care act.

aboutre not talking spending cuts or entitlement reform. they are talking about something that has nothing to do with the budget. they are willing to plunge can't defund the affordable care act. let's put this in perspective. it has been in the law for 3.5 years. the guy who was running against they said he was going to appeal it. we won. the voters were clear on this.

this law that has been placed is providing people benefits. it is not holding back economic growth. it is helping millions of americans. >> according to john boehner, president, called the speaker this evening to tell him he would not negotiate with them on the debt limit. the speaker was disappointed at all the president the chambers of congress will chart the path ahead. the senate is expected to take up the bill passed in the house defund the federal government through mid-december. house lawmakers will return to the capital on wednesday while they await senate action. house republicans are preparing

to debate a bill next week that ties a one-year increase in the debt limit to a delay the federal health care law. >> many have said that our report would advocate reinforcement of fortress indices or closing down our prisons. no conclusion like that could be farther from the truth. we recognize that perfection and protection is not possible. fine and good men and women will still come forward to serve their country and risked their lives on the front lines of danger. we should continue to do although we can to protect them as they go about such challenging tasks. that was the sole purpose of our report. it was produced with the deep sense that we had to get it right. controversyections, , and all other factors aside. administration's

response to the consulate attack in benghazi. dc, liveington coverage of the national book festival with your chance to talk to authors. live on c-span, saturday morning starting at 10 eastern. tracks,verted horse life for the german pows detained in america during world war ii. >> she announced the rules of the national press club where she spoke answer questions.

>> good morning and welcome to the national press club. my name is angela. i'm a reporter for bloomberg and the 106th president of the national press club. we are the world's leading professional organization for journalists committed to our profession's future through programming with events such as this while fostering a free press worldwide. for more information, please visit our website at www.pre ss.org to donate to programs through the national journalism institute, also visit press.org/ institute. on behalf of members worldwide, i would like to welcome our speaker and those of you in the audience today. the head table includes guests of our speaker as well as working journalists who are club members. if you hear applause, members of the general public are also attending so it's not necessarily a lack of journalistic objectivity.

i would also like to welcome the c-span and public radio audiences. you can follow the action today on twitter using #npclunch. after the speaker concludes, we will have a question and answer time and i will ask as many as time permits. i ask each of you to stand briefly as your name is announced. from your right, reporter for bloomberg news, mark. bill loveless, host of platts energy week. margaret ryan, u.s. correspondent for interfax national gas report. harold wimmer, president and ceo of the american lung association. m show hand, energy wire. kenneth mccarry, -- kenneth mccarthy husband of our speaker. alison fitzgerald, chairwoman of the national press club speakers community and project manager for the center for public

integrity. speaking -- skipping over the speaker, a freelance editor and the committee member who organized today's breakfast, thank you, rod. reverend mitch hess cox, evangelical environmental network. deborah, environment correspondent for writers -- reuters. bureau chief for argus media which produces argus mayor daley. and bob keats, senior press secretary for the national resources defense council. [applause] barely two months ago, after 136 days of delay and wrangling with senate critics as well as answering more than 1000 questions, our guest today was confirmed as a 13th administrator of the environmental protection agency.

gina mccarthy was already familiar with the agency she now heads. she served as the epa assistant administrator for air and radiation. despite a background including leading efforts on environmental issues for republican governors in massachusetts and connecticut , our guest today could only muster six republican votes in the senate for her confirmation. that may not be surprising giving she is the point person to carry out president obama's pledge from his second inaugural address to "respond to the threat of climate change knowing that failure to do so would betray our children and future generations." to many, that was the residence latest articulation of a so- called war on coal and the economies of states that depend on it production and use to generate nearly 40% of the nation's electricity. president obama doubled down directing the epa to issue, by today, regulations to address

the omission of greenhouse gases from new coal and natural gas fired plants and the expected backlash to the proposal was on display when our speaker appeared before a skeptical and at times hostile group of lawmakers on the house energy and commerce committee. administrator mccarthy assured members of the panel that cold would continue to play an important role in generating electricity for years to come. if that is true, it may be less about the details of the new proposal them the fact that whole generation is already being displaced by natural gas, being discovered and produced at a record rate because of technology such as hydraulic fracturing. when she is not drying regulations, she follows her red sox and has spoken about the thrill of getting to yell, play ball, at fenway park. please help me give a warm national press club welcome to epa administrator, gina mccarthy.

[applause] >> thank you, angela. it was a long wait through the confirmation process, but oil was it worth it to be in this position and to work for and on behalf of the american public and the great people at the epa. it's a wonderful agency and i'm proud to be where i am today. i also want to tell you that i thought six republican votes was pretty good. [laughter] maybe that's just me. i worked hard for those six votes. roddick, thank you for all the work he did putting this together and thank you to the head table being assembled today. good morning, everyone. it's great to be here and i appreciate your coming as well. less than three months ago, president obama stood outside in the sweltering heat to unveil a new national plan to confront

thgr of climate change. he delivered, in my opinion, one of the most important speeches of his presidency. i will admit i'm a little biased. in those 45 minutes, the president laid out not only a vision but a plan for protecting our kids and families from pollution and fighting the threat of climate change. he called on agencies across the federal government, including the epa, to take action to cut carbon pollution, protect our country from the impact of an already changing climate, and to lead the world in this effort. he asked us one very important question that we all need to ask ourselves -- do we have the courage to act before it's too late? how we answer that question will have a profound impact on the world that we leave behind for our children. they have called on the epa to take action and we have

responded. frankly, why wouldn't we? our job is to protect health and the environment. this is the only agencies solely focused on delivering clean air, clean water, and a safe and healthy environment to american families. for more than 40 years, the epa has done its job well, with honor and with great distinction . for more than 40 years, the epa has worked tirelessly hand-in- hand developing the best science available in being transparent in our decision-making. we've done our job, as i said, with working from everyone from state to state, ngo's and everyone in between to make sure that we progress in a way that is sensible across all regions of the country.

the overwhelming judgment of science tells us that climate change is real. human activities are fueling that change. we must take action to avoid the most devastating consequences of climate change. we all know that this is not just about melting glaciers. climate change caused by carbon pollution is one of the most significant public health threats of our time. that is why the epa has been called to action and that is what today's action -- why today's action is so important and why we really need to talk about it -- not just this morning but when you go home in your own communities. it is a subject that deserves to be brought up and to be thought of as seriously as we can in our everyday lives. let me explain why it's so

important and why it's so important in the epa and public health. climate change is really about water. it's about clean, reliable sources of drinking water. it's about aging water and wastewater treatment facilities that end up overstressed and flooded during all of these extreme weather events. it's about mudslides. it's about storm surges, from pounding rains and it's about sewers that will back up and overflow. it's about inadequate storm water systems that let pollution attack sensitive ecosystems, like the wetlands and our estuaries that threatens our fish and wildlife. it is about all of these impact adding up spoiling the beauty and vitality of some of this country's most iconic water bodies that threaten our country, our safety, and the livability of our communities. climate change is also about

heat waves and drought. droughts that drive up food prices, that threaten our food supply, as well as the manufacturing operations that rely on water everyday to run their businesses and climate change is about wildfires like recent ones in the southwest, fires that in 2012 alone scorched more than 9 million acres across eight states. that is an area more than two and a half times the great state of connecticut. think of all of that property damage, the lives lost, air pollution caused by these fires. it destroyed landscapes putting communities and lives at risk. climate change is also about the spread of disease. warmer temperatures contribute to the rise of small creatures like mosquitoes and takes.

their bites may not seem deadly, but they spread diseases like what the west nile virus and lyme disease. they spread further and wider as the climate changes and most importantly, climate change is about clean and healthy air for all of us to breathe. it is about health. carbon pollution and hotter weather can lead to longer allergy seasons, increased heat related death and erect threats to those who suffer from chronic lung and heart diseases. we all know that rising temperatures bring increased smog so let me drill down on this one issue just a bit. the epa has been studying in regulating pollution that leads to ground-level ozone and what we call smog for decades. we know this issue. one thing we know for sure is that when the weather gets

hotter, smog gets worse, and people of all ages suffer. my guess is that many of you know someone who is affected by smog. it makes it harder to breathe and to many of us have health challenges that smog can make worse. daniel is a retired railroad executive from wheaton, illinois and he suffers from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or copd. it is a life-threatening illness that affects lungs and the respiratory system. it is exactly the kind of condition that can be made worse by smog. luckily, daniel received a lung transplant and his health has improved significantly other than when he was on death's door. but last year, he made the trip to tell us of the story and he wanted to make one specific ask

of our agency. he asked us to take action on climate change. they could make respiratory illnesses like the one he had been suffering from so much worse. unfortunately, daniel's story is all too familiar. it is not just adults or the elderly who suffer from air pollution. it is about our children, especially children and lower incomes and in urban communities. if your child does not need to use an inhaler, then you are one lucky parent. one in 10 children today in the united states lives with asthma everyday. i said that correctly -- one in 10.

when it comes to health concerns, don't your children always come to mind first? at the end of the day, that is what this issue, climate change, is all about. that is why the epa cares about climate change and why we know we must take action now. that is why people from low income environmental injustice communities all across the nation are concerned about climate change because those communities are often -- so often -- most at risk when disaster strikes. that is why groups are speaking out against the threat of climate change and pollution to protect our children from those dangers. that is why faith groups of all denominations are encouraging action. we must meet our moral obligation for the next generation and be stewards of our precious natural resources. it is those resources that

provide the foundation for our health, our well-being and, yes, for our economy. the president climate action plan calls on federal agencies to take steady, sensible, pragmatic steps to cut the harmful carbon pollution that fuels our changing climate and to prepare for unavoidable impact based on the climate change that is already have a meeting and is inevitable. the united states could leverage our actions internationally so that we could address a global challenge in a global way. that is why we are here today. we want to limit carbon

pollution from new power plants. they are the single largest source of carbon pollution. new power plants, natural gas and coal fired, can minimize their carbon emissions by taking advantage of available modern technology. these technologies offer them a clear pathway forward today and in the long term. let me get to the proposal just a bit. these proposed standards are the first uniform national limit on carbon pollution from new power plants. they do not apply to existing power plants. i might repeat that one more time so that everybody gets it. these proposed standards are the first uniform national limits on carbon pollution for new plants.

they do not apply to existing power plants. today's proposal does set separate national limits for new natural gas power plants and for new coal power plants. her plants would need to meet a limit of 1000 pounds of co2 per megawatt hour while new smaller natural gas plants would need to meet a limit of 1100 pounds of co2 per megawatt hour. new coal plants would need to meet a limit of 11 hundred pounds of co2 per megawatt hour. coal plants could choose to also have additional flexibility if they want to average their omissions over multiple years by meeting a somewhat tighter limit. some of you may remember that we proposed standards for last year and you may be saying to yourself -- why are they starting all over again? let me explain.

we received extensive public comment on our last proposal, over 2 million comments to be exact. on the earlier proposal, we generated considerable new data that came in through that comment time. we understood what technologies were available and we looked at recent trends in the power sector and we did democracy demands -- we paid attention. we read the comments. we thought about them. we decided to up date the proposal. that is what today's proposal reflected and we're very confident that the carbon pollution standards we are proposing today for new power plants are both flexible and achievable. they pave a path forward for the next generation of power plants

in this country. the standards are flexible. they set different standards for different types of power plants. that is what the data helped us understand. these standards are achievable because it will secure major public health and environmental protections but they reflect the demonstrative performance of a variety of the clean, homegrown technologies. technologies that are already entering the market and being constructed in plants today. the standards set the stage for continued public and private investment in technologies that are so important, technologies like carbon capture and sequestration. with these investments, technologies will eventually mature and become as common for new power plants as scrubbers have become for well-controlled existing plants today. if there is one thing i've learned over the course of my

work in implementing the clean air act it has been that power plants have really long lifespans. longer than mine, even. sometimes 60 years or more, sometimes 70. people are making decisions about how to build new plants today which is one reason we need to act today. that is what makes standards for new power plants so very important and why this proposal takes full advantage of all of the cutting-edge technologies that increase efficiency and reduce waste. that translates into lower carbon emissions and more efficient, effective, clean energy. as always, the epa is expecting that we will get lots of comments on this proposal and we will do what we did before and gives each and every comment a thorough consideration. with all of this talk of cutting

carbon pollution from new power plants, you are probably asking yourself, what is the epa doing about the pollution from existing power plants? let me explain a few things. first of all, addressing existing power plants is an important use of the president climate action plan. we are committed to acting on reducing carbon emissions from existing plants as well. however, those proposed standards are on a longer time frame. we plan to release a proposal for public comment in june of next year -- that is june of 2014. we started the process already in order to meet that timeline. the process we started as one that involves engagement with states, local governments, industry leaders, ngo's labor organizations, businesses and

others who want to weigh in. we plan to be in very close consultation with the states. we have to ensure that any guidance that the epa puts out in june 2014 can translate into flexibility sufficient to account for the differences among our states and among the regions. i can promise you that the epa will follow the course that president obama charted in his speech in june. we want to get -- we will get -- to a point where we are building partnerships with states, local communities, and with local leaders so that we understand the options available in the options that must be available to make an existing standard and effective carbon strategy. we can learn a lot from ongoing efforts to reduce carbon pollution. those efforts have moved us toward a cleaner, more electric generated power already and we hope to build on the progress

that is currently going on and, frankly, has been going on for years at the state and local level. in fact, 10 states are already participating in their own market-based program to cut pollution's from carbon. i should make sure that everybody knows when i say carbon it is "c-a-r-b-o-n." i'll talk about cars later, too. "c-a-r." more than 35 states have clean energy targets. more than 25 have already set energy efficiency goals and have cut their energy waste and over 1000 mayors across the country have signed agreements to cut carbon pollution. clearly, states and local communities are doing their jobs

as incubators of innovation leading the way to cleaner, more affordable, more sustainable energy. fighting climate change makes good business sense. that's worth repeating. climate change just makes good business sense. as the president has pointed out, more than 500 businesses including gm and mikey called -- and nike called this and i quote, "one of the greatest opportunities of the 21st century. so we know rejecting our kids from harmful pollution is something that just cannot be solved overnight. it is going to take a broad, concerted effort from all levels of government as well as the private sector as well as individuals sitting here and beyond, as well as the international community, but make no mistake about it.

epa's action today to address carbon pollution from new power plants is an important step forward in this long clean energy journey and it is a necessary step to address a public health challenge that we all simply cannot afford to avoid any longer. the good news is we can successfully face the challenge of climate change but only if we work together. we have proven time after time that setting a fair clean act standards to protect public health does not cause the sky to fall. the economy does not crumble. in fact, we are already seeing investments in clean energy payoff. just this week, the department of energy released a report showing the cost of renewable is dropping while the use has grown.

just last year, in 2012, the u.s. deployed almost twice as much wind as it did just the year before. working together with input from states, communities, tribes, industry, and environmental advocates, we have grown our economy. we have driven innovation, we have created healthier, safer, more livable communities to hand down to our children and our grandchildren. do not forget -- because i will always remind you -- under this president's leadership just a few years ago, we established historic greenhouse gas fuel economy standards for passenger vehicles. those standards will save consumers thousands of dollars at the pump. those standards did not cripple the auto industry. they made it stronger and they made it more competitive.

by working arm in arm with industry, the united auto workers, consumer groups, advocates, and others we got the job done and we got it done right with the support of the auto industry, we achieved standards that will cut carbon pollution from our cars and half by 2025. the average driver will save more than 8000 dollars -- more than $8,000. far from the auto industry collapsing its actually thriving. over 300,000 jobs have been added in that industry alone since the president of the united states rescued it from collapse. this proves we can improve pollution while creating jobs and strengthening the economy. the old rules said we could not protect our environment and

promote economic growth at the same time. you heard it, you heard it. in america, we have always thought out -- sought out to use new technologies. we have used science, research and development, and discovery to make those old rules obsolete. we have the know-how and the ingenuity to take on climate change. we can, we must turn this public health and environmental challenge into an economic opportunity. as the president has reminded us, all we need is the courage to act. for me, i muster that courage every time i look into the wonder of faces of my three children, daniel, maggie, and julie. in the end, this is really what

this is all about for all of us, our obligation to leave our children a world that is as healthy and safe as the one that we inherited. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. isn't your proposal on new coal power plants given the fact that carbon capture and other technologies are, at this point, not proven expensive than not yet ready for print? >> who wrote that question? were they listening to my speech? [laughter] >> probably. >> clearly not. i really appreciate the question and i'm glad it came up first. ccs is a technology that is feasible and available today. we know that.

how do we know that? it's been demonstrated to be effective. we know that it's been demonstrated and it is actually constructed on real facilities today, not just unconventional facilities but coal facilities. they are actually being invested in and being constructed and the designs are now available for others that are coming up. i think the coal industry and the investors said there needs to be a certain pathway forward for coal to be successful now and into the future. i believe this proposal, rather than killing future coal, actually sets out a pathway forward for coal to continue to be part of the diverse mix in this country. look. we know coal will be part of the energy generation that we rely on substantially over the next

few decades. why wouldn't we now with knowledge and invest in the type of technologies that will allow coal a future long beyond that? the president has made a commitment to support a diverse energy supply because it helps us economically, domestically, as well as it protects us from international concerns. we might as well invest today and set the pathway forward. we believe that this does that and we believe that, over time, you will be able to see that this is a reasonable, cost effective strategy as we move forward to keep coal in the energy mix. >> to what extent, if any, did the epa consider making concessions to aid the coal industry are was that even a legitimate consideration during the discussions? >> the epa, and i'm very proud

of the people who do this work thomas spent a great deal of time working with the industry themselves. we do it before, during, and after rulemaking and we do it for one reason. epa, while we are solely looking at regulating pollution, we have to understand what kind of pollution reductions are achievable without doing significant damage to the companies that we are regulating. we know, and i have said before, that our standards rather than doing damage can actually promote an industry sector to grow. what we did here in this proposal was we worked strongly with the utilities to understand what technologies were available. we will work with them over the comment. we want them to understand what type of carbon capture sequestration will be necessary and at what level because it is only going to be partialccs but

it will be enough to make them competitive in a carbon constrained world and we have always, as the epa, do wonderful cost-benefit analysis so that we can understand for the american people and the layout out in a public and transparent fashion so that they can understand the impacts of our rules and the public health protection to the costs associated and, in this case, we think we have done exactly the right job at looking at the science and the data tells us again to make a sensible, reasonable step forward to address what is essentially one of the greatest of the health challenges of our time, climate change. >> you told the house energy and commerce committee this week that coal will continue to be a significant source of energy in the u.s. for decades. what assurances do you have to offer to those who are skeptical of the epa's motives?

