put on there by george w. bush, but served under two different administration. we thank you, sir, for your time this morning. getting up early in sa san francisco and talking to the viewerrers. >> guest: thank you, greta. >> host: we'll be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. thank you for calling in and seconding ut your tweets and posting comments on facebook. we'll see you tomorrow.

>> we were hoping to bring you remarks from vice president joe biden to the house democrats' retreat taking place despite the weather in cambridge, maryland. lawmakers meeting at the hiatt hotel there, the same place the republicans held their policy meeting. vice president biden decided not to make the trip today. citing the large snowstorm pummeling the eastern seaboard. the caucus chair, congressman becerra, said there were 125 members registered for the retreat. president obama is still scheduled to meet with house democrats on friday before departing to california. he has a meeting with king abdullah of jordan and a vacation. we are expecting remarks from democratic leaders this afternoon. minority leader nancy pelosi expected to answer questions that. will be live at 4:00 p.m. eastern. we'll have it for you on c-span.

we'll continue to keep our crew and producers at the hiatt. we'll have any news that emerges from that gathering for you when it breaks. in the meantime house democratic leaders did brief reporters last night following a day of meetings. their comments are about 35 minutes. >> i'm glad you made it. [inaudible conversations] >> yes. he has to wear a tie. >> okay. thank you for being here. we just had agreed welcome from the governor of the great state of maryland, martin o'malley and a wonderful presentation by a couple of economists who talks to us about building an economy that works for all americans which is what we are here to do,

talk about how we reward work, now we provide economic security to all americans, how we make sure that the economy of tomorrow works for everyone. not just some, but everyone. i will return to the days when we consider our children the american dream is before you. quite honestly these last few days have been pretty good for americans. yesterday we maintained the full faith and credit of the united states of america and did not cause american families mortgage interest rates to go way up. we made sure that people could still borrow at a decent rate. today hundreds of thousands of americans woke up hearing the president telling them they're getting a raise to $10.10 an hour if you were working minimum-wage. i think you're ready to work. we want to get out there and do the things that show americans that we're ready to take action to ready to work on their

behalf. this should be a year of action. there is no reason why 2014 should be a year of shut down politics or why we just pack up and put it away. we can do things like raise that minimum-wage, not just for workers for federal contractors, but for all americans. we can guarantee equal pay for equal work, renew a emergency unemployment insurance for over one half million americans and finally fix a badly broken immigration system. we know on the immigration reform front that we have the votes to pass and believe the we have the votes to pass all the initiatives that i just mentioned which is why i think that this should be a year of work and action which is why we are here assembled in maryland to talk about how we as democrats will work with the president for this year of action on behalf of the american public. with that let me turn to the leader, nancy pelosi. >> thank you very much to you and mr. crowley.

thank you for providing the auspices for which we can come together to work for an economy that works for all americans. we heard from some experts and economists today. we are in a wide exchange of ideas. and one of the ideas that emerges is that when women succeed america succeeds. the reinforcement of that principle is one that, again, the president reinforced by raising -- guaranteeing a minimum wage to people who work for contractors with the federal government. but in our agenda when women succeed american succeed. it is about pay equity and raising minimum wage. is about paid sick leave. it is about children learning and parents earning. really important. and also, we, day after the

house of representatives passed the lifted debt ceiling. can you imagine -- let me just read from the constitution. the 14th amendment declares that the validity of the public debt of the united states of america authorized by law shall not be questioned. the action that we took yesterday reinforces that honor of that statement and the constitution. it is really stunning that 199 republicans voted to defaults on the full faith and credit of the united states of america. that is not in furtherance of an economy that works for all americans. in fact, it does not work for america and all, whether it is our global standing or whether it is what is happening and kitchen tables across the country. as our chairman said, the

interest of people will pay on their car loans and mortgage statements, college loans, small business loans, should they be small business people, what it means to people's retirement, the impact of a default on the full faith and credit of the united states of america. putting all of this with a bluntness of confidence in our economy that wants to share prosperity for all americans, confidence in an economy that works for all americans. we are excited about the enthusiasm, hopeful that with the cooperation between democrats and republicans yesterday on the floor, people to the speaker for bringing up the legislation, he knows the consequences of a default, but yet 199 of his colleagues did not share that concern. stunning. and no senator voted -- no republican senator.