>> i think we have made our motives pretty clear. the epa's job is to look at environmental health and protection. we implemented the clean air act . we have aspirations outside of the authority -- we do not have aspirations outside of the authority that congress has given us. we just want to work on the pollutant regulated under the clean air act and we have taken a look at how to be reasonable, rational, understand the data, look at the technology available , and make sure that we craft our decisions in a way that is fully science-based, fully data- driven, and is reasonable and rational. i'm not making a statement would

this -- with this rule, nor would we ever about some independent choice about what fuels we like or don't like. we are looking, as we always do, the ways in which we can reasonably reduce pollution under the clean air act with the authority that congress has given us. >> what steps will the epa take to ensure that electric consumers will not be harmed? please explain regional flexibility sent some areas will feel more impact than others. >> that is a good question and let me make a note for myself so i don't forget. in this rulemaking, we have to keep in mind that this is about future power plants, new power plants so, really, we needed to understand what technologies were available and we needed to make sure that we wrote a rule

that took advantage of the most cost-effective technologies given the fact that any investment as large as a power plant will be hanging around for a while. we are going to be lagging with that plant and those technology choices for decades to come. we don't think that is a regional issue. we think that is just about how you build a new power plant and how you use the most effective technologies. however, when you look at flexibility, when you look at two of the changes that you saw in the role that is different than the original proposal, one of them was on the natural gas side. if you look at the comments that came in under our proposal, there were questions and concerns about the levels that we had originally proposed and whether or not some of the smaller natural gas units used

could really operationally and effectively obtain that standard in a consistent way. we have teed that up for a discussion establishing slightly different standards recognizing operational issues. these are all technical discussions that we look at in great detail. we look at the averaging periods applicable to the standards. the 1100 pounds of co2 per megawatt hour is a 12 month average. we also put in a flexibility for those facilities that would allow them to average over a seven-year period. why did we do that? it is not we thought we would get lower environmental protection. it still requires partial ccs as it is designed and constructed. what we recognized is that ccs may provide a challenge out of the date as to whether or not you understand how to operate it effectively, whether or not you have all of the equipment you

needed as tuned up as it needed to be so we gave flexibility to go to a slightly lower standard for the opportunity to have seven years to make the system right for you. that should be plenty of time given that ccs is already technically feasible, already available, and it is being constructed and facilities today. >> why did the epa decided to shorten the flexibility option from 30 years to seven? >> that is a good follow-up question. i don't know. i'm kidding. [laughter] i think we learned from the data that came in during the comments. we began to understand what the challenges were with this technology and as i said before, we started looking at the shift in the actual energy world was looking like. if you remember during the original proposal, we had 15 really traditional coal

proposals that were out there and a were not getting funded and are not moving forward. what we realized was that the ones that are attracting investment and the ones that will provide fuel diversity and the certainty moving forward were ones that actually installed ccs. we understood that was a pathway forward. what we were able to do was get a much better handle on the kinds of adjustments that would need to be made. he got a better handle on how long it would take to address those issues and we found a way to provide flexibility without losing the environmental protections that the original proposal had sought. we are getting the environmental reductions at the same time as providing just the right flexibility that we need to make this work for the industry. >> did the revised proposal

factor in the outdated social cost of carbon values? >> yes. let me hit this issue, if you don't mind, a little bit more robustly because it has become an issue of concern. the epa's job when we do rulemaking is to look at the costs and benefits of our rules and that means we are supposed to look at all of the benefits of the rules that we do, all of the costs to the extent that we can identify through here review processes. back in the prior administration in 2008, they did start looking at the cost of methane and factoring that into their rulemaking. this did not begin with this administration. that is because everybody recognized that carbon actually had a cost. i think we now know the cost is a lot larger than we had originally proposed. when you reduce carbon, it is

factoring into the ability to address carbon pollution in the changes that the world is experiencing relative to a changing climate. when this administration came in, then began a number process to look at what science has happened since then, what the modeling shows us about the earlier cost of methane projections. we updated it and we put it in a rule in 2010. there is a good technical document with that rule. i don't think it was an epa rule. but we put it out and it was a document that was produced by the white house. omb and the cea did a process and the epa was participating. we put it out and we had a good discussion. we got public comment and we move that forward with the rules. so we had a new cost of methane

and what it said was that we were using three of the models that are always used, most effectively, to estimate climate impact and we said that as the models are updated or in two years, we should look at it again because the information is changing as science comes in. that is how we do our business. that is what we did recently. we did a not date. you know why? the models were updated. we did not change any imports. we just listened to what peer- reviewed scientists and economists told us about the real social cost of carbon. the year we put it out in a standard recently and it has caused anxiety which is why i wanted to explain this to you a little bit more fully although it may be boring or the heck out of some of you but it is an issue where people are concerned that we were not transparent. it went through a rulemaking process twice.

it is in one now. if you're concerned we got the number wrong, put some comments in but the federal government makes its decisions on the basis of peer-reviewed science, whether it is about public health consequences or economic consequences. we are always open. we provide technical information. we take comments, considerate, and make decisions. that's all this is. >> when does e shall e.p.a. expect to finalize the regulations being proposed today? >> well, the clean air act gives us a one-year time frame, and let met explain why that is. because when this particular rule goes out it really does send a signal to the agency, to the market, that if you expect to start up and construct a facility, then you need to pay attention to these particular standards because that's going to be your obligation if they stay the same.

so it really has an impact and the clean air act recognizes that and asks us to complete it within a year. now, i will say that that doesn't mean that over the course of the com period we won't pay attention and there might not be adjustments but it does send a signal to the market right away and we're hoping that that signal is that there is a way to build a coal facility that is clean and can operate for a long period of time in a carbon- constrained worldle >> if the plan works and survives legal challenges, will that put an end to the effort of the california ant northwest states plan to deal with it through a market-based system? >> yes, it will. just kidding. seeing if you were paying attention. [laughter] remember this is about new sources. no -- new, new, new.

just sending a message to the industry about what the latest technologies are and how we expect them to reduce pollutants under the clean air afpblgt as i indicated, an information will be available today, we're really gearing up to start working with state and local communities and the business communities to begin to take a look at how we address the existing standard much the existing standard under the clean air act is very different than the new source standards. these shouldn't indicate that we think we can retrofit existing facilities by plunking carbon capture sequestration on the end. carbon capture sequestration is really being designed into these facilities, which is why it's very appropriate to look at

this technology in new facilities, which is why i don't want you to look at this proposal and say ah, i know what eepeep -- e.p.a. is going to do with the existing. new process is likely anticipated. e.p.a. sets the standard, we take comments, and eneverybody complies. isn't life grand? it doesn't actually often work that way, but we hope. in the case of existing facilities, what we are really supposed po -- to do is establish a guideline and then the challenge for the states is to look at that guideline rk look at their own facilities and senled a plan back to e.p.a. that assures they can meet that plan and effectively reduce carbon in a way that's sensitive to local concerns and to understand how electricity is being generated in those states so that we can all work together which is why what we're announcing today is a

series of meetings and engagements with states and with local communities all across the region and with the business community and with utilities. if you wonder why e.p.a. is at every energy conference imaginable, this is it. because we are going where people have information, where we can understand the issues, where we can develop a guidance that we put out in june. now, i will say that the clean air act in regard to this statute and many others requires that e.p.a. work with states as co-regulators in these tasks. i am looking forward to that. i have been one of those co- regulators for many years when i worked at the state level. in this instance state and local communities have been far ahead of e.p.a. and the federal government in understanding what actions make sense for them and how they can reduce the

carbon from their electricity sector. we will go out with a great process that will explain the flexibility in the statute, that will explore those issues, that will provide certainty to the states who are already addressing these issues effectively that we are going to pay attention to those processes, some of which i played a pretty heavy hand in crafting and i think they're still pretty good, and we'll make sure that we look at these reasonable differences and that we're totally respectful of -- respectful of the processes that are already in place and, frankly, these discussion -- discussions will given us a woifl opportunity to explain to the american public that they need be -- not be afraid of the actions we will take to address carbon and climate change. you will be hearing from all over the united states about entities that have taken huge

leaps forward and are learning how to shift money and put it to school teachers, for example, instead. i know the guidance we put out will respect this progress moving forward. >> c.c.s. tech analogy -- technology is not currently being used on a commercial scale power plant. why does e.p.a. think c.c.s. is ready for use by the industry? >> well, i probably should let all the technical people explain but let me pretend to aspirin what c.c.s. is. it's the capture, the transportationion of the c.o. 2 and the storage of the c.o. it.

there is no question that the capture can be done effectively. the capture of c.o. 2 has actually been going on since the 1930's. we kind of know that one. we know how to transport. there is actually a full-scale plant. it's a gas iffyidation technology that is in operation today that's been using c.c.s. at a full scale, pulling out c.c.s. at percentages much higher than our proposal is contemplating and they have been doing it effectively for years. there is no surprise about how to do this. now, that doesn't mean that over time themes -- these technologies can't get better. . sequestration is one area where we hope to advance. we know the department of energy has resources that they've already announce hd, $6 billion in resources that are going to

continue to fund the development of these types of technologies. this is what is going to ensure that we have a diverse energy supply in the future, and i feel very confident that the information we have in this document will show that we know how to not only do those three components but it's been demonstrated in facilities that the part y'all c.c.s. capture that -- sks partial c.c.s. capture that is being demonstrated stood, what kind of facilities the u.s. government thinks are going to be effective in a car bom-constrained world. >> following up on that we have a couple questions about the kemper project, which one person describes as vastly overbudgetet. what are your conclusions at this point about how economically feasible that will be.

>> good question. kemper is a southern company facility. i will tell you i can't speak to will whether it's over budget. i've certainly read that, but the one uniqueness you need to understand about kemper that i think makes it really not a good comparison, if you are wondering, or a good model if you are wondering if c.c.s. is going to be cost effective and available, again we have four facilities currently in the construction phase. you know, at least one is 75% complete, that's integrating c.c.s. into the zivene the facility. but the kemper facility is actual think very unique, not just in the c.c.s. but it has other unique technologies being tested by southern company because they have some proprietary oversight over those technologies.

so it isn't just the c.c.s., i think it's the actual gas turbine that is different. so there's a lot of things different and unique about that facility which really tells me that they -- there may be a lot more going on than just whether c.c.s. in its traditional way can be put on that facility and work cost effectively. >> i would be remiss not to ask one of the many questions about fracking. what will your approach be to enforcement regarding v -- shale drilling and fracking? >> it's a good question. it's not the subject matter of today but i'll take it on anyways. no, it's good because it is clearly related. this country has had an enormous increase in the amount of natural gas it's generated and how cost effective and really inexpensive natural gas has

become. i think that's one of the reasons you are seeing a significant shift away from coal and investigate -- investing in natural gas and i'm quite sure that's how everybody is looking at it. the fracking issue is one that e.p.a. has been all over for quite a while. if you are unaware, we have an ongoing study that is really 18 research projects all into one to look at all the water issues associated with fracking, to make sure that we have the skibes to understand what its threat might be and whether or not there needs to be action and how that action should be taken. i think the president in the climate action plan actually addressed this issue in a couple of give -- different ways. really the first way was he told us we needed to get what he called a methane strategy, and he's pulled all the agencies together to develop that. now, the thing i think many of you may not know is that on the air side, e.p.a. has already regulated fracking. the reason you don't know it is

because we did it so well, nobody complained. well, very few. i shouldn't say nobody. and what we said was and understood was that methane in the fracking process is emitted, and in that methane say lot of vool phil organic compounds. those are air pollutants regulated under the clean air ack, and in order to address those we are requiring actions throughout the sector to take a look at natural gas wells and during the fracking process to make sure that they use either green completions which are phased in and going to be fully available in a few years, which recaptures the methane, then allows companies to make money because that's the product they're producing. that's the major constituent of natural gas and it allows them to capture the v.o.c.'s so it doesn't contribute to what we all know are significant air quality challenges we are seeing in the western parts of the states

that were never seen about. again, ozone the so we are regulating the industry from the air quality side effectively. it's not just cost effective, it's going to make some money, and we've done that working with the states hand in hand to ensure that as they are regular late, -- regulating, we don't duplicate their efforts but take advantage of it. we are helping them understand if issues are arising and provide technical expertise to them but we are effectively looking at fracking in general from both the water and air quality side and we know that's our obligation. again that's e.p.a.'s obligation to protect public health and the environment so we take it seriously an -- on the nam gas side as we do regulating coal and the emissions from coal. >> we are almost out of time but before asking the last

question, a couple of housekeeping matters. first i'd like to remind you, on september 26 we will have new orleans mayor michigan landrieu and philadelphia mayor until nutter. november 11 we will have walt binther, president and c.e.o. of the charles schwab. and we would like to present our guest -- guest with the traditional national press club coffee mug. >> as long as it's less than $5, i accept. >> yes. we buy them in bulk for a very good price. and one last question. you are here at the national press club today. a questioner asked, now that you are administrator, will you allow more access for journalists to interview scientists and policy advisors?

>> i would say e.p.a. always allows access to our scientists but if there's any issues, we'll talk. thank you for your attention. [applause] >> thank you, administrator mccarthy. thank you all for coming today. i'd also like to thank national press club staff including our journalism institute and broadcast center for helping organization today's event. finally, you can find more information about the national press club at our web site, www .press.org. thank you. adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

on the next "washington journal," senior national

security correspondent for reuters discusses u.s. military facilities. then a look at the backlog of claims of the veterans affairs department with a member of the concerned veterans of america organizing committee and national journal contributing editor talks about the future of the farm bill, food stamps, and legislation in congress. washington journal, live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> c-span on-line archives redefine social studies in america. the c-span video library is a great resource for you to view and share content any time. it's easy. here's how. go to c-span.org. go to the video library. click on what you want to watch and press play. you can search the video library for a specific topic or a key

word or you can find a person. type in their name, hit search, go to people. go to their bio page and scroll down to their appearances. you can share what you're watching and make a clip. add a title and description and then click share and send it by e-mail, facebook, twitter, or google plus. funded by your local cable or satellite provider. they appeared before a house energy and commerce subcommittee for just over three hours.

>> i'd like to call this hearing to order this morning. today the sub committee is having the hearing to explore president obama's climate change action plan. and i certainly want to thank the secretary of energy mr. moniz and jenna mccarthy, the new administrator of the environmental protection agency for joining us this morning. i want to be sure i -- we start the clock so that i don't speak forever because that would be pretty boring for everybody. but i do want to thank you two for being with us this morning. i will tell you that i'm extremely disappointed that we

sent letters to the department of agriculture, department of defense, health and human services, department of interior, xm bank, national aeronaut aeronautics, office of science and technology policy and the u.s. agency for international development because they're very much involve in this action plan as well and they did not send witnesses to testify. now, in june of this year, president obama went to georgetown university. and he gave his speech in which he announced a climate change action plan for america. and in that speech, he mentioned that he was tired of excuses for inaction. i'm going tell you, i take exception to that. because in his action plan, he

included many of the component parts of the cap in trade legislation that was considered by this -- by the congress in 2009. the waxman-markie bill. that legislation passed the house but did not pass the u.s. senate. so rather than inaction on the part of congress, congress made a decision and that was that it did not want to adopt that legislation. so, i understand the president's view on climate change. i would like to predicate this by saying worldwide co-2 emissions last year amounted to 800giga tons. of that, 30gigatons were caused by humans. that's 3.5% of all worldwide emissions by human activity. the question become, if you have a broad spectrum of action on

this plan and we know it's the president's priority and we know we spent $80 billion on action claims, this year we spent $22 billion. we want to know more about the plan. is it going to contribute to higher energy costs? is it going to create obstacles to economic growth, is it going to have an impact on our ability to compete in the global market play. i'm going to read some headlines and newspapers around europe and elsewhere about this issue. and all of these were within the last three months. the support for the european union's climate and energy policy eroded friday as the czech republic became the latest member to denounce subsidies for

clean but costly renewable energy and pledged to use more fossil fuels. europe's industries is being ravaged by exorbitant energy costs. the quixotic dash for renewables is pushing electricity costs to untenable levels. we can't sacrifice europe's industry for climate goals that are not realistic. the european union's energy and climate policy is in disarray and losing credibility. utilities are turning to coal and chief lignite emitting more co-2 than ever. europe faces a crisis in energy costs. the new government in australia the first order of business was deciding to repeal the carbon tax legislation. they also plan to abolish the climate commission, the clean energy finance corporation, and

the climate change authority. 151 coal mines in america have closed. this is a discussion today. we recognize we have different views on this. but we are trying to make a sincere effort to understand the ramifications, the impact of climate change. as a congress, we have the responsibility with all of the money being spent to get a better feel of what's the government doing. it's comprehensive. it spreads throughout the entire government. this hearing is about we want to know what's going on.

and we're going to go back to every one of the agencies that i mentioned earlier whether we sit down with them individually or as a committee, we want to nope and understand precisely what is going on. so once again, mr. secretary, madam administrator. thank you for being with us. i want to recognize the gentleman from california, mr. waxman for his opening statements. >> today's hearing is the first time in a long time that this committee is holding a hearing on climate change. and i welcome this hearing. i want to commend chairman upton and chairman whitfield for holding it. climate change is the biggest energy challenge we face and a clear and present danger to the united states and to the world. i commend the administration for sending the energy secretary henry mow neetz and jenna

mccarthy to testify. it's unusual to have two cabinet secretaries testifying as a subcommittee hearing. your presence makings it clear how seriously the administration is taking this hearing. as the secretary moniz explains, the scientific evidence is overwhelming. that's why the president released a comprehensive climate action plan in june. his plan is reasonable, it's afofrdable, and it will protect our atmosphere for our children and future generations. it will make our country the global leader in the clean energy economy of the future. in past hearings and markups and in debates on the floor, republicans on this committee and in the house have opposed many elements, included in the president's plan. last congress the house voted 53 times to block action on climate

change. this congress, the house voted to slash funds for clean energy industry. the funding for international negotiations on a climate treaty. our committee refused to listen to the scientists of the last two years, subcommittee ranking member rush and i have written 27 letters requesting hearings on climate change. until today, no hearing was ever scheduled. i hope today will mark the start of the change in approach. that's why my question for house republicans is simple -- what's your plan? if you don't like the plan, what's your proposal. the president said he's willing to listen to other ideas for protecting our planet and fulfilling our moral obligations

to future generations. what are yours? yesterday we held a forum to hear from americans who are already experiencing the impact of climate change. from california to new york, from iowa to texas. we heard stories of wild fire, droughts, floods, sea level rise, and record temperatures. their accounts were moving and powerful. the extreme weather events are happening now. they are costing lives, destroying livelihoods, eliminating jobs, creating billion dollar disaster relief legislation. we need to start addressing this enormous threat now. the longer we wait, the more damage we will cause, the more deeply we will need to cut carbon pollution. the bigger the bill will be for taxpayers and the further we will fall behind china and germany in the race to develop

the new energy technologies of the future. the president was right. we don't have time for another meeting of the flat earth society, saying no to every solution is not a plan. doing nothing is not a plan. if all of the republicans on in committee do today is criticize, they're denying the science or ignoring it. no one can accept what the scientists are telling us and plan to support a plan of action. i hope we can move past denial and start a constructive dialogue. the secretary and administrator have both told me they want to work with the stake holders and implementing the president's plan. here with congress, especially with this committee, which has vast jurisdictions over the nation's energy policies. we should listen closely to their testimony today, where we disagree.

let's offer alternative solutions. the climate clock is ticking and too much is at stake for more politics as usual. thank you, mr. chairman for this chance for an opening statement. >> thank you, mr. waxman. i'd like to recognize the chairman of the full committee, mr. upton, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. today's hearing is about oversight of the president's climate change policies and activities. and it's 'tis appointing that 11 agencies, which had ample notice to identify witness, including sign tifss and work with staff to accommodate them on different panels chose instead to decline our request. climate policy is a central feature and given the billions of dollars currently being spent on climate activities, no good reason for so many agencies to decide they cannot testify before this committee. when the administration first attempted to impose its climate policies on the american public through the cap in trade legislation, we needed a reality

check. and at that time, it was noted that without meaningful international participation, jobs and omissionings would simply shift overseas and there would be no meaningful impact on carbon emissions or the changings that may result from those emissions. other nations would seek to grow their own economies and would naturally take advantage of u.s. economic and manufacturing weaknesses. we heard that firsthand in this committee. last week, the labor department reported 11.3 million are still unemployed. and 7.9 million in involuntary part time workers whose hours have been cut back and unable to find fulltime jobs. it makes no sense to impose a harmful policy. one i might remind folks was

reject in the front door here in congress by senate democrats. the administration is now working to circumvent congress through the back door, seeking to regulate what it was unable to legislate, no matter, perhaps, what the cost to jobs or the economy really is. thoughtful oversight is necessary so that the public can understand more clearly what is happening and what the impacts of the administration's climate policies may be. i believe it's a disservice to the public to suggest a policy approach, meanleful address climate risks which in fact it will not despite tens of billions spent and countless jobs lost. so today, with the help of america's newfound energy abundance, the u.s. is the envy of the world. as it relates to energy access and the development of energy resource, we stand at the threshold of profound economic opportunity for the nation and future generations. so we should pursue constructing

a new architecture of abundance as a central feature for future economic strength and the economic foundation to address climate risks. there should be no question that the economic wear with all will provide a wide avenue of information and energy and environmental challenges of the future. yes, it is good to have secretary moniz and administrator mccarthy before us. you two stand at the center of those spoils in the nation and you'll play positive or negative roles to ensure a strong, vibrant future. how do you intend to address the abundance, what should the agency's roles be in access to abun can'ted affordable resources that are so necessary to meeting future challenges and

making our nation more competitive. i look forward to having that discussion. i yield back my time. >> gentleman yields back. i recognize mr. tomko. >> thank you, thank you for holding this important hearing. the international panel on climate change will issue the latest report summarizing the findings of recent climate science. it's likely to reiterate the report they sent us five years ago. the planet is warming, sea level is rising and a significant degree of this change is attributable to human activities. higher sea levels create more perilous conditions when hurricanes approach the coast. significant losses for farmers and ranchers and set the stage for more intense wide spread forest fires. our infrastructure, our

community, our economy are all vulnerable to these changes. add to the facts that the infrastructure is aging and we're neglecting to maintain the very systems we rely on to support a modern thriving society. we can continue along our current path leaving states and local governments to fend for themselves as they patch things together as they wear out, are damaged, or destroyed. or we can use the intellectual and entrepreneurial resources we have to address the challenge. our current path leaves tremendous opportunities for job creation, social progress, and economic growth untapped. it wastes resources, especially human resources. president oh what realized this and offered a modest, balanced plan to rebuild and redesign the modern infrastructure we require for the future. the administration's plan seeks

to realize the potential of cleaner energy technology. at the same time, the plan recognizes the important role that fossil fuels play in our economy. we continue to use these fuels as will other nations, but that does not mean we need to use them inefficiently or without regard to the increasing risk that they pose for the future of our planet. our citizens could be employed building the transportation, energy, and water infrastructure. our manufactures could be supplying a high speed rail, energy efficient vehicle, fuel cells, advanced batteries. other nations are moving forward, insentiveizing and positioning themselves and their citizens for the future. they are thinking long term. while we subject our nation to austerity and endless series of

stop gap funding bills. this is not the bold and inspired thinking that created this nation and made tid great nation it is. no one set out to put our planet on a new trajectory. it has happened. the president's plan is a fine start. i'm pleased we have secretary moniz and administrator mccarthy here with us today. the two officials and the agencies are tasked with a great deal of responsibility for making this plan a success. thank you both for being here this morning. i though is not our last hearing on this topic. and that we will have additional opportunities to hear from other federal agencies. a lot of work to do and we've wasted too much time already. thank you for holding this very important hearing. with that, i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. at this time, i would like to recognize secretary moniz, five

minutes for his opening statement. and once again, thank you for joining us this morning. be sure to turn your microphone on. >> thank you, thank you, again, mr. chairman and ranking member waxman, members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to speak about the president's climate action plan and in particular, the doe's role in its implementation. i'll start with saying the evidence is overwhelming, the science b is clear. the threat from climate change is real and urgent. the basic science is simple carbon dioxide makes the earth warmer and we emit it more and more at a rate that's long been misunderstood to have a cumulative impact. the green house gas above all from the combustion of fossil fuels is affecting the climate. carbon dioxide is important because of the magnitude and

because it's long live in the atmosphere. all of this was known a long time ago. what was not anticipated was the pace at which energy needs would grow to serve 7 billion people on the planet with rapid industrialization. every ton exposes our children and grandchildren. we can say that rising sea levels increasingly severe drought, heat waves, wild fires, and major storms are amplified by a warming climate. this is costing our economy billions a year and common sense and prudence demand we take action. that's the driving force behind the president's climate action plan and the three pillars are to cut carbon pollution domestically, to prepare for the worsening impacts of climate change and prepare for the climate change impacts. my focus will be what can the u.s. do domestically to release

carbon pollution and the doe's role in the climate action plan. first, use our energy more intelligently. i'm committed to energy efficiency and to reduce energy bills for familiar lips and businesses. department of energy also plays a central role in developing the low carbon tex nolings of the future. coal and natural gas will remain significant sources of energy in the years to come and that's why due issued $8 billion in loan guarantees for advanced fossil energy technologies that reduce carbon omissions. doe committed $6 billion on clean coal technologies all with the goal of enabling the use of fossil fuels in a carbon constrains world. doe released a paper called revolution now that outlined some of the critical clean energy developments for wind, solar, l.e.d.s, and e.v.

batteries. the key message is the pattern of dramatic cost reductions, strong government rd&d, supporter policy, and rapidly decreasing employment like the story of one conventional natural gas production that unfolded in the last 30 years. a clear indicator of the transformation is the business model evolution taking place in the utility sector in response to energy efficiency and renewable energy market trends. changes in energy technologies take time, sustained investment, and stable policies, even in the age of budget austerity, we need to make sure we continue to invest in clean energy. as part of the president's climate action plan, the department of energy will also assist in the development of the quadrennial energy review.

i might add, my grandchildren are 8 and 10, so i'm excited to be part of the president's plan to reduce the risks of climate change. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. secretary. madam administrator mccarthy, you're recognized for your opening statement. >> congressman waxman, members

of the committee. i should be on. i should be on. in june, the president reaffirmed his commitment to reducing carbon pollution when he directed many agencies including the epa to take steps to mitigate the damage caused by carbon dioxide and to prepare for changes that have been set in motion. climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time. scientists are convinced that human-caused climate change is occurring. if the changing climate goes unchecked, it will have devastating impacts on the united states and on our planet. responding to climate change is an urgent public health, national security and environmental imperative that presents an economic challenge as well as an economic opportunity. both the economy and the environment must provide for current and future generations. we can and must embrace cutting

carbon pollution as a spark for innovation for job growth, clean energy and economic growth. the nation's success over the past 40 years makes clear that environmental protection and economic growth do go hand in hand. the act to direct agencies to address climate change. preparing for impacts of a changing climate and leading international efforts to combat climate change. epa plays a critical role in the plan's first pillar, which is cutting carbon pollution. in the last four years, the epa has begun to address this task. epa and the highway transportation and safety administration, we worked together to set green house gas and fuel economy standards for model years 2012 to 2025 light duty vehicles.

over the life of those vehicles, the standards will save an estimated $1.7 trillion for consumers. it will cut consumption by $12 billion barrels and reduce green house emissions by $6 billion metric tons. epa with model year 2014 and 2018, heavy duty trucks and buses present a similar success story. a second phase of strds. the president asked the epa to work with state, utilities, and other key stake holders to develop plans to produce carbon pollution from future and existing power plants. epa will propose standards for future power plants.

existing plans are already planned with expertise to help inform the development of the standards which we expect to issue in june of 2014. states will have the primary role in developing and implementing plans to address carbon pollution from existing plans, allowing us to capitalize while accounting for regional diverty and providing ample flexibility. the plan calls for the development of a comprehensive strategy to address methane emissions. epa will reduce methane emissions through incentive-based programs. the president's plan calls for a broad array of actions to strengthen the resilience to climate impacts. epa will incorporate impacts to implement existing programs and will develop information and tools to help decision makers

including state, localities, and tribes to better understand the current effects and future effects that we know are coming in a changing environment. epa working closely with the federal agency counterparts on building national resilience, including developing the national drought resilience partnership, ensuring the security, and protecting our water utilities. the president's plan recognizes that we must couple action at home with leadership abroad. working closely with the state department, epa will continue to engage international partners and efforts to reduce pollution through activity including partnership methods to address emissions and other pollutants. in conclusion, the president's plan provides a road map for federal action to meet the challenges of a changing

climate. to promote clean energy solutions to capitalize on american innovation and that drive economic growth. thank you again. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you, madam mccarthy. before i begin my questions, i would like to ask unanimous consent to introduce a few relevant documents into the record. i would like to enter the president's climate action plan. two, the invitation letter sent to the federal agencies requesting witnesses today. the majority committee staff hearing memorandum. i would like to enter the special supplement to the bulletin of the american meteorological society released this month and entitled explaining 2012 events from a climate perspective. excerpts from the annual energy outlook, 2013, including a chart reflecting world energy related carbon dioxide emissions,

1990-2040 and a table reflect ing world carbon die di oxide emissions for 1990 through 2040. and making energy access meaningful published this summer in the national scientist publication, issues in science and technology. without objection, the documents will be entered into the record. at this time, i recognize myself for five minutes of questions. recently in the august break, i spent time at some universities in the state of kentucky. and in talking to students, one of the major concerns was trying to find a job upon graduation. i started thinking about that. i looked back at the last 62 years, the unemployment rate in america, and the last four

years, 2009 through 2012 the unemployment rate has been higher in america than at any time in the last 62 years except for three of those years. the president said as we transition which we know cannot be done overnight, and the president talks about all of the above policy, but america is the only country in the world where you cannot build a new coal power plant because the emissions standards cannot be met because the technology is not available. we know regulations on existing plants will be coming out in 2014 in june. but in that speech, the president said -- and in talking about his action plan, that we must provide special programs

for people who lose their jobs. and i quoted, there have been significant closures of electricity production plants using coal and over 151 coal mines have been closed. so i would ask either one of you, what are the special plans in the president's action plan to help address these people who are losing their jobs because of these policies? >> let me begin -- i just want to indicate that i think that i and i think the environmental protection agency have been sensitive that we have to be sensitive to the economic consequences of our action. >> mrs. mccarthy, do you know

specifically what plan is in effe effect? he talks about the special plans to address the concern of these people who lose their job s? >> not familiar with the details of those plans. but i am familiar from reading the climate action plan that the president sees this as a challenge and an economic opportunity. >> after looking at the chart, the climate act tess plan, there's one chart referred to as the green cabinet. how does the green cabinet differentiate from the regular presidential cabinet? >> mr. chairman, sir, the green cabinet denotes there are occasional meeting of principals from the agencies who have a special responsibility in the climate action plan so we can

get together and discuss a coordination of program, make sure they're not -- not duplications. so it a subgroup of a cabinet that meets periodically together with key white house presidential assistance to discuss the general set of issues around a climate. >> who is the person in the secretary of energy responsible for the coordination of all of the task forces relating to climate change in the government? >> well, of course, i considered myself as having ultimate responsibility. but the -- >> designated. >> the action officer, if you like, is my chief of staff, kevin nobloc who's keeping track of all of our responsibilities under the c.a.p. >> kevin -- >> yes. >> and who's your designated person for this. >> we have two primary components. a mitigation strategy. we're managing out of our

audience. we have our office of policy directed by the associate administrator. >> i noticed the g.a.o. in the budget, there's $22 billion allocated for climate change, action plan for 2013. how much of that money will be allocated to the -- to the epa? >> i'm sorry, could you repeat the question? >> there's $22 billion planned to be spent in 2013, fiscal year 2013. how many of that money was allocated to epa? >> i can't answer that question, sir. i'm happy to follow up. >> you know from the secretary's position, how much -- >> i think the problem first of all is how one counts. the -- for example, our if we count our energy efficiency

programs which of course have the objective of saving money and also would be a good part of the solution for climate change, let's add $1 billion there. but if we talk about all of the programs that are helpful for climate change, about $5 billion mostly in the r&d budget. as i say, most of that is for efficiency, nuclear power, clean technologies, actually throw in infusion. the one exception one might say is the substantial resources we devote to carbon capture and sequestration to make it competitive in a low carbon world. >> thank you, my time is expired. recognize mr. waxman for five minutes of questioning. >> in your testimony, you describe the dangers we face from climate change? is it too late to protect the planet from the worst effects of

climate change? >> we cannot avoid the implications we're speaking of today. in my view, this decade is the critical one. >> how much time do we have? can we afford to wait to act? >> it will be a long-term commitment but we have to act in this decade because, as i said, the co-2 problem is cumulative and every ton we emit, you can check it off against the children and grandchildren. >> this congress is the do nothing climate. we're doing worse than nothing. we're obstructing progress. you've been accused of leading a war on coal. in 2009, the president supported market-based legislation to make major carbon pollution reductions while investing $60

million, develop clean coal technologies like carbon capture and sequestration, is that right? >> that's my understanding. >> the chairman said this is the only country in the world where coal plants cannot be built. you haven't released any regulations to prevent coal plants from being built, have you? >> we have not, no. at the time our bill is being criticized for being too generous to the coal industry. all of the republicans on the committee and the coal industry opposed the legislation despite the massive investment in that industry. we want to invest in innovative approaches so coal can still be used. republicans opposed us. last year, i tried a different approach. i wrote an op-ed calling for an emissions fee to put a price on

carbon. i support the revenues raised for raising taxes. republicans outside of the house some of them supported it. in fact, house republicans opposed every idea that's been raised for addressing climate change. you promulgated everything from cars and trucks. house republicans voted to strip you of the authority to regulate those emissions, isn't that right? >> that is my understanding. >> they like the idea of energy efficiency. but i look at their record, they voted to block enforcement of requirements of energy efficient

lightbulbs but they voted to cut funding for energy efficiency programs. the same is true for research to develop the solar, wind, and other clean energy technologies of the future. within your department, there's a division called aarpa-e which invested in advanced research projects widely pratzed by the scientific and research committee for finding break through technology. this year, the house appropriations committee voted to slash the budget by 80%. is that right? >> that is correct six? >> committee members argue against u.s. efforts to do anything about emissions because our nation is at a competitive disadvantage. they say we need a global approach but then the appropriations committee votes

against the u.n.'s framework on climate change which is the international body charged with negotiating an international committee. what's your plan. it's easy to criticize other people's solutions. if all you do is criticize you're either a climate denier, you don't think it needs to be done. the science doesn't warrant it. it's not happening, or they're

ignoring the warning of scientists. we have a narrow window to act. we should be starting to act now. we need to stop ignoring the scientists and listen to them, mr. chairman, tell us what your plan is. don't just criticize. we're facing a serious problem, not for the future, but right now with extreme weather events. >> the gentleman's time is expired. i recognize the gentleman from michigan, mr. upton for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's important that as we conduct oversight on climate change and energy we reflect on the statutory frameworks of the agency implementing such policy. as we reflect back to doe, it was at the time of energy constraints way back in the

1970s. you would agree, dr. moniz, we're currently if a new era of north american energy abundance. where i believe and i think the staff could show that as well we could be energy independent by north america by using all of the resources that are available. i would like for you to comment on that as part of the record. >> certainly, mr. chairman, the president and i are both very supportive of the all of the above energy strategy within a world we're working to stop co-2 emissions. >> on page 10 of the plan on the natural gas bullet, it says it refers to the natural gas or bridge. is it the policy of d.o.e. to consider nation ral gas as a

bridge fuel? >> we support clean safe production of natural gas and i might add, of so-called unconventional oil. >> so as we look at what you may be doing as an agency to approve or considering export applications for lng, is a bridge fuel, is that part of the discussion or the debate? >> no, sir, that's not been part of the discussion to date. >> our approach to the exports is, by law, to approve them unless we rule it -- we rule an application as not in the public interest. the public interest determination has many -- many facets. we have given as you know another two applications, conditional approvals recently. i should emphasize the final approval will require the environmental review of -- through ferc and coming back

through the department of energy. >> i know as i looked at the situation particularly as we try to become north american energy independent, the new discoveries and fields that we've been able to find of natural gas are exciting, positive change. we look at the advent of the manufactured vehicles using natural gas. we look at the fleets, ups, at&t and others to be able to convert those vehicles to natural gas. major manufacturer in my district, eaton looking at natural gas trucks. locomotive railroads, looking at perhaps a positive transition from diesel to natural gas. then the work of caterpillar and general electric.

and see if we'll have a positive impact on our economy. mrs. mccarthy, does epa consider natural gas abundance? >> epa views it as a positive for air quality, as an opportunity for us domestically. to be safe and secure in our energy supplies. our responsibility is doing it as safely as we can working within the industry. >> i talk to the railroad folks and we talked about the potential change conversion to natural gas. is it that the regulations may

change impacting the, quote, payback period as it relates to the epa considering new regulations to do that? >> any regulation that epa would consider are going to be thoughtfully considered. epa is investing heavily in the opportunities to gather the data, to work with the industry in a collaborative way. we see this as a very positive collaboration moving forward. we see this as a significant opportunity to reduce air pollute tants and to move forward in a safe and effective domestic supply. i see no reason for concern that that situation is going to change and people won't be able to rely on this as a cleaner fuel moving forward.