thank you. no republican senator voted to lift the debt ceiling. every one of them voted to default on the full faith and credit of the united states. it is really important that the public understand what is at stake in these debates. today it is president lincoln's birthday, february 12th is when we used to celebrated. now is a weekend and a weekend the rest. february 12th, president lincoln said public sentiment is everything. the public has to know how they are affected by public policy in washington d.c. they want america to have a raise. america deserves the race. work ethic is alive and well across our country. hearing from economists of creativity thrives across america which is what creates jobs for an economy that works for all americans check. we are excited about a year of

action working with the president, hopefully working in a bipartisan way. in that spirit i am pleased to yield to the distinguished democratic whip of the house, the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you, madam leader. very, very pleased to have all of you here, all of our colleagues here fish, and we were proud of our governor this evening as he spoke to our caucus. he focused on the issues that the president focused on. an optimistic way. a president just a few weeks ago said he was optimistic that he had done better but we were not really needed to be. we still need to invest in growing our economy. he said that he wanted to work together. i would suggest that every time that we have had a bipartisan

vote america has been advantage to. whether it was being airbills, unfortunately not in a bipartisan way a great bipartisan votes when we funded government, past the omnibus appropriation bill, replace the devastatingly negative and sequestration under the. so acting in a bipartisan fashion is a good thing for the country. the president thinks that we need to act. the american public did not send us to the congress of the united states says not to the public business. not to invest. not to vote to make sure they get paid.

not as the fall were the cracks. not help the economy by passing comprehensive immigration reforms. and while i'm optimistic that when we act together america will succeed women will do better, all this will be better. we will, in a phrase that i have used so often make it in america that is what americans will do. we want to have a sense that they can make it in america. that is what people came to america, to make it, to seize the opportunity that is the american dream. i'm optimistic, concerned. he says that is what our leaders said. if we get past this one referring to the extension of the debt limit so america would pay its bills we are done until

the election. let us hope that is not true. let us hope that the republicans want to work with the president and with us to make sure that we can make it in america. women do better and america will do better if we invest in our people and grow our economy so that everybody can make it in america. that the yield to my dear colleague and friend, the assistant leader, mr. jim cliburn. >> thank you very much. madam leader. i think that all of us have the ability by the actions. the minimum wage, federal contractors. >> minimum wage.

it extends into areas that we have not touched on. it has been 20 years since we have established a floor for the people who learned salaries for tips. two hours and $0.13. twenty years ago. it has been that way ever since. this executive order raised the debt floor to $4.90. and it covers concessions and service, contractors which means that these concessions for state government where we have people blind and disabled who do certain services for the state government and contract with the state government.

with that service is covered as well. now we believe it is time for the congress to pass the bill. it would immediately lift over for a half million americans above the poverty level. that is what it would do. and i think it is high time that we do that. because, as was said, over 6 percent of the people who are going to benefit from the minimum wage are women. and one in four had children. and so i think it's important for us to look at one other thing. we hear all this talk about minimum-wage as relates to young workers. the fact of the matter is the average age of minimum-wage

employees is 35 years old. and they have the least one show. so this is all about lifting households, women, children above the poverty level. i would hope that the congress, our republican friends would join us in passing the bill raising the minimum wage. with that and would like to yield to the vice chair of our caucus. ..