>> may i put a footnote in with your permission. i want to say to chairman up ton. i would add to the list and fracking, less oil use and better air quality. >> thank you, plk. this time i recognize the gentleman from california, mr. mcer inny for five-minute ms. >> i would like to explore two things in my five minutes. first, the confidence that you have that climate change is taking appalachian, and as caused by large degree by human activities. and secondly, if action is taken to combat climate change will harm or benefit the economy. but first, would you address the first question, how confident are you that climate change is taking place and is it a

significant threat and is it caused by large degree by human activity. >> the scientific community overwhelmingly endorses the statements and i peshlly do as i said in a previous hearing before this committee. i think the -- my confidence in those statements does not rely just on b the results of some very complicated computer models but simple arithmetic in terms of what's fwhoen for a long time about the strength of c.o.-2 -- the green house effect and that the amount that we are emitting is of a scale that within decades, we would reach areas such as doubling preindustrial emissions which have always been viewed as being highly, highly risky. >> thank you. >> i would like to address my second question to you in this form -- how have higher standards such as those as fuel efficiency helped drive

innovation and create jobs? >> well, we have worked with the auto industry in particular in the past few years to understand what they need to have certainty moving forward on air quality standards, on fuel efficiency, on green house gas standards. we have worked together. as a result of our rules, we have been able to support the industry in a robust sort of reear in jens of that industry, both domestically and internationally. we're proud of the work we've done together. we're delivering fuel efficient vehicles in consumers the way they want them, saving money, reducing green house gases, and we believe we're part of the auto industry's effort to gain a competitive advantage that's to a great advantage of jobs and economy in this country. >> you believe detroit is become more competitive with these higher fuel standards. >> we believe so. >> thereby freeing more jobs. >> we know certainty is important moving forward. we have provided this industry a

path forward until 2025. that gives them the opportunity to do research, develop new technology, and to have a solid footing moving forward. >> thank you. >> if i may add, sir, on the auto side, i think it's a bigger story going back to when the auto industry in this country lookled like it was on its last legs. a whole combination of issues for support from gm and chrysler, assuming they have proper restructuring for the future. to loan guarantees for ford and nissan. nissan built a plant in tennessee because of that loan guarantee, to preparing for the future with electric vehicle markets and the great success story of tesla, we can talk about fisker, which we all know is a different issue today. this portfolio took us to a vibrant auto industry growing faster than the chinese industry? >> any other technology or items

that energy efficiency or work toward renewable energy has created jobs that you like to poi point to?

asally, it will be needed the example i gave in new jersey , to provide resilience against extreme weather events we are seeing more of. >> thank you. i would like to recognize see chairman from texas. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to welcome our two witnesses and give you the red badge of courage for showing up. we indicted 13 agencies -- we invited 13 agencies. i don't know if you got the long straws or whatever, but you two are here and we are glad you are

here. we didn't hear from the department of agriculture, defense, interior, , orportation, nasa international agency for development. two have been here before and we are glad you are both here. you and the other 11 agencies got a letter dated august the sixth 2013 asking you to attend and it asked you to answer nine questions. when mr. waxman was speaking in his q&a, he said that the obama administration has spent about $60 billion on climate change. the number i had was $70 billion. this is really an effort to let the obama administration put

their best foot forward. we asked nine questions and i asked the staff if you're agencies had answered these questions. i am told that they have not. i'm going to read them into the record and then give you briefly a chance to see if you can give us these answers. the first question that we asked your agency was to describe the climate change related research and technology programs that you are actively engaged in, including programs or activities undertaken with other federal agencies. we didn't get an answer to that. we asked you to describe the climate change adaptation, litigation or sustainability related activities you are engaged in, including activities engage with other federal agencies. we asked you to identify the interactions, in which your agency is currently dissipating in or has

participated in since january of 2005, didn't get one to that. you to identify all climate change or clean energy related funding, grants or financial assistance programs which your agency is currently participating or has participated in and the amount of climate change or clean energy related funding, grants and financial assistance distributed by your agencies since january of 2005. didn't get an answer to that third we asked you to identify all the regulations or guidance documents, including regulations or standards to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is your proposed by your agency since 2005 or under development. didn't get an answer to that. all the you to identify climate change related ,nternational negotiations didn't get an answer to that.

provide the approximate amount of annual agency funding contributed to climate change activities for the fiscal years 2005 to 2012, didn't get an answer to that. ascribe the actions that your agency has undertaken to respond to the executive order by the president 13514, including the approximate cost, personnel and other resources dedicated by your agency to implement that executive order. didn't get an answer to that. mr. chairman. and last but not least provide a agencies within your office that are working toward climate change. part-time or full-time. guess what? we didn't get an answer to that. asking thisas been committee and the subcommittee to hold hearings on president

obama's climate change efforts. all year long. we asked nine questions and we did not get one straight answer. are you trying to hide something? are you embarrassed by a? or do you just not care to respond to the congress? i am very happy to come and discuss any and all of those questions. i will address a few of them now if you would like. , the question on regulations and standards is clear. efficiency standards is what we do in this regard. programs, as i said earlier, our last budget fy 13 enacted, the question is ambiguous.

but if we take all of the programs that help address climate change, even if they have other objectives like efficiency, then that count would come to about 5.4 billion. there are multiple objectives like fuel diversity the, fossil fuel. secretary, i do appreciate that you're making an effort to answer. we asked thesed, questions a long time ago and we would appreciate for you to respond to that. >> the point i am trying to make is, we are trying to have a good faith effort here to have a real dialogue, but in order to have a dialogue we have to have the facts. we are being stonewalled, which means the american people are being stonewalled. these are not complicated questions and they are not trick questions. if the obama administration has

is great climate change action plan, every one of these questions should be able to be answered in detail and in glowing terms. i would hope that you two representatives of the obama administration, first of all, smart, you have integrity, you have work to this committee. give us the straight facts and then we will have a debate over what those facts mean. >> you quoted me as saying the $60 billion has been spent, but my statement was that we propose $60 billion to be spent under our legislation. secondly, it is unprecedented cabinetto have to members come to the subcommittee. i hardly call that stonewalling. >> we are talking about different figures. i wasn't saying it was 60

instead of 70. it is what we were propose to spend in the cabin and trade bill. >> i would like to recognize the gentleman from michigan. mr. dingell for five minutes. >> i thank you for your courtesy mr. chairman. administrator mccarthy. welcome back to the committee. congratulations on your new position as epa administrator. we wish you great good luck as you take on this new position. secretary, we welcome you to the committee. gentlemen and ladies, these questions will be yes or no. i will request that you give us some additional information as a after the response has been made. for both of our witnesses, and does epa or the department of energy see a future for coal as a viable energy source in light

of the impending greenhouse gas regulations e please answer yes or no and then submit additional information for the record. >> yes don persimmon. agree, yes. >> i understand there will be a different proposal for modified unit set up an updated and also for units that have not been modified. can you tell me if the epa is reaching out to all stakeholders concerned about components of the greenhouse gas rule? please answer yes or no. >> to the best ability we can, yes we are. also, madam please administrator, submit more information for the record? is the epa thinking about a unit

by unit compliance goal for existing at modified source carbon standards? please answer yes or no. >> we are thinking about that and a number of other trickle -- and other different strategies. >> the debate about climate .hange is not just about their it is also about water. the debate about climate change is not just about air. it is also about water. the greatl know that lakes contain 20% of the world's freshwater. luckily our water levels are up slightly this year after years of in adequate ice cover on the lakes and too little precipitation, rain and snow. lake levels affect not only shipping and boating and recreation, but also make it ,asier for algae blooms to form

endangered fish habitats and drinking water sources as well as industrial and cooling water intakes. madam administrator, do you believe that the president's climate action plan provides the withtion for epa to deal the unique problems of the great lakes? please answer yes or no. >> yes. willie epa under your leadership continue to work with other federal and state agencies to address climate related problems of the great lakes? yes or no. >> yes. >> in dealing with water quality, do you believe the epa has adequate clarification of its jurisdiction under the clean air act -- under the clean water of, to ensure detection water sources. >> not as yet, but we are certainly working on that. >> i want you to give us some additional response on that, because that is a matter of the

concern, i think to you, and it is to me to. administrator, as these problems on the great lakes become more frequent, do you believe the epa will need further clarification of its clean water act jurisdiction? please answer yes or no. >> yes i do. >> madam administrator, i believe you are finding that the actions taken by the congress to foreclose you and epa from giving us additional work in terms of rules and regulations clarifying the supreme court decision are extremely unhealthy, am i correct? yes or no. difficult.them very seen a i'm sure you have recent map published in the showing whatraphic would happen if all the worlds eyes were to melt. while this is a drastic

scenario, it shows almost all of florida and all of new jersey submerged. it was not the map, however, that intrigued me most. the map showed little or no effect on the great lakes. , alongbelieve the epa with other federal agencies, have the tools necessary to predict what effect climate change might have on the great lakes? basin and the region in which they exist tom a yes or no? >> yes. >> will you submit additional information? >> yes, i will. >> i have additional questions for you, mr. secretary, about what it is you will do about potential shortages and whether we have shortages coming on electric power because of the actions that are going to have to be taken with regard to

global warming and matters of that kind. and how that is going to affect our future in terms of reliability and availability of electric power. >> i would just note, sir, that we have a report, phone ability of the energy structure, that will answer your question. that in anrojections unconstrained world pertaining to greenhouse gas emissions, we could see a two foot drop and the level of the great lakes in this century which would be very disruptive. >> industry is going to make a large number of retirements of plants because of -- >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much.

whether orment about not climate change is taking about i know one thing this argument that mr. barton had with the gentleman from california. something that is taking place is the taxing of the hard- working people of this country is taking place. mr. chairman, thank you for your open statement when you set out. it wasn't an estimate on your funding fore change climate science technology international assistance and approximately $70 billion from 2008 to 2012. mr. barton, you got better answers than i got. by no answer you got a better answer than i received from mrs. mccarthy about a year ago in the science committee. i may have asked your question that you didn't like. your answer was, i am not in the

job of creating jobs. i'm not in the business of creating jobs. that is out of the record itself. if youword therefore you wanted to apologize to the millions of people who are unemployed and many of them hungry. i have never seen that apology to this day. actually, mr. chairman, i would consent to submit more my questions in writing. i have more than the five minutes will allow me to make here. i yield back the time. i think both the witnesses for appearing. >> at this time, i recognize digital men from new york. >> thank you, mr. chairman. reduce ouroing to

carbon pollution, we need to deploy more clean energy and boost energy efficiency. yesterday, the department of energy released his report showing that wind and solar electricd lighting and vehicles are growing rapidly in this country as a result of well-designed federal and state incentives. and investments in research and development. the reportsaid, finds that as a result of these measures, and i quote, the historic shift to a cleaner or domestic energy future is not some far away goal. we are living it and it is gaining force. i would like to ask your unanimous consent to enter this report into the record, mr. ciriaco the report contained a particular striking graph about the cost and deployment of wind energy in the united states. when capacity has skyrocketed in our country. i believe the committee has that graph. we are posting it. thank you.

iz, what has been the key to empower success? think the story as i alluded to earlier, is actually the same story that we saw it decades ago with unconventional natural gas. we had investment from the federal government. we had public and private partnerships, and we had time- limited, well-crafted incentives that had these things taking off. we are seeing the same thing with wind. as we can see, the deployment is very striking. of course the costs, certainly in good wind areas, ours competitive with other sources. he report has similar graphs and the same kind of message with photovoltaics. it is not fully appreciated how

competitive solar is already in the right conditions, which is typical for this stage of the technology penetrating the market. >> is your response for solar as strong as is when? >> stronger. >> super. leds is totally incredible. it has gone from 50,000 to 20 million deployed in the country in a very short time. $15cost has gone from 50 to , and a lifetime savings from one led is over $100. we do to ensure that is utilized fully so we can achieve the same levels of success? >> first of all, as is a maintain commitment to

, andesearch development deployment push. these will be market competitive technologies come again, sooner rather than later. we would like to capture the developments these and that involves other things that we are doing such as, for example, the advanced manufacturing partnership, to really help establish a cutting- edge manufacturing capacity and training in this come in a -- and training in this country. >> energy efficiency is one of the cheapest and most costs effective ways to reduce carbon pollution while saving consumers money. it is a big art of the department of energy's responsibilities under the president's plan. for new energy efficiency standards for appliances and equipment.

>> the standards applied to ,educing all of our emissions carbon emissions as well as conventional pollutants, by reducing our energy needs substantially. i want to emphasize, all of our rules have a cost-benefit test and they also save money for consumers. upfront, marginal increases are overwhelmed by the energy savings at the consumer level. >> some believe that taking action to address climate change will kill jobs and cost consumers money. is that an accurate description of these energy efficiency standards? >> no, we believe that they create jobs, for one thing, by saving money. in the economy, that can be devoted to other purposes. in addition, it gives us

products that we can sell globally. >> i see that my time is up, mr. chair. >> i recognize the gentleman from illinois for five minutes. >> again, welcome. i'm glad to have both earlier today. ourtary moneiz, energy plan must have a strong nuclear component. >> we are supporting nuclear power, yes. >> to consider nuclear programs to be a critical part of this administration's plan? >> yes, it is all of the above and nuclear is strongly there. the only person who voted against licensing was the then who was appointed

by the president. so you have the presidentially appointed chairman casting the only no vote for licensing a new nuclear power plant in this country. administration, how many nuclear reactors have closed down? we have one in new jersey, wisconsin, california, florida -- without the vote to license by the chairman of the nrc who is appointed by the president. i will give you that point. you have to bring me a point on jobs. a lot of jobs have been lost by the shutdown of these nuclear facilities. under the presidents climate action plan, the epa is expected to propose a rule later this week setting greenhouse gas standards for new power plants that will require ccs technologies for any new coal plant built in the u.s..

this is effectively, as many of us fear, and administered a mccarthy knows where i stand on this, a ban on new coal-fired power plants. you believe, as a secretary of energy, that it is defensible for the epa to impose regulations that bands construction of new coal-fired power plants in this country? from an energy position of the baseload demand requirements of this country and low-cost power, obviously, we are moving coal- fired power plants from the fleet, which will raise costs. >> i might add, there are lots of activities already. >> is the doe aware of any u.s.

commercial scale power generation plants using coal as a fuel that captures, transports and permanently stores carbon dioxide? >> as you know, there have been a number of demonstrations -- >> that is not the question. >> 75% complete in mississippi. >> not generating and not storing. >> if i may add, it is not a power plant. but we should not ignore that. >> that is another point very >> we have had the great plains weyburn plant. on a -- >> the point is, you know ccs takes billions of dollars. there is no mercy available technology to do it. for these new rules to be promulgated, it is a signal that we are not going to build new untilired power plants that is at least demonstrated ability to have the technology and the concern is the costs are

going to be great. mccarthy, has epa ever established a new source performance standards for an omission source on the basis of technology that has not and commercially proven by operation at commercial scale? , for have in the past example, our use of scrubbers -- >>en as an innovative but it was commercially available at the time. that is the difference between the clean air debate and the greenhouse gas debate. isthe greenhouse gas debate not available. that is the number one concern that we have. do you agree with that? >> the rule has yet to be issued, but i will say that this is an issue that was heavily

discussed. that is the reason why we are repurposing. we will have a full debate on this when the rule goes out. i would indicate to you that this rule is not about the existing facilities, it is about the future plants that are being constructed. there are four plants now being constructed that are planning on and designing in ccs at levels that would beat anything we had proposed in our earlier -- >> and i hope you are right, and i hope it is successful. it will be costly. i'm going to end on this, chairman. i think you have litigation issues that are unknown. the state of illinois is primed for this, as you know. you are doing your research there. , thankre other issues you mr. chairman. i yield back. >> will you provide us a list of those four plants you just

referred to? >> certainly. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to welcome administered mccarthy and i look forward to our discussion and i have enjoyed it so far. i have been concerned in the past that the epa has not taken the doe's concern about reliability seriously and there are utility rules. can you commit to giving difference on grid reliability when drafting a rule for existing power plants? is a part of the consideration of the epa? >> we have worked hand-in-hand in developing this proposal. >> i see the secretary shaking his head, too. i'm glad you are working together. even though we want as clean air as we can, we still want to turn on the lights. particularly in texas have our air conditioning in the summer. i generally support the research

and international efforts to address greenhouse gas emissions that the administration is undertaking when it comes to regular in carbon. i see that congress should move past its gridlock and develop a regulatory plan instead of the epa. i think congress ought to do our theand i particularly asked supreme court. until congress to to legislate again, we can't sit here and complain about the epa for doing what the supreme court says it has the authority. climate change is real and something that congress should act on. secretary, where are we with ccs technology? i know the plant in mississippi may be up and running in the next year, but even that is not charity. when the reason lately -- wendy -- >> certainly carbon cast sure -- certainly carbon capture is demonstrated

technology. we continue to invest in new technologies that will further reduce cost. used technologies in various places. certainly in the petrochemical industry. in the great plains plant in the second place. sequestration side, our storage side, as i said earlier, there is one field in weyburn that has already stored 20 , largely in texas, actually. we are using 60 megatons a year for producing 300,000 barrels of oil. this is a growing concern. the components are all there. >> i think some of our concern is that we don't want the

requirements to get past the technology are what you can capitalize to do with it. there needs to be quarter nation there. if that technology is there and there are examples of it. in mississippi? is a timeline on when it will be up and running? >> i believe they are operating in 2014 or 2015. it is quite close. is a gasification plant. again, the co2 will go to enhance oil recovery and local feels. >> there has been success in the midland area for enhanced oil recovery? there are examples. average, in texas it is been about a half a ton stored per barrel of oil produced. it. appreciate it is a beneficial use.

we can use it for enhanced recovery. would you expect the issue in june of 2014. you said that for us to be successful, the policy has to develop economic growth. ise people say the policy only going to do harm to our economy. to what degree will utilities play a role in developing these regulations? is our formal process artie schedule that they participate in? >> epa is arty engaged in a number of utility and energy related forums. we will engage with utility at every step of the way. belief thatcerted they are taking numerous actions already. there are so many states that

already have renewable fuel standards, energy efficiency standards, they're working with their mayors to make the cities more efficient. there are ways in which we can recognize and understand how best we can shape these plans that states need to develop that will be beneficial to them on an economic perspective and beneficial to the u.s. and the world to reduce the threat of climate change. >> these power companies are actually part of that process? >> very much so. >> i recognize the gentleman from louisiana, mr. scully's, for five minutes. alise, for five minutes. >> these policies have an impact on families and the economy. we hear all the time from small

businesses. talking to my colleagues, some of the biggest impediments they have to creating jobs are policies coming out of washington. mccarthy,dministrator the policies coming out of epa seem to be at the top of that list. a lot of the threats coming out of epa, and i know you are new to the current job, but you have been at the va in different roles throughout these years. i don't know if you recognize those impacts we have talked about them before in our hearings. when you look at the climate policy that you are proposing, i want to read a comment from you recently and get your take on it. the administrator said this recently, essentially, the president said that it is time to act. he said he wasn't going to wait for congress. authorityinistrative and it was time to start utilizing those anymore

concerted way. so, when you talk about the actident's task queue to regardless of what congress does, it causes a big concern, not only to members of congress, but to people across the country who believe in a democratic ross is where republicans and democrats work together and .ongress is divided the president through are supposed to administer policies that congress has passed. presidentu encode the in saying it is time to act anyway, i hope you understand the chilling effect it sends across the country. i would like to get your interpretation on what the president said and the authority you have to act, even if congress does not put on the path that you want to. >> let me phrase the issue in a way that hopefully is a bit more positive. >> it is not positive when i hear those comments. >> i think the president has

reached out and indicated that congressional action would be something that he would want to engage in and that he would welcome. i think what he has also told us to do is look at the laws that congress has already enacted through their own public democratic assess and what have they told the agencies that their responsibility is and their authority is. we are not doing anything at epa or in the climate plan that goes outside the boundaries of what mission has said is a and our authority. >> we are concerned about some of the things you are doing in terms of them going against wishes of congress. gotcap and trade bill defeated when there was a super majority in the senate. just a few weeks ago, we in the house voted, the vote was 237-

reject the act. barbara boxer was recently quoted as saying we don't have the votes for a carbon tax or a carbon fee. i would hope he would take all of that into consideration when you are looking at climate change policies. not only did we say we don't want it, we voted to reject a carbon tax. you need to take that into consideration. congress has now said that is something that you don't have an authority. we reject that. i want to bring up, when you look at the impacts of these policies, how they are working in other countries. it has a real impact on our economy when some of these rules are proposed. some of these other countries across the globe have already tried to go down this road in terms of climate change policy that you're looking at her he did there was a revolt in australia in their government, a complete up evil because of their carbon tax. in fact there is a movement with

this new government to repeal the carbon tax. read from "the telegraph" just a few weeks ago. . times", germany's energy poverty, how electricity becomes a luxury good. it goes on and on. bills on the year way as energy prices rise again. romantic germany risks economic decline as green dreams spoils. i hope you understand, the countries that have tried this are failing miserably and they are having revolt in those countries. congress has sent a message to you, i hope you would respect those messages that a consent. look at what has happened in other countries where they are seeing dramatic declines in their economies and dramatic increases in energy costs.

these are the concerns we have as you are looking at climate policy in your agency. recognize the will of the people . >> i want toy hear point out that there is no reason you should be mindful of proposal that have passed the house if they are not law. you have got to be mindful of what the law is. you have to enforce your laws. this argument that you should pay attention to what republicans are able to pass to the house is not a law. >> thank you, also, from me. given the immediate and long- term threats imposed by climate change, i am very encouraged that we're finally having a formal discussion on this issue. the congress in action, president's climate action plan is a welcome step forward and we

need to debated because we need to cut carbon pollution and prepare for the impact of climate change. we urge the president to create a panel to prepare for climate change impacts. one of our key recommendations was to fully evaluate the impacts of this problem. climate change is already costing the federal government tens of the audience of dollars in disaster assistance. moneyesting some of this upfront in resiliency measures, we could minimize these cost impacts down the road and create jobs doing that implementation. i was pleased to see the president included a similar task force on preparedness in his climate action plan. can you discuss what the task force will be working on and to what extent it will be examining this budgetary impact? we be issuing findings concerning in action to living a more resilient infrastructure? thank you for the question.

as he recognized, the president's climate action plan focused justice heavily on the adaptation question as it did on the mitigation issues in the international component. i think he did recognize the extreme concern that communities are facing and the public health impacts associated with not recognizing that the climate is changing and preparing for that and making our communities more resilient to the changing climate. he established a task force to look at these issues. we are going to be working with every state and community. there is support already that has been issued by the department of the interior. to look at resiliency projects. $100 million as a result of the climate action plan. we all have each agency developed climate action plans. we are participating on the national forms as well as in

developing our own task forces to begin to work more effectively with communities, to integrate what we know about changing climate in the work we do. there is a great deal of work ongoing. it has been nurtured over the past two years, but it certainly has been given a boost in the action plan that we will move . >> forward ver >> doe focuses heavily on more mature technologies like solar and wind. notnt to make sure we are neglecting some other promising renewable technologies. there are several companies, ,ncluding one in my district which is developing exciting new technologies to harness energy from ocean waves, tides and currents. it was recently awarded a $500,000 doe grant to develop its wave energy technology. this only scratches the surface of public and private investment that is needed.

i was going to ask you, what to see presidents climate action plan due to expand development of marine and hydro kinetic energy technologies? >> thank you. if i may add a note to the earlier question. in addition to the task force, specific been a sp sandy task force. that will the translatable to other parts of the country. finally, under fema, we have responsibilities for doe and other parts of our national infrastructure. on your question to me, it is very important that we not forget what are sometimes called forgotten renewables. that includes hydro kinetic hydro,tides, small advanced geothermal.

we are looking to increase our emphasis on those as we go forward. >> thank you. i wouldld follow up, love to have a written response on some of the ways that you want to do that that i could take back to some promising industries in my local district that want -- that would love some support like the one that was given to eagle merit. >> time is expired. i would like to recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania. secretarymoiz, you have taken over leadership at doe. you understand the role of doe in cord knitting national energy policy. can you tell us whether doe is going to have an active role going forward in ensuring that the climate policies pursued by other federal agencies to not negatively affect the affordability and availability of energy? which weincipal way in

will be doing that over these next three years is the so- called quadrennial energy review process that will be convened out of the executive office of the president heard the department of energy will be establishing a secretariat and the analytical under pinning. that will involve the entire administration. i will be our principal role there. wean also assure you that view our job in technology development as being to innovate, to keep lowering the ours of energy for consumers and our industry. >> so you will review climate policies, regulatory initiatives of the epa that have the potential to negatively affect affordability and reliability of energy? -- we have review processes. but we will do in this context

is help provide the threads, some of the analytics to bring together all the agencies to discuss energy policy broadly, environment security economy. i administrator mccarthy, want to understand with all the climate change related programs suchyour agency pursues, as research, technology development, grants, education and outreach, does your agency determine at the outset what those programs are supposed to accomplish? and then go back and evaluate whether they actually did become as with a set out to do? >> we keep quite close tracking. i would add that many of the programs that we run our programs that congress has specifically directed us to run. make information about what these programs have achieved available to the public? >> very much so. >> can you identify for us what or where that information is available? >> i can certainly provide that

to you. >> upa has been implementing climate policies for a number of years. have you evaluated what that work is accomplished in terms of meaningfully addressing climate risk, and could you share that with the committee? >> we certainly take a look at work that we do to understand what kind of greenhouse gas reductions might have been reduced. as we all know, climate risk, reducing climate risk is a global effort. to the u.s. is participating in that effort as we can. >> does epa coordinate with other agencies when it evaluates the impact of its regulatory action relating to the power or? >> for a much so. in every regulatory process, all agencies are participating in the interagency review. part of that is to look at the cost and benefit analysis that epa produces and to comment on both of those. >> for example, have you

consulted with the department of health and human services about the impact of energy poverty or higher energy prices on health or the ability to respond to extreme weather events? >> what we have done is to ensure that we do a complete analysis to the extent that it is available to us and appropriate on what the economic consequences are of our rulemaking. we take great pains to make sure that we do not threaten reliability, nor do we put out rules that will significantly increase cost to consumers. >> one other question, the presidents climate action plan says on page 10 that quote curbing emissions is critical to our overall efforts to reduce climate change. that is identifying technologies and best practices for producing methane emissions. i should note that epa's website indicates that we can cut

methane significantly by reducing reliance on landfilling and increasing use of modern waste energy facilities like the one in my district, the solid waste management facility. will you recommend to the agency or request the importance of focusing on ways to increase the united states use of waste energy for managing nonrecyclable waste? >> we will raise that issue, but i think if you see the tone and tenor of the president's remarks in the climate action plan, it is an effort to understand where methane is being generated, how effectively the work of the industry lunch judges that will capture it, because it becomes a significant financial opportunity. those are the things we want to capitalize on. the $8 billion, loan guarantee program that we will be issuing would include

msw technologies. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> i recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. doyle. >> iq, mr. chairman. welcome, it is a pleasure to have you. your recentto say visit to pittsburgh was appreciated and well received by all of us in attendance. we hope to have you back there soon. your visit is very timely today because many of us are eagerly awaiting the first rule regulating carbon pollution from power plants. the single biggest emitter of carbon and united states. though i think you legislation to address climate change to a cap and trade system would have been an easier more direct approach to limiting our nations global warming impact, we tried that here in this committee and unfortunately we were unable to get it passed. having said that, you want to point out that where i live, in

southwestern pennsylvania, we are witnessing coal plant retirements nearly every month. it is impacting the economy and many of our constituents and potentially the reliability of the electric grid. whether that is because of low natural gas prices, environmental regulations or old age, the fact is, we are taking a lot of old power off-line and making it very difficult to build new ones. the central tenet of the presidents climate change plan is the new source performance standards for power plants. it has been widely reported that the standard for new coal-fired our plans would require some type of ccs technology to comply. i am aware of and has have supported the creation of several demonstration projects for ccs across the country. i am not aware that there is anyone that would be considered the best system of emission reduction as defined by the clean air act.

can you tell me how ccs is going to achieve that requirement, that esc are would be adequately energyrated considering cost requirements and environmental impacts? >> first of all, it is good to be here. becky for the welcome. is first thing i would say that relative to the retirements that you are discussing, we have been very strongly engaged with our energy colleagues to ensure that as retirements are happening we work with our energy office and our agency and others to make sure that those issues are managed effectively. we do not see that there is any cap in our communication system and ensuring that we can achieve those regulatory standards effectively without threatening reliability. in terms of the rule that is coming out, i do not want to speak exactly to what the rule is going to say, it would be inappropriate for me to do that, but i will say that on the basis of information that we see out

in the market today and what is being constructed and what is being contemplated, that ccs technology is feasible. it is available today. to give a signal about what is going on in the rule that needs to be put into a broader as well as a more specific context. we will meet our regulatory obligation to look at what is possible and what we should be doing for new future powerplants . frankly, the challenge is that foreed to divide certainty how you construct a coal facility in the future that will allow investment in that technology and allow the technologies that you are investing and to grow and become more and more competitive. kempneraware of the plant in mississippi that is being cited. ant light is utilizing innovative technique that pipes the carbon dioxide emissions to depleted oilfields.

it uses the co2 to force oil to the surface. pennsylvania, that is a little less realistic. unless we want to build a pipeline to texas for our co2 which is not quite practical. how is epa taking into account the regional differences that there are from different places in our country as we look at these technologies? this seems to be working, but it is not something that could work in wider company words. it is not something that could work in my neck of the woods. likeic lee, those regions southwestern pennsylvania that are still heavily dependent on fossil fuels. >> i think we recognize that the captured inhat is enhanced recovery becomes a very cost beneficial use of ccs. there's no question about that.

we also see part of that being as a result, there are significant pipelines that are being constructed to take advantage of those cost considerations. there is also an opportunity to sequester, which is i think demonstration projects and investment that the secretary can speak to, but there is also products being produced at the end of these design systems that actually can be sold. there is a variety of things that we see developing that make it very promising for coal to have a certain future as the president intends in and all of the above strategy. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> i mentioned that this rule is expected out on friday. we will be having a hearing on the proposed rule. thank you. saturday afternoon. we be here on saturday?

i recognize the gentleman from nebraska for five minutes. and unexpected surprise to go this early. i appreciate that. askingng to start off by unanimous consent to put the letter of our attorney general from nebraska, his letter to gina mccarthy, and a white paper that was done with other ag's into the record. the date of the lever is september 11, 2013. it is important to note that our attorney general's involved in this because it is an impact to our state and be we are a public power state. he is the lawyer, in essence, for our public power generators. rulesave a concern on the

that are being promulgated. i know they aren't finalized yet, but nonetheless, in regard , we haves a new fuel old coal-fired plants that probably aren't going to make it , they aren't going to be able to adhere to the new rules. the issue is can we build new plants with coal since we are only a couple hundred miles from the base in and that is the prominent feedstock for our generators. he has a question and i have a same question and that is does the epa believes that it has the legal authority to eliminate coal as a fuel for new electrical generation?

>> we have the authority and responsibility to establish standards in the case of new facilities and guidelines with the individual states looking at their own energy mix and come back to the epa with recommendations on how to comply. i believe we are moving in a sound direction but i will also caution that one of the reasons we are repurposing is because legalare a lot of concerns. i would ask that we have this conversation in a more concrete way. when a new source rule comes out , and to not project what we're doing in the new source as being appropriate or legally correct for existing facilities. neither is the case. answer andiate that it would be easier if we had the

final rule. >> we haven't even propose one yet, sir. we will have it certainly. >> we certainly have concerns regarding our ability to use the cheapest and most readily >> if i may interject. we were so shocked by the original rule that we were anticipating a numeral. -- a new world. -- rule. >> the newly proposed to be comments, ise there still room for new coal, electrical generation? >> i think the rule will provide certainty for the future of new coal moving forward at in terms of existing facilities.

we believe that coal will represent and continue to represent a significant portion of the energy supplied moving forward for decades to come. >> ok. they're been several questions regarding nuclear power as well. meet what the new greenhouse gas standards will be without nuclear power as part of the portfolio? >> i do not think the new source standard is designed to influence the existing or folia. it is designed to make sure future power plants that are being constructed take advantage of technologies that will ensure they are as clean as they can be and have a future that the carbon constrained. >> it is important to have nuclear power which has basically zero greenhouse gas to

be part of our portfolio. >> the president shows -- shares your concern. i appreciate that. note wemay add, i would went through in my view a lot of years with words and not actions. we are seeing actions and not words. $8 billion loan guarantees from nuclear new programs. i would say we are walking the talk. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from cap -- from california. >> thank you. i thank our distinguished witnesses for joining us today. administration for taking on climate change. i strongly support the goals. to cut carbon pollution and better prepare our country for the impacts of climate change.