>> desperately searching for a job and have now been denied insurance. what that really means to these individuals is as they continue to look for work for education, food, medicine, r ent, mortgage cover their government is not there because the republican caucus uses this against

individuals and their families. the gentleman from new york contacted me is there anyway we could see a bill this week before we broke for the district work period and i said i don't think it was likely after the senate was unable to pass. it is difficult to tell someone who was so desperate in fact, looking at the prospects of losing his home what that means to a family. my republican colleagues talk about how profanely they are be here is the opportunity to send a message to 1.8 million americans, not democrats or republicans, not red or blue or green, just americans who were desperately trying to make ends meet.

said message to give people hope that their country believes of them as much as they believe of the country and give them hope to take care of their families. just something to help make ends meet to pass the unemployed in insurance extension with that i will turn over to our point person on the budget committee. >> i joline to welcome you to maryland off to a great start what specific actions we can take to make sure the economy works for all americans. that is the subject to have the economy to work for everybody we have to reform the broken tax code that is

too many places is rigged to help powerful special interest and folks at the very high end of the income scale and a case in point our the provisions that acreage big corporations to ship american jobs overseas. american products, not jobs. other provisions of the tax code that encourage big corporations rather than having those funds invested here with american jobs. we will push has the president outlined to a tax code that works for everybody much as powerful special interest to be sure we encourage investment united states with all sorts to modernize our

infrastructure that helps to put more americans back to work period we hope our republican colleagues will join us in that effort. i will turn it over to steve israel who tries to make sure we build the economy that works for everybody. >> thank you. what you have heard from my colleagues cover rising wages, pay equity for women, a fair tax code code, immigration reform the fundamental differences of the united states congress right now. whose side are you on? and every one of those issues of rising wages immigration reform of fair tax code whose side are you

on in california today i will add one of the most liberal republicans in congress decided he was on the wrong side to jump ship because he himself knows you cannot continue to defend the indefensible or the wrong priorities. and to the wrong values. having you very much. >> with a summary of your remarks shows your approach to the president's initiative what do you oppose them what to expect to hear on friday? >> i think the characterization we were not talking about president

obama is initiative but came up and bacchus i said that in its present form is unacceptable to me and i have worked with many colleagues to find common ground but in the present form it is unacceptable. but it is not a rejection of the president's trade agenda but a rejection of the current form of the camp/baccus. but the trade issue is very important because the party of john f. kennedy, a free trade, fair trade we believe the global economy is here tuesday and we want to export products overseas. we have the tax code right now that the ward's businesses that sense jobs overseas. that has to be reversed to reward businesses that

create jobs in the united states. it is all a very much a part of the economy that works for all americans. something my colleagues are saying, let mr. israel was talking about we see what the president said in his speech to an opportunity agenda. we have long seen an opportunity gap in our country and we have to do what we can to close the gap. one of the approaches is we understand the american people are not fully participating in the prosperity sub are enjoying in the country or any part of it. we interesting and the republicans are in different to those to be raised of the battle of wage and to beat an extension the list goes

on. do any colleagues want to say anything? vivid you have been known to give a prediction of things what is the likelihood of the democrats taking back the house? >> we are here to talk policy but hopefully find common ground to focus on the economy to create good paying jobs in a bipartisan way. if republicans was supported the increase the minimum wage we would rather have that legislative success than the issue of the campaign. >> talk about obamacare side up my gosh -- where they have signed up to what is your reaction?

what is the pivotal mark? >> are you referencing the affordable care act? >> yes. [laughter] >> the affordable care act we worked very hard to enact as we talk to a lot of you i said it will get better every month. by the time we get to summer people will say this is helping me, my brother brother, bryce sister, my neighbors and we have evidence of that mentioned in the 3.3 million people cover a 1.1 billion in january alone. this is very important young people in all that the interest-rate ages 89 through 34 rose 65% over

last month. we think what is happening is what we thought the american people see the benefits of the affordable care act with the marketplace with competition to get good benefits and better access. what is the purpose? period we think it will be a great benefit to and they will see that in the coming months. >> 3.40 million over 12. 5 million. >> with the exchange. >> any other questions? >> it is safe to say most issues there is zero appetite for those to come up under the republican controlled house you said you want to put pressure on