it is real and it is happening now. it'll continue to produce devastating effects unless we take immediate action. failure to act in an urgent manner is shortsighted and detrimental to our environment and economic interests. some said will cost too much money but they neglect to consider the cost of inaction as well as a tremendous economic benefits of positioning our country as a global leader in clean energy. employs hundreds of thousands of employees. potential growth in this sector is enormous. my home district of sacramento boasts 14,000 clean energy jobs. throughout the united states, there are 119,000 of those jobs and 80,000 window jobs. thousands more are employed in energy efficiency. this is a sector that great

millions of jobs and lead to faster economic growth. but we do have competition. chinaing to the pew, dollars -- bullet that $5 billion compared to $30 billion for the u.s. we are ranked behind china, all , southpe, canada, europe africa, and japan. these other countries recognize the economic potential of clean energy will stop what are they doing to capitalize on it? >> they meaning the other countries? clearly, people are seeing tonkly, $1 trillion market developing. the development now for clean energy. to address climate and air advancen and just to technology. and certainly in a country like china as you know, it does

provide significant incentives for domestic manufacturing capacity. >> the united states has always been a leader in clean energy technology. therly, we are facing competitive challenges from abroad. the president's climate action plan is a critical step to ensure not just to be addressed the dangers of climate change but also that the united states can compete and lead in the clean energy economy of the future. secretary moniz how will the plan is spur clean energy, innovation in the united states and great new energy jobs? do you believe the united states once again lead the clean energy revolution? certainly believe we can and we must lead the revolution. i will mention two ways. example, through our bringuing loan program to

as i said earlier, many technologies. i've mentioned before utilities scale of solar post up a huge success in california. program for loan advanced fossil fuels. and for nuclear across the board for these technologies. another different kind of an initiative i alluded to earlier, advanced manufacturing initiative want to capture things like 3-d printing which can apply to new energy technologies as well as a host of other technologies. those are some the things we are moving forward. >> thank you. areepublican colleagues quick to argue that climate change will hurt the economy. a largechange imposes cboomic risk and failure --

release a report saying that delaying the action would damage by increasing the risk of costly, potential outcomes. the clean air act revised a good example of how we can make steady progress in cleaning up the air was going to be economy. since its enactment in 1970 a month cleaner air act has by two thirds. whatistrator mccarthy, does it tell us about our ability to cut pollution? >> thank you for asking the question. in our experience under the clean air act, we have significantly lowered pollution while at the same time gdp has risen and the economy has grown. doknow the economic goals not have to conflict with our environmental standards. we know in fact that this

country is where it is because we have both cleaned our environment, kept us safe and healthy for our families, recognize the public health value that it represents while we develop an economy that respects those needs as well. we're asking for that same strategy to be employed as we tackle what i believe the be the most significant health challenge which is climate change. >> thank you. >> the time is expired. the gentleman from west virginia. five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. agree that the co2 levels are increasing. some climatologists have concluded that their energy models reflect co2 levels coincide with temperature increase. we've are supposed to have

charts appear. -- up here. these are the models suggested. modelswell know, these are key components of developing climate change policy. unfortunately, as we're finding out, this a projection and here is the reality of temperature changes over the last 40 years. almost noit is been increase in temperature. very slight. evenct, the co2 levels with the greenhouse co2 level in emissions, it is increased by 60%. shown by the aerial view. also the and are the is expect -- and the antarctic is expensive. is report coming out of the united nations, it is saying

that most experts believe by 2083 thomas 70 years, the benefits of climate change will still outweigh the harm. that leaves the question today. what should be done about it? we're the testimony from the administration that all climate change is man-made and america needs to reduce its co2 emissions. assumetically, let's that all coal fire generation in america was curtailed. according to the united nations and the ipcc, this would reduce the co2 levels by merely 0.2%. by ridding all coal fire generating power in the united states. the administration needs to remind people as you heard from the chairman and the opening problems,at man-made

if we could, only represent 4% of all of the missions of the globe. natural issues for present 96%. as a result of my this administration is by virtue of these extreme a job killing regulations is putting our nation at risk. all in the idea of clinging to the notion that cutting 0.2% is going to save the world's environment. let me remind the rest of the world is not listening. the president's energy policy is not being followed. china, india, russia, europe are expanding the use of cold. if demonstration is barking on a new global initiative will stop exporting uncertainty. according to the president, he will not allow low interest loans to be made to developing

nations around the world. to come out of poverty and will continue to struggle. children will be sickened. and parish as a result of this president's support of this policy. when the biggest moral responsibilities of unisys is to help emerging nations come out of poverty. moral of the biggest responsibilities of the united states is to help emerging nations come out of hockey. it must have access to energy. energy forward for duration. for cooking. for commerce. sahara, the total amount of power they can generate in africa is a 60 watt light bulb per person. pirg three hours of day. -- per three hours a day. why should they be denied access to affordable energy so they can come out of poverty?

please send this message back to the president. this president must not prevent people from around the globe of obtaining dependable energy. and threatening american jobs -- i0.2% of a greenhouse am sorry, co2 emissions is not an acceptable energy policy. crushing the american economy to abuse of hisis an presidential authority. .2% is an abuse of his presidential authority. what level do you want it to be? millionndred parts per -- 300 parts per million? >> let's respond. a lot of issues you raised there. if i may focus down, first of

all, as i said before this committee, the issues in terms of the risk to climate change are not based upon models. it is pretty simple. number two, i do not believe anybody is ever said that all climate change is man-made. the forcesnt is that from co2 is clearly of the scale that has long been suspected to produce the change we are seeing and will see. i think we should address as many things, but let me focus on increase ofnd the warming temperatures. first of all, let's not forget this decade is the warmest decade in recorded modern history. it is not exactly like it has been cooling off. secondly, the issues of scale changes in the rate of increase are fully expected.

niño are part of this. the models did not include other issues such as deepwater warming. i will give you an example. an article writer now aware by looking at the observed surface water temperature in the pacific, putting them in, it comes with this hiatus and is only a hiatus and the constant global warming. i believe we have to say it is a misreading of the record. the statement stands that co2 emissions and other greenhouse gas emissions are a driver at the local of multiple degreed centigrade in the century. is very consequential. i remind you that when not be here if it were not for the

greenhouse effect of water vapor which is provided six degrees their height of surface warming. fahrenheit of surface warming. >> we have gone to minutes over. -- 2 minutes over. risk put in the record a -- a report where he says neither volcanoes nor the son nor any combination can plausibly explained the atmospheric temperature changes would actually observed from space since 1979. >> without objection and i will like to put in record your photo of how ice has expanded by almost one million square miles in the arctic circle. >> reserving the right to object. >> i would like to be observed.

>> i bit his ill streets why we need committee when we bring up -- i think this illustrates why we need committee where we bring in the scientist. it was credibly and accurate what he rate and -- what he read and contrary to but everybody in the scientific community has to say including secretary moniz who was a professor for 40 years. he is a phd in physics from stanford university. when he scientist to come in here and talk about science. >> are you objecting to this? >> i will not object. >> i would not object to yours either. i would like to recognize dr. christianson for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i am glad we are having this hearing. addressible plan to change by reducing carbon

pollution and helping communities to prepare for the impact of climate change. in reading testimony and hearing testimony, i applaud the open approach to setting the standard that has been engaging and will engage all the stakeholders in the process. despite hearing a lot of criticism of the president's plan for our republican colleagues. like our reinking member, i would ask, what is their plan? the president said he is willing to work with anybody. i am glad if congress will not act, he will. i am also glad that most of you included in your testimony that fromconomy also benefits the prior responses and have benefited from prior responses to climate change. my district and the u.s. virgin islands and other territories are at the forefront of this issue. yesterday,nelists already experiencing an impact

of that change. in the virgin islands, we have endured a series of coral reefs event. significantly impact our .isheries and our tourism our at announced ability. if we were continue to do nothing, will expect increases of sea level rise which will impact our infrastructure. as much of the country is experiencing. it is abundantly clear that climate change israel and we have to act. and we have to act. and needs to lead on this final issue. we also have to make sure that we transition to cleaner energy sources in a way that is workable especially for communities with a great economic challenges. in the virgin islands and other territories, we realize it is diesel.

electricity prices are the highest in our country. we really have a strong incentive to scale up affordable renewable energy and energy efficiency. it will take time. administrator mccarthy, you've answered my first question. you have made it clear that the rules proposal will apply onto new power plants. >> that's correct. >> if you would work on a road to reduce pollution from existing power plants. it will be important for my constituents that we find cost- effective solutions that work for our specific circumstances will stop i did the same is true for all the to restore -- circumstances. -- i think the same is true for all of the territories include cold why you. being an island and where we are located. i've read your testimony that you plan to work with territories to ensure that you

understand our specific circumstances. under the provisions of the clean air act, the states and territories have the flexibility to achieve carbon pollution goals in ways that work for them. do you anticipate that flex ability will be there? >> that is correct. , we look to moniz our supply system am a see promising technology-based systems that will allow places like the virgin islands to meet our electricity needs with clean and affordable power? what is the most promising areas? but yes, i do. in fact, islands often have the biggest challenge in the combination of risk and high energy prices. that is where first of all, renewable -- not being dependent

on oil imports is very important. that is where renewables can be very important. also, i think there is an package. at least one advantage in an island setting is transportation based upon electricity and or natural gas can be more attractive because of the range, the driving range issues are not as important. there is a real future for green islands. we'll be delighted to work with you. >> where are we with ocean diversion -- it seems like we'll be ago source. >> with continued to do research. earlierve at was shown with cost dropping and deployment. we are in the early stages. there's a ways to go in cost -- in terms of cost reduction. there are pilot projects in various parts of the world. >> thank you.

>> the times expired. the gentleman from kansas. five minutes. -- thanke will stop you. i want to ask a couple of pushes of you. identifying regulations that exist and how they impact the climate change. you agree that we want to make sure we have successful fund policy as a result of those sets of rules and regulations that you promulgate? their baseline statement? baseline statement? on your website, you have .rackers that and identify the purpose of these rules is to impact the 20s as indicators -- 26 indicators? he will get a good outcome -- you will get a good outcome?

>> the better way it is part of an overall strategy that is positioning the u.s. for leadership in international discussion. climate change requires a global effort. this is one piece and one step. it is a significant one. >> would be risible to take the regulation -- risible to take the relation and link it to the 20s as indicators -- 26 indicators? unlikely that one step will have a visible impact. a visible change in those impacts. what i am suggesting is that climate change has to be a broader array of actions that the u.s. and other folks in the international community take that make significant efforts toward reducing greenhouse gases in mitigating the effects. --the independent

>> climate change. cumulativet the effect? you are saying these are the indicators and it cannot be your testament today. those you are proposing is not going to have any impact at all on any of the indicators? clear president was very what we are tempted to do as put together a copperheads implant across the administration that positions -- the president was about a comprehensive plan across the administration. >> for the purpose of leadership but not to indicate the indicators? >> we are working within the authority to do what we can but what i am pointing out is that much more needs to be done and

it needs to be looked at. >> in your opening statement, you said we got rid of a bunch of greenhouse gas. one of your indicators is heat related death? how many have been eliminated as a result of the 2010 rules? >> you cannot make those connections. >> you said you cannot -- >> i did not say that. butan you draw conclusions with the rules and your indicators? >> what you are asking is in pa in enough itself -- what you're in enoughcan epa itself -- carbon pollution is one of the regulations. we are going to move forward with what we can do that is reasonable and appropriate.

>> i am not asking that question. if you have the capacity to solve greenhouse gas issues. if anything you are doing is doing any good as measured by the indicators that you have provided? you have no capacity to identify whether the actions epa has undertaken has any impact on the indicators? cause and effect. any relationship between the regulations you promulgated and the 26 indicators of your website? quick the indicators on the website are brought, global indicators. --brought, global indicators broad, global indicates. >> i asked like the indicates. they are quantifiable. sea level rises. those are great quantifiable. >> they indicate the health. >> you cannot link up your

actions at epa to any benefits associated with the indicators? >> we are able to show and i hope we will show this in the package that we put out for comment is what kind of reduction is going to be associated with our rules and what we believe they will have an terms of an and health benefits. a very large strategy. gentlelady -- i am sorry. did you become it -- did you become it? t? commen >> does report that links hot weather with death. >> thank you for calling this hearing on the obama administration's diamond action plan.

administrator mccarthy, thank you to assume the challenges of the epa administered. secretary moniz, same goes to you. my republican colleagues' arguments relating to carbon pollution and the changing climate are reminiscent of their are him it and the arguments of special interest in the past when it comes to updating our standards relating to pollution and health standards and a clean environment. a predict and they always do will have a rise in unemployment , it is going to skyrocket. they predict the economy will going to a tennis -- a tell span. tailspin. americase every time tries to set better standards for air. all you have to do is think back

to the 1970's. i am old enough to remember what the mornings were like before the clean air act. how foggy it was. you could smell it and tasted. the country had the where -- where with all to adopt the clean air act. it has improved. the same could be said the 1990's. it could be said about how america cap the problem of carbon that was depleting the ozone layer. the same could be said when it comes to cancer-causing. the plastic industry did not collapse, did it? i would say to my republic only have confidence in america's ability to innovate in the phase a significant challenge -- face of significant challenge.

humming from a state like florida, what we see clearly i had about is a greater cause to in action. look at what citizens across my state and all across the country will face and rising insurance premiums when it comes to extreme events. we are debating flood insurance right now. that is going to be tied more and more to the change in climate and sea level rise in the future. localabout what governments and communities are going to have to do to invest in infrastructure. in the state of florida have a we are investing to protect our clean water and drinking water supply from the rising bays and oceans that are going to intrude on the drinking water supplied. communities are having to invest to protect it for structure. just the plain old pipes underground that we needed to operate as the normal community

all up and down the coast. in the face of more drought, ,lood him along the fire season season --longer fire flood, longer fire season. i am glad the administration is taking leadership. let's talk about costs and benefits. we propose a major role you are legally required to analyze the cause and benefit of the rule, isn't that correct? required forn agency rulemaking since president reagan signed an executive order on analysis in 1981? it is called cost-benefit analysis because you're required to estimate both the cost and the benefit of government action. >> that's correct. >> if you did not look at both,

the information would not help you assess the merits of the role if you only look at cost, no one would be worth it. -- no rule would be worth it. be morees have to energy efficient. thewas required to estimate cost of producing electricity and reduce air pollution including carbon pollution. that's one the benefits of the rule. >> yes, it did. they need to do that comes from a court ruling in 2007. >> how did you get that number? three and interagency policy or peer-reviewed science? >> yes. highlyased upon three peer-reviewed models. models back on the

in the 2009-2010. every rulemaking opens up for comments going forward. the recent change in the numbers was strictly updating the peer- reviewed models using them with the same inputs used previously. >> the time is expired. the gentleman from ohio. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you so much for having a hearing. and the secretary and the secretary administered for being with us today. appreciate the comments today. costar start, if i with a question to you. as the chairman had earlier stated in his opening remarks, when the president came into office, congress took under consideration his climate plan. congress consider whether we would embark on a revelatory on massively de-carbonize and our energy supply and raise our

energy costs. the u.s. must take the lead we were told. do you think it's economically wise for the u.s. to unilaterally amend policies that would result in more expensive energy cost for american households and manufacturing? this question is important for a district like mine. time going all of my plants.large a small what is happening here in washington if asked -- affects these plants and back home. do you think it is economic wise for the u.s. to unilaterally government policies that can result in more expensive energy for these manufacturing facilities and for american households? >> first of all, and in no small boom,ue to the shell gas we are seeing lower costs and

many industries. >> if i can interrupt. like in the state of ohio, 70% of our energy is cold based. >> across the country, we are , lowg more manufacturing energy prices. in ohio, and the issue of shell gas now. secondly, the u.s. moving forward, i would say number one, american leadership is indispensable if we would have international action. very much i believe the self- serving interests of developing the new technologies that will in fact give us a strong position in a future multitrillion dollar market. >> if i could continue on with the question to you. , andhe climate action plan in your testimony, we are

talking about the three pillars that you mentioned. the third point being that united states needs to lead the international effort. especially when we are talking about climate issues. and what does the administration mean by the u.s. taking the leadership role and does this mean we're supposed to be the first nation to decarbonize our energy supply on a very large scale? expect the rest of the world to follow? do lead as that we wean energy and i do believe lead interface. we have to help deploy it. we are working with the state department in terms of the policy level, made tremendous progress in the g 20 contacts and china. and the department of energy, we are working to mechanism.

ministerialergy which is advancing dialogue with other countries. in many countries now, we have active dialogues going on where our companies are working with companies in those countries. countries like brazil. yesterday indiana -- yesterday in vienna. they are interested in our technologies for efficiency. this a market for our companies for services and technology. that is what we mean. i see from your testimony on you eight, you talk about are finalizing the rule covering michael wave ovens. -- michael wave ovens. ovens.owave

is, are there other appliance rules being planned in the future? >> yes, indeed. i would be happy to supply a list. the next one we hope to advance in november of electric motors. plans humming any in the future, if you can supply that to the committee. -- coming in the future, if you can supply that to the committee. >> when it is appropriate, right boxes, we are pursuing voluntary discussions because when the industry and consumers come together and agree on a rule that is good that actually get it implemented faster. both of the rulemaking and on convening voluntary approaches to efficiency. >> my time has expired.

i yield back. >> the gentleman from texas for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and many colleagues of my side of the isle, i am disappointed that so many of the experts justify and put out the rules on carbon rules and decided not to educate the public eye testifying here this morning. ratio does not13 bode well in the most open administration ever. i am sure we'll will find out where these people are as we leave here. the few and the proud. , administrator mccarthy, welcome. my question will focus on refineries, u.s. energy

renaissance, and issues in texas. first of all, refineries. mccarthy, much of today's discussion has been about the carbon plan, the power sector. 's nextworry about epa steps for refined. your epa announced the houston area was on track to attain ground-level ozone standards by 2018. you put out a press release that said "these reductions are even more impressive in houston's rank as one of the largest growing areas in the country." but rather than recognize the success, epa is working on more ozone and so-called tier three rules. we keep hearing rumors of new

rules for greenhouse gases in the refining space. all of this could mean billions of dollars, billions in compliance costs. these costs will hit family hit family'sl heart. in places like sugar land, katy, texas. i say briefly, can you tell me when to expect these carbon rules for refineries? >> i do not have a time frame. >> will you commit to study because of all of these rules -- the cost of all of these rules are refineries? >> i will certainly to follow what ever protocols are expected. >> answer yes or no questions, yes or no. can you guarantee that your

rules will not rise gasoline prices? and do not know what rules i would never make guarantees to anything, sir. >> ok. it's about the u.s. energy renaissance. as you know, emissions have fallen in recent years despite these new regulations. they are manufacturers. is americant reason natural gas. no, do you agree that fracturing and horizontal drilling have graded an american renaissance that is helping us/our carbon emissions -- slash our carbon emissions? >> is a complicated question. i will make a short. the new technology has advanced

our ability to capture natural glass domestically that has been great for air quality. i think that answers your questions. >> i will take it as yes. --l carbon emissions [inaudible] yes or no? >> i cannot make it. you're asking really, kate bush. -- asking really complicated questions. >> one final question. know is inte as you desperate need of new reliable power. at a time when we are looking at blackouts 2014-2015. without more power generation, thats considering rules

could affect sequestration. earlier, myiscussed district is actually home to one of the only ccs modification in the country, the plant. yes or no question. technology is ccs ?urrently economic we have oil and gas right there. right on the property. of ccs isbination very attractive. if i may add one more thing. timessue has come up many about the to was being here. i like to say that first of all there's been no trouble occupying three hours. secondly, i know my colleagues

-- our colleagues would be delighted to have a conversation about all these issues. >> thank you for much. arell say to you that you right. it took a lot of time today. we are going to get back in touch with the other agencies and meet with them individually or through a letter exchange. we will follow up with them. i will rather nice the gentleman from illinois for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thank you both of you for being here. the last few hours you have given us. i have heardiz, you speak in favor of the presidents climate action plan. i understand the concern about the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions being expressed. that being said, statements from experts have said electrical prices are projected to have increased 40% since 2001 to well

above the rate of inflation will stop it continue to rise. 60% oftion to this, over our nation clean power generated comes from nuclear power which is virtually emission free. i'm concerned about the efforts of your agency of the future of the energy sector. i believe any serious plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions must have a strong nuclear component. have proposedt therehave arisen. goals and keep it as brief as possible? your goals for the sector overall? have manysures factors. in one case, equipment issue in california will stop in vermont, it is presently -- in california. -- in vermont, it is presently -- for years already, the

department energy, supporting things like extension technologies. that is one direction. another is we are still working on the provisional loan guarantee. it is really important to get some of these new plants built. >> the deal would close, any of the loan guarantees? >> on nuclear -- >> why not? >> it is an ongoing negotiation. >> it is been going on for a long time. >> i've taken a direct interest in this. >> from our perspective, i hear demonstration using that. i've heard you use the loan guarantee as a promise for, hey, we supported. these are all conditional. they are not finalized will stop when you have a number of plants closing and we are very slow to replace that capacity.

do believe the greenhouse gas set up by demonstration can be met without the use of nuclear power? go you are the 70% we are halfway there. if there are closures in that time, that'll make it more difficult. plantsmany more nuclear that you could put out of commission? >> i do not know. i can tell you i am hoping to have discussions with the industry to better understand where that is going. nuclear power plants still do have a pretty low marginal cost which make them attractive. as we know, the lower natural gas prices have lowered the cleric rices. -- the clearing prices. no -- >>there are there are no long guarantees, they are conditional. up, i would not take

up all of my time. it demonstration was serious about addressing change, it would harness the clean energy for nuclear power. at a minimum, it would follow the law. i a discussion about following the law today. it would reconstitute the program and provide a solid basis for the nrc to issue new plant licenses. thank you for your time and testimony. >> we are following the law. >> the gentleman yields back. noticed, wehave have ignored her. she is not a member of the subcommittee. traditionally, we finish of the subcommittee members before we go to her stop -- before we go to her. mr. griffin has said you have been sitting patiently. i would like to recognize you for five minutes if you like as your questions. >> thank you both. for that courtesy.

that the direct, at least you life on our planet, is the greatest challenge that humankind has faced was stop -- based. -- faced. i also start with that this congress -- i feel so strongly that this congress has a moment of opportunity where we could take leadership and to be -- on behalf of the united states, the countries around the world that we could benefit economically. this a moment of great opportunity that i fear as a member of the energy and commerce committee we are squandering. i look at some of the young people in this audience. this is their century. -- i feel anation

obligation that we do something about this. if either ofto see you have a comment about this in thef call -- coal rolling promulgated about to ,ome out about the charges basically an insignificant effect on climate change. and that it would jeopardize the economic opportunities to people in poor countries and further impoverish them. that is a pretty heavy charge. i am wondering if you -- madam administrator could give us an answer. >> i would be happy to begin. what i would say is the reason why the power plant sector is one of the first places to go to regulate carbon pollution is because by far the largest industry sector in terms of his

generation of greenhouse gases. therecond reason is that are opportunities to reduce greenhouse gases. that will position us in the energy future. it is every reason why we should want to tee up ideas and options for how to do that effectively taking advantage of modern technology that we can take advantage of and escalate their introduction both in the u.s. as well as internationally. that is what is going to make significant differences. not just what we are doing here but its impact and moving clean technologies for. the international discussion, i think you will see the language in the president's climate action plan is very detailed on this issue. it in no way steps back from the intent of the united states and our obligation to work with the developing countries to ensure that they mature and provide energy for their citizens.

here is notage in inconsistent with that goal. it will not minimize our efforts. what it does say however is that we needed to be careful about how we are investing we do not want developing countries to make mistakes that we might have made in not positioning ourselves for the best technologies available in a carbon constrained world. >> i would add the climate action plan as far as the bank does have an exclusion for the least developed countries. >> i see. i would say how much i appreciate your being here and the fact of having the epa administrator as secretary of energy at a single hearing, i am sure we will have and hope you will have an opportunity to hear others. that is not an everyday occurrence. i want to thank you for that. also associate myself with mr.

waxman's plea that has been made more than once that we have scientists come in. have the kind of forum where the science could be challenged and questioned. if there are differing opinions, i am wondering is there really a significant difference of opinion about the science of climate change? that the levele of the broad impacts in my view, there are none. very simple argument as to why this inspector. oflso observed the pattern effects was predicted decades ago. this is not the made up. clearly, there are specific -- when you drill down, specific issues.

it is consultative science. earlier we had a discussion about the last several years. a slowdown of warming. this is not out of the expectations of decade-old scales. are is where scientists having argument over the specific driver. recent papers as one example have linked essentially the old -- el nino/elño nina. >> the time has expired. recognize the gentleman from virginia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i did appreciate the comments as we move forward so we do not

impoverish the other nations and impoverish our own nation they use modern technologies. haveroblem that i think we is that we ought to make sure the technologies are available first before with regulations into place that cause us to lose an entire segment of our .opulation's jobs that is been my concern all along. coming from a coal producing region i can tell you the policies, not counting the ones that will come out later this week or the next few months, they are devastated the economy. it is quite moving when you see these people, these are hard- working men and women out there trying to do jobs. not just because miners, the jobs relied upon the coal mines. every time i turn around, another manufacturing company that is relying on the coal industry that is going out of business or need affordable electricity is going out of

business. about every other week, i am losing a coal mine. people make about $75,000 a year and they are not making get now. one the biggest blows that received and probably in fairness, the two factors that listed was the -- scissors of and the economy is so poor in the area. and we just lost a hospital in my district. some of my constituents are going to drive an hour to get cardiac care. it's not a good thing. we'll look at the cost benefit analysis, we do not always the fact that people have the ability to afford the electricity and their homes and they have to cut back on things and important things. if you cannot heat your home effectively in the wintertime in the mountains of virginia, it gets pretty cold. that can effect your health. if you have a problem with your

heart and instead of going to of local hospital because local policy, you have to drive an hour to get the heart care, that is going to and impact your help. -- health. we saved all would be grand and great tom a we have the breakthroughs a technologies first before we say we were to shut down a lot of coal powered plants. the technology is not out there to make the 100%. when you look at poverty and i noticed the gentleman earlier referenced a german article on how electricity or can a luxury good. i do not be the people of the united states consider electricity luxury good and we want to be at the point where we have a minister, you ms. mccarthy. minister even have tips on how you do not preheat

your oven to do the cooking and if you lower the contrast and brightness are your television you can print down your electricity bill. the germans can put themselves in a position where people cannot afford. i do not want this for my country but it is hitting my district heart. i would hope you would take that into consideration. i know the president outlined the goals. i heard mr. secretary say earlier that we are halfway there. my question is, is that programs from the epa? or is that from plant shutdowns? , scan the programs at the epa has enacted bring down greenhouse gases in the last five years? can you quantify, to programs have brought down? was think the goal clearly stated in the climate action plan. in no way does that plan say

that those actions are going to add up to that 17%. it is a start at looking at the most economically viable opportunity -- >> did you know 17% was just a number picked out of the air or was there some basis for it and can you give me that basis? >> i believe it was an international goal that was stated. there are certainly some analytics, but it was not directly associated with that plan. it remains a goal that we would like to reach. >> i understand we are trying to reduce the gases, but do we know specifically how much each program will give us? believerthy, i truly when you're here to testify and i've told people in my district that i think you do care about the plight of folks. i would ask you to commit whether it is my district or one of the others in central appalachia has been hit so hard, if we set up a trip would you

him down and see what is happening to the people and see where the jobs are disappearing? there are lots of empty towns -- there are lots of towns at empty storefronts. about half of the reduction so far have been from shale gas revolution, purely market- driven. another part of it has been from the, especially in the transportation sector, the efficiency standards holding demand down. >> those are based on regulations, is that correct? though >> i would like to represent the gentleman from new york. >> that me say that i am applauding our committee for finally having a hearing on climate change. i want to say that it is obvious to me and to everyone else the science is undeniable and it is time for us to act and congress has been ducking this issue. even going so far as to deny the basic science of climate change.

i have seen the devastating effects right in my area when hurricane sandy hit new york, new jersey and connecticut. my district severed huge devastation. rising seas, greater storms and flooding will continue in if we choose to do nothing. i'm very happy the president has acted, has decided to act. though some may deny the existence of climate change, the science is clear and people object to the specifics of the president's plan, they should not oppose their own plan for curbing carbon pollution and climate change. the committee should actively actively --should the committee should actively pursue this matter. it will also grow new industries in renewable . you,tarymoiz, let me ask

one of the major issues arising from that was a loss of power and the loss of time that it took return. did you speak to us about what the department of energy is doing with regards to the loss of power and this in regards to climate change. >> in the context of our general work on the electric grid of the 21st-century, we are folding in very heavily resilience issues as well as the kind of renewables and other drivers of that technology. i mentioned earlier that one specific project we just had in new jersey looking at a micro- grid to support a major transportation corridor which would be an important evacuation route for new yorkers. the second thing, which is very important, we are working theely with industry with

american petroleum institute and with the eei, what we learned in is how theard way electricity infrastructure and transportation fuel infrastructures are so interdependent. we are working on that area at being positioned for any future event. >> so implementation of these plans is ongoing, we can expect that soon? >> yes it is. a little of the product that we will put out at the end of the month, for example. >> thank you. i have been a long supporter of alternative fuels for transportation. besides electric vehicles that you mentioned, what are other alternatives of fuels that the department of energy is working on? support andnly particularly for heavy vehicles, looking at the issue of natural

gas as a transportation fuel. we have an extensive program on advanced biofuels moving to cellulosic biofuels, for example. whereare again a case costs are coming down quite dramatically. we are not quite there yet, but they are coming down dramatically. of course electrification, again, costs have dropped dramatically. not yet for the long-range vehicle for the mass market, but the penetration is happening at afaster than it did comparable stage for hybrid vehicles, looking very interesting. hydrogen economy and fuel cells, that remains a much earlier in the development. i would say alternative liquid ares and electricity actually can quite interesting. >> thank you. i know you have both been here a long time, so i am going to

submit a couple of questions for you and spare you from having to answer it. i would like to thank both of you for your hard work. >> if you have completed your questions, i would like you to use your time. we are at a critical crossroads in this country in our energy policy. if we decide to do nothing, which is what i sense is what the republicans want us to do nothing, it is going to lead to more carbon pollution, or droughts and floods and other extreme weather events. more billion-dollar disasters and bills to pay for the taxpayers. will not treated kindly. we will be the generation that ignore the warnings of scientists and left future generations a violent and inhospitable climate. on the other hand, there is another path. we have a shrinking window for action, but we still have a window to act.

niz told us if we act now, if we unleash unmet , we can ingenuity protect our atmosphere and create millions of new clean energy jobs. i want to thank the two witnesses who have been very helpful and terrific in being here all this time there it i hope we will all put aside our partisan differences to help achieve these goals that are very important ones for the future of our country and the rest of the world. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. waxman. i would also say how much we appreciate the two of you being here today. we do think it is a major compliment that our co2 emissions are lower than they have been in 20 years and as we move forward i think we all want a balanced approach. we want to protect the environment but we also want to make sure that we have a strong, viable economy and that we don't

want to be left in a noncompetitive position in the world marketplace. all look forward to being with us in the future as we look forward to being here again. we spent three or four marvelous hours together. that will conclude today's hearing but i will remind visitors and members that they have 10 business days to submit questions for the record and i ask that the witnesses all agree to respond properly to all the questions we have submitted to you all. thank you again and we look forward to working with you as we move forward. >> thank you for holding this hearing. >> thank you, that concludes today's hearing.

[indiscernible] >> next on c-span, members of congress debating a bill to continue running the government until mid-december. administrator jenny meeting new rules to limit carbon pollution. on the next "washington journal," marcoux was involved --cusses u.s. material

discusses security at military facilities. national journal contribute in edit or talks about the future of the farm bill, food stamps and legislation in congress. at 7ington journal," live a.m. eastern on c-span. span online archives will redefine social studies education in america. go to c-span.org and go to the video library to watch the newest video it onto the most recent tab, click on what you want to watch and press play. you can also search the video library for specific topic or keyword where you can find a person.

type the name hit search and go to people. go to their bio page and scroll down to their appearances. you can also share what you are watching and make a clip. using set buttons or handle pulls at a title and description and then click share and send it by e-mail, facebook and twitter or google plus. the c-span video library. searchable and easy and free. funded by your local cable or satellite provider. >> today, the hosta baited and passed a bill to fund the government through mid-december. house debated and passed a bill to fund the government through mid-december. half of ther and a debate from the house floor. >> madam speaker, i ask that we have time to include material on

the same. >> without objection, it is recognized. >> i yield myself five minutes. >> the gentleman has five minutes. >> madam speaker, the resolution we look at today will keep the government operating into next year. it is straightforward, clean, short-term, continues reductions in federal discretionary spending, but most importantly, madam speaker, it will prevent a government shutdown. the legislation also includes an amendment to the base told which

adds the text of hr 2682 the defund obamacare act of 2013 and the text of hr 807, the full faith and credit act. it will fund the government for the first 76 days of fiscal year 2014 until december 15, 2013. it provides $986.3 billion in funding, approximately the same rate as the current post sequestration level with some minor adjustments. the basic bill is extremely clean. additional provisions were only added in a very limited number of cases where adjustments were needed to prevent catastrophic shortfalls or unintended disruptions to critical programs or services. it simply keeps the lights on in our government to provide for the safety, security, and well- being of all americans.

i would like to remind my colleagues, madam speaker, both in the house and the other body that a government shutdown is a political game in which everyone loses. it shirks one of our most basic duties as members of congress and puts our national security at stake. to be clear, if this legislation is not enacted, and we embark on a government shutdown, the consequences are severe. our brave men and women in uniform do not get paid. our recovering economy will take a huge hit. -- ourr most formidable

most vulnerable citizens, including the elderly and the veterans who rely on -- our most vulnerable citizens, including the elderly and veterans to rely on government sources, will be threatened. the shutdown, even the threat of a shutdown, so as to the american people that congress does not have their best interest at heart. this continuing resolution keeps this congress moving in the right direction. it gives us time to solve the urgent fiscal issues facing our nation, finding a balanced and attainable plan that eliminates sequestration, implements careful reforms for both discretionary and mandatory spending, and keeps our economy growing. it is my hope that the house will pass this bill today and the senate will act in short order so that this matter will be wrapped up well before the deadline of the 30th. so, i urge my colleagues to do their jobs as members of the

house and to do what is best for this country and vote yes on this bill today. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. >> the gentlewoman is recognized. >> i will oppose this continuing on september 10th, chairman rogers introduced the cr and a statement noted ,this bill is free of controversial writers and does not seek to change existing federal policy. how things have changed. unfortunately, this new package will attach not one, but two politically motivated ill- conceived, doomed provisions. one directs the president to pay certain debts, but not others in

case house republicans are determined to default on america's obligations. the other would defund the affordable care act. defunding the affordable care act has far-reaching consequences for all americans. if the house cr is enacted, no funds could be used to administer payments calculated on the basis of aca provisions. patients, doctors, hospitals, medical suppliers, and other health providers would all experience significant disruptions. many of the improvements to medicare made by the aca would also have to be suspended, such as better coverage for preventative services, lower costs for drug benefits, --ronger tools to combat both

to combat health care fraud. most importantly, undermining the implementation of the aca only gives our medical choices back to the insurance companies and keeps health insurance costs -- much live for too many too high for many families. the house republicans' default plan is flawed as well. the majority proposes that if it forces a default on federal debt, the u.s. should pride-- should prioritize payments to bondholders, the majority of which are foreign owned. while we pay back china, the majority of americans would be pushed to the back of the line. active-duty troops, reserve troops, 3.4 million disabled

veterans who served their country with honor, 1.1 million doctors and others who survived -- and others who provide health care to seniors with medicare. 32 million children in schools that need payments to continue serving nutritious lunches, 44,000 national institutes of health grantees conducting life-saving medical research and providing estimated 500,000 jobs. we, my colleagues, should be focused on jobs. putting people to work. instead, the republicans want to play games of brinksmanship on the budget and the debt limit, even though the foreseeable consequence will be plummeting stock markets and businesses freezing their hiring. --e republican budget plan is

budget plan its self shortchanges american jobs and infrastructure, results in education and defense layoffs, closes headstart and afterschool programs, and divests health research. and the sequester, cbo tells us, will cost the united its economy -- will cost the united states economy up to 1.6 million jobs over the next year. i hope at some point we are able to agree on a bipartisan cr that the one before us unfortunately is not it. unfortunately, we will be back here again next week facing the i yield back. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized.

>> i yield two minutes to the chairman of the energy and water subcommittee on appropriations. >> the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. -- madam speaker, i think the i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in support of the do so with no small amount of frustration since we worked on the energy ours was a tough but balanced bill. we raised the cap set for the south wall funding our nation's critical priorities -- strong national defense, the work of the army corps of engineers, the work of the department of energy. all of that work will be thrown away unless we deal with sequestration and get back to what we call regular order. coming up with an approach to manage or perhaps eliminate sequestration is going to take as those decisions are

being made, our nation must be kept open for business and the government --st abide critical services. must provide critical services. if the government shuts down, many of those services will not be funded. military personnel will not be paid and their families will suffer. and this will be an breach of trust to our men and women in uniform under the jurisdiction of the energy and water bill -- many activities will grind to a halt and that includes the dredging of waterways critical to american jobs and businesses and work on flood control structures such as levees. and in our national laboratories, critical and time sensitive work to maintain the reliability of our nuclear weapons would also slow down and that would be unconscionable and our work overseas doing short our nuclear weapons materials are kept out of the hands of those who would do our country harm would also be curtailed.

colleagues, the continuing resolution before us is a limited, temporary measure which includes no objectionable provisions and ensures our government keeps its obligations to the american people. we encourage its passage so the senate can quickly begin its consideration of the measure. i thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized. >> i am very pleased to yield five minutes to the ranking member of the ways and means committee, mr. levin. >> the gentleman from michigan is recognized for five minutes. >> [indiscernible] >> without objection. >> this bill defunds still more than the affordable care act. it undermines medicare.

it would end improvements in prescription drug benefits. increases costs for those with medicare advantage. and it hurts children covered by chip, as well as the disabled. but this measure has still more peril for our country. we in the house are like two ships passing in the night. house republicans will pass this bill. it will sail off to the senate, surely to return, after the senate has stripped off the effort to defund the affordable care act. so, then it will be squarely up to the speaker of this house. will he act as the captain of the entire house of representatives, or remain a captive of his right wing republican mates? will he, as he acts, worry

mainly about the risk to his speakership, or the risk to our entire nation? house republicans taking the ship over the cliff would take the nation's economic well-being with it. this is the inevitable danger of the course being chosen today by house republicans. and only those blinded by rigid ideology can fail to see it. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madame speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman for homeland security appropriations. >> the gentleman from texas is >> ignized for two minutes.

thank the gentleman for yielding. this short-term cr would do just thatit would give us time to. finalize a broader budget deal, fund as through the fiscal year 14 appropriations bill, and get our fiscal house in order by getting the budget process back in regular order. our appropriation process matters. it matters for the oversight of the sprawling federal bureaucracy. it matters to control our government. it is a basic duty of the congress that is explicitly spelled out in the united states constitution. this is necessary. we must avoid the disastrous government shutdown that no one wants, especially our men and women in uniform. i urge the senate to pass this

and the president to sign this into law as soon as possible to avoid a devastating and avoidable government shutdown. this response to the will of the american people by defunding obamacare. it must be repealed. mr. chairman, i thank you for the leadership on this bill, and i thank you for your commitment to regular audit -- regular order in ensuring over the next few weeks, we wrap up the fy 14 byocess the right way. accomplishing all 12 appropriation bills. i urge the house to pass the cr to keep the government running and avoid shutdown. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized.

the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> i am pleased to reserve and yield to my good friend, chairman rogers. >> the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the military construction and veterans affairs appropriations subcommittee. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. >> madam speaker, today the constitutional conservatives in the house are keeping their word to our constituents and our nation to stand true to our principles, to protect from the most unpopular law in the history of the country, obamacare, that intrudes on their privacy, the most sacred right of americans to be left alone, and we have also kept our word in this continuing resolution to ensure that government will continue to

operate while we negotiate in good faith with the president and the senate to find a way forward. our short-term contain-- continuing resolution funds every aspect of the government and in fact, it is important to remember that the senate has had the military construction and veterans affairs bill for three months. they could have passed it a long time ago. the senate has had the defense appropriations bill since late july, so they could have passed that bill a long time ago. and put it on the president's desk. we could have been sure our military would be paid. the senate has had the department of homeland security bill since early june and has done nothing. the senate has had the energy and water bill since july 10 and done nothing. we have done our job, we in the house. the constitutional conservative majority have kept our word to our constituents and the nation theo our job, to fund

essential aspects of the government and ensure we have done everything in our power to protect our constituents from the most unpopular piece of legislation ever passed in the history of the congress, obamacare, permanently and totally defunding it well protecting the core functions of the government. it is necessary to ensure we have the ability to defund the claims backlog, to ensure we have the resources for the military to build facilities around the world to ensure that our men and women have everything they need to protect this great nation. i urge the members to join me in supporting this continuing resolution. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> i am very pleased to yield five minutes to the outstanding

ranking member of the defense subcommittee on appropriations. >> the gentleman from indiana is recognized for five minutes. >> i appreciate the gentlewoman for yielding. at the beginning of my remarks, i want to acknowledge i have made a mistake and that i have been wrong for the nearly three decades i have served in the united states congress. i regret to have to admit that. this morning in anticipation of today's debate, i took a look at article i of the constitution and realized in article i, section nine, paragraph 7, i have been misreading it all these years as a member of the appropriations committee. the paragraph reads "no money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of a

continuing resolution." the constitution says nothing about appropriations, apparently. 2007, since fiscal year this chamber and the united states senate, congress could collectively -- congress collectively, should have acted, -- should have enacted,made discrete decisions, thought about legislation to read 84 appropriation bills. we have individually in acted nine. -- enacted 9. i am appalled that in late july, early august, every member i have talked to in this chamber on both sides of the aisle, senior and new, have said if we could only do a continuing resolution, we could prevent the shutdown of the united states government. today the united states

congress, we consider it a success if all we do is pass a continuing resolution to do what we did in fiscal year 13, what we did in fiscal year 12, what we did in fiscal year 11 and 10 and nine and eight and seven. we are governing this country by looking backwards. we have a responsibility to make decisions. i want to remind my colleagues just on the defense portion of this bill, some of the initiatives, the initiatives will not take place because of the continuing resolution. under the leadership of chairman --ung and the members of these

of this subcommittee, one of our missions is to cut -- cut -- 100 $53.5 million for unjust cost growth of the strike fighter. one of the initiatives we would like to enact and cannot under the continuing resolution. we want to cut $131.4 million for carryovers and cost scripts. what we would like you to do -- what we would like to do to legislate in this body is trim $104 million. imagine that. funding by $104 million. that is not needed for the next coming year. jammer, 90neration $9.9 million. we would like to cut that. why? because of poor program weecution and contract delays.

had a failed ballistic missile test. we would like to reduce that and cut it by $110 million,but let's do a continuing resolution. let's not make a decision about how we should fund the national park service. what about the u.s. copyright office?what about the bureau of engraving and printing. there must be some catastrophic fight we are having because they are going to be under a continuing resolution. the national institutes of allergy and infectious diseases. i am concerned and what to make -- and want to make it clear that i profoundly appreciate the leadership of chairman rogers

and the ranking member for trying to be responsible and get the job done. but if this continuing resolution is passed as is until december 15, i have a profound fear that our colleagues will be so upset by lurching to another crisis that we will never go back to doing a governance of this country. i yield back my time. >> the gentleman from time is expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the financial services appropriations subcommittee. the gentleman from florida, mr. crenshaw. >> the gentleman from florida is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you very much, madam speaker. thank you for your time, chairman rogers. thank you for your leadership in this very difficult appropriations process. i think everybody agrees the

appropriations process is one of the most important functions of the congress, if not the most important. while we would all like to be here having finished all the appropriations bills, there just wasn't quite enough time. all we are asking today is for the members to adopt this continuing resolution. it will continue funding the government for the next three months at the same level it was funded last year. --at will give us the time and as a body, to finish all the appropriations bill. some have passed these subcommittee and the full committee. some have passed the south. i know the subcommittee i chair, financial services, we had a number of hearings. members worked hard to set priorities, past the subcommittee, past the full committee, and ready to go before the house. there are some very important things in that bill. i think we have all heard

stories about the iressa and how -- about the irs and how they singled out individuals and politicaled on their philosophy and subjected them to intimidation and bullying. we were all outraged. in our bill, we have resolutions to hold you accountable.we're going to use the power of the person asked you to come clean. no more of this. we actually conditioned some of the funding to the irs as to whether or not they put in place the safeguards that have been recommended to ensure they do not continue this outrageous behavior and also make sure it does not happen again. so, i think we should pass this continuing resolution, fund the government for this short time, put in place the spending bill that sets priorities that make the tough choices we have to make in these difficult times. i urge all my colleagues to vote

yes on this continuing resolution. alexald back my time. gentleman's time is expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> i yield to minutes to the gentleman from idaho. >> the gentleman from idaho is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, i appreciate that. i have to tell you, my good withnd from indiana, i agree him. thet of the people sitting on floor are on the appropriations committee. we have to get back to regular order. the chairman and our members have been trying to get back to regular order where we pass appropriations bills and get that done. so far we have not been able to do that. though it is necessary to do a short-term cr. i can tell you the last couple days i have heard a lot of talk

about republicans trying to shut down government. that is the last thing we want to do. if we wanted to do that, we would not be doing a short-term cr. the reason we are doing a short- term cr instead of a long-term cr is give the appropriations committees time to do their work and do our individual bills. that is what we are working on. we cannot fall into the abyss of a long-term cr. as many know, and i will give you an example -- as many of you know, the west has been on fire this summer. the chairman was reducing the number of fish in arizona. he saw the effects of the fires we werew out to the west. able to get 636 million allers -- $636 million to fund the for service and firefighting costs.

we do the long-term cr, we lose that $636 million. we do short term, we will be able to keep them. we need to get to a long-term stay where we do individual appropriations will so we can have priorities met. some people think that doing a long-term cr reduces spending. i will tell you if you look at where we were last year with the bill we almost got done and then ended up with the long-term cr, the epa is spending about $75 million more this year than they would have with the bill we would have passed. if you think that is a way to save money, it is not. we need to do our job. talking about the forest firefighting service, i have to tell you since i've got a minute how proud i am of the work that --e forest service date, the that the forest service did, the hotshot crews across the country. i met with some of them from tennessee. i knew they were from tennessee because they spoke funny. but they did an amazing job.we should be proud of the work they do and we have to make sure they have the resources to fight these wildfires. -- the gentleman from time is

the gentleman's time is expired. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. poe. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. >> i thank the gentleman. madam speaker, i got this letter. "the affordable care act is affecting my family. i am a single mother. i have raised five boys on my own.i currently work two jobs to keep up with my monthly mortgage and utility bill. this is because my primary employer would not hire me to work more than 29 hours per week thanks to obama care. now i have to work seven days per week -- more than 20 i -- 28 hours a week thanks to a obamacare. now i have to work seven days

per week. i had to make a tough decision i did not want to make. my son is now living with relatives in another city. i am depressed that obamacare has begun to tear my family apart and has already put an unhealthy burden on me. madam speaker, real person, real tragedy. it is time to free americans from the shackles of obamacare. that is just the way it is. >> the gentleman from time is-- to gentleman's time is expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the state foreign office of appropriations. the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you for the hard work

you have put into the bills in committee. i rise in support of the continuing resolution to keep the government operating through december 15. we hope this resolution will give congress and the white house time to come together on a iomprehensive budget agreement. chair the state foreign operations subcommittee and affect the bill directly the u.s. national securitythe world has not been a more dangerous place and to cut back our diplomatic activities would be failure to get a cr enacted would affect key posts including egypt, israel, pakistan, iraq. this would mean dramatically reducing our presence in key regions like the u.s. and asia. --s could affect jobs for

this could also impact the u.s. jobs of the men and women producing american-made equipment. one year ago, terrorists attacked and killed americans in benghazi. failure to pass a cr could delay implementation of the benghazi accountability review board recommendations and jeopardize the safety of our diplomats who continue to serve abroad. it is important that we pass the cr today and the senate consider it as quickly as possible. it is a basic risk function and responsibility of the congress to keep it open and working for the people who elected us. this will simply does that. i encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote yes and i yield back my time to the chairman. >> the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. >> we reserve as well.

>> the gentleman from kentucky. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the hundreds of state committee on corporations. the gentleman from virginia, mr. wolf. >> thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank chairman rogers for moving this bill. i rise today in strong support for h a rise 59, providing continuing appropriations for the continuing weeks of fiscal year 2014 through december 15. this bill is needed to keep vital government services and programs operating past the end of the current fiscal year on september 30. as a gentleman from kentucky has said, the committee on appropriations has made significant progress in moving the annual appropriation bills. additional time is needed to allow for the prompt completion of the fiscal 2014 appropriation work. this resolution continues for discretionary programs at the current post sequestration level, inc. clued in critical

programs on the jurisdiction of the cgs subcommittee. the operations of the federal prison system. you can shut down the federal prison system. the fbi counterterrorism act of it is, the fbi team is working with regard to benghazi as a former spokesman said. also working on counterterrorism. the weather forecast. we have seen major storms hit this nation. all the way in the past year. to shut that down, the warnings and the satellite programs that they depend upon and also for the continued development of of nasa'sce at the -- space exploration programs. our nation is in serious financial trouble. it is well past the time that we put everything, everything on the table including entitlements and agree on long-term budget solution which includes the end of sequestration. hopefully the 76 days provided in the resolution by the chairman will be enough time for

an overall agreement to be reached and also to allow us to pass regular appropriation bills for fy 14. i urge my colleagues and all members of the congress to support the cr, avoid a devastating government shutdown and create a window of time for the congress to fulfill a basic constitutional duty, the appropriation of funds for government programs and services. thank you chairman. a yield back the balance of my time. >> he gentlewoman from new york is recognized. reserve it. >> to gentleman from new york reserves. he gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the agricultural subcommittee on appropriations. >> the gentleman from alabama, -- >> the german from alabama's recognized. two minutes. >> iq, chairman rogers, for he inw the opportunity to speak

support of the f y 14 continuing resolution. it is very obvious by the comments that the republicans have made on our side this morning that we do need to keep the government open at its current sequester funding level and continue to provide the services that our constituents have grown to expect from the government and make sure that we don't have a government shutdown. chairman rogers mentioned, i chair the appropriations andommittee of agriculture some may ask why is it so important that we keep the government open? can we just go with another year-long cr? i would like to provide some reasons why the fy 14 mag approached bill -- why the fya bill needsations to continue.

in the appropriations bill, we direct the states to be in full compliance with standards and we increase oversight of vendors to rein in costs. we require the da to report on strategies that have been implemented to help weed out fraud. one thing that i hear a lot about is the new school milk regulation. we want to provide flexibility for school districts as they implement these new school regulations for meals for students. out -- herthe come car the commodity future regulations to adopt cost analysis of several dodd frank provisions that are deemed duplicative and also very costly. the usda to finalize an inspection rule that is proven to decrease illness causing have to jens in poultry operations at a reduced federal

cost. i can tell you, representing a district that grows a lot of poultry and that produces a lot of poultry, that is very important. in closing, let me just say i andy support h whereas 59 ask for my colleagues to do the same. >> the gentleman's time is expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. yield two minutes to this distinguished gentleman from california. >> the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. >> madam speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this toical, right-wing effort walk our economy off a cliff and cause a government shutdown. i invite my colleagues on the other side to wake up from this radical ideological wet dream and come back to reality. it is time for us to come to the

negotiating table, time for us to talk about what we can do to avoid a government shutdown. it takes health-care coverage away from millions of people are blocking funding for obama care. this is the 42nd attempt to do so and there is absolutely, as we all know, zero chance of it happening. it makes sure we pay china first before we pay people in this country should the right wing demand to continue defunding obamacare at all costs. we all know how this should end. there is a way to fund the government which would pass this chamber with votes from both sides of the aisle. i can only hope that the republican leadership will eventually listen to the pleas from the americans in my district and in the whole country and pursue this bipartisan effort varied until then, i urge all members to oppose this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. -- shegentleman gentlewoman from new york reserves.

the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i rise in support of this bill to continue to fund government while also defunding the president's health care law and ensuring that this country does not default on its debt. while some might criticize his effort, this is not a republican idea. talk to union leaders. james hoffa says that the president's health care law is destroying the middle class family in the 40 hour workweek. the president himself has --nowledged that this law when the president said he was to delay components of the law only for the president -- only for the privilege class. this law is unworkable. it is killing jobs in america. it is causing people to lose good health care that they have today. in louisiana alone, our families are facing over 50% increases in their health-care premiums

because of this law that is devastating our economy. it is not ready for prime time. the president has even acknowledged it air t has signed seven bills to defund or repeal components of the law himself, it is time this house takes action and the senate takes its -- and the senate takes action as well. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. pleased to reserve -- to yield two minutes. >> i appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy. i appreciate the hard work of the appropriations committee that has been placed in an impossible situation. a t cut have pending bill. if -- we would be having appropriation bills on the floor

and we would be dealing with them. because the appropriations committee was given an impossible challenge. they were getting funding levels that the house, the house will never approve. that republicans in the house will never approve. with obamaing here care as a sideline. it is going forward, everybody in this chamber knows that the president wouldn't sign it, it is not going to the senate, and that train has left the station. is what we need to be doing getting down, i heard my friend from indiana talk about real things. the appropriations committee, if real spending limits and time on the floor and regular order, these are accomplished distinguished people who care about the integrity of government. and they could work it out. the quickest way to do it is if

the republican leadership would allow a conference committee on the budget. has handcuff the appropriations committee is they are operating under this unrealistic, ideological document that won't pass the house. if the republican leadership would appoint conferees, we could work with the senate that passed a budget and we could get down and work out something that is agreeable. then we won't have this folder and -- we won't have this false air and and we won't have the -- it doesn'ttaff have to be this hard. let regular order work, stop the sideshow. the germans time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky seek recognition?

>> i yield two minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. gartner. >> mr. chairman, i rise to engage chairman of appropriations committee. i would like to thank chairman rogers for his dedication and willingness to work with all members of the house of representatives when the states are impacted by natural disasters. -- we are currently experiencing a major flood. it is impacted 15 counties. certain areas have her cv over 20 inches of rain. 19,000 homes have been damaged or destroyed and the destroyed count is now above 2000 homes. .any areas are still in crisis the federal emergency management agency will be unable to provide an accurate damage assessment for at least 30 days. additionally, the colorado department of transportation estimates that the cost could exceed the hundred million dollar cap.

and devastation caused by the severe flood necessitates a response from the federal government. i ask that the chairman consider working with me and other members of the colorado delegation to recover and rebuild from this tragedy. >> first, i want to thank the gentleman from colorado for all of his efforts to help colorado to all of this turmoil. terrible disaster. aware of the dire need to have colorado -- to help access tond have emergency resources including access to emergency transportation dollars. i look forward to working with the gentleman to address this important funding matter as quickly and and expeditiously as possible. i speak for all the house