to the bill but how is there a specific strategy? said. >> guest: obama to do more? >> as you indicate to everything that we talk about is in over 70 percent of the people they think we should have comprehensive immigration reform. the list goes on. we said the too hot to handle approach public sentiment is everything as abraham lincoln said a and the more people don't like camby to have the better off we will be. however yesterday we said over and over we will the support in increase of the debt ceiling unless it is clean we are not negotiating the full faith and credit of united states of america. it took months but yesterday's they finally

conceded at least the speaker recognized the harm that would happen to our economy and we got a clean, you know, we are not going away on these issues. we passed minimum wage in the first 100 hours with the majority in 2007. president bush had signed the bill. it is not partisan. of unemployment benefits is a bipartisan initiative all along so we are suggesting is not partisan issues but areas where we have bipartisanship in the past and again, we believe the fair thing to do is to understand their challenges minimum-wage is not just for a minimum-wage earners but for every one that is why people make much more in the

minimum-wage understand it is good for them to reject the me and into the economy then creates jobs in that way as well it is a stimulus >> this is february. [laughter] >> we have spent in session five weeks. >> the debt ceiling was lifted i don't take the american people by that. timid americans are suffering they need help of its people who are earning 90 enough even the fast food chain store to increase the minimum wage the president's address that but congress

needs to do more. he asked the republicans to the democrats to pass a minimum-wage increase for the american worker. to help move the country forward to work with colleagues to make that happen but they have to beat us more than halfway. >> i don't think anyone -- to the we have discussed those the don't have a chance in heaven to get past. measures that not only have the task majority but those in the house of representatives would vote for these we're asking for achievements to have a vote and most americans would be astonished to go it is not

that congress came to get its work done by a conservative -- a concerted effort to prevent us to put up obstacles to let us vote. we're not insisting they joined us to do what americans want us to do to provide insurance for those who have lost their jobs or providing equal pay for equal work but saying let us vote and of the majority exist, but excellent but don't blockade progress the house of representatives is the people's house and should not be the graveyard for good ideas. >> we're not having a theoretical conversation but very specific actions congress can take no.

these are pieces that are ready to go. they can be acted on today if we have a vote to start changing people's lives for the better. rehab the bipartisan senate immigration a bill. we want equal pay for equal work we have legislation introduced to make sure you can earn it sicklied to take care of family who is in trouble and not have to the newspaper goodies are concrete actions we will make it clear within 100 hours of a dukakis we will do these specific things with a bb impact.

it is important there recognize these are concrete practical steps. >> yesterday you said you shared with some concern of the congressional black caucus in judicial appointments coming from the white house so can you expand on that? and let us know what appointments you would like to see moving forward. >> what i said is i was an agreement with the congressional black caucus we the diversity of the bench and the problem in the united state senate deferring to each senator in each state if they did not support diversity we would not get it and i said i agreed. as a matter of fact i had a talk briefly with senator

reid's chief of staff who ask about my sentiment. but let me differ to the assistant leader of the black caucus because he has been involved in those discussions. >> yes i have. our concerns if you look at the list of possible judges would have not been acted on, about 13 or african-american. we believe these are people who come with sterling credentials but because of the process that we have have, too many senators from various state are refusing

to return the blue slip so they're out in the bow so we have asked the senators the fact that for two years because they did not allow their names to move forward these people would be approved if they were allowed to have a vote. is not fair to have a process that will not allow the full senate to vote on these nominations. for everybody you express his concerns it is very important to america.

[laughter] >> if i may just say there is a lot of people out in the cold literally and figuratively because of the employer insurance. we don't want the republicans to be in different so far it looks the way they are let's hope they prove us wrong but they q for coming out in the cold to be with us and we hope we can stay in close touch over 48 hours a you can see how excited we are about coming together. thank you again. [inaudible conversations]

>> house democrat leaders yesterday at the start of their caucus retreat. we expect to hear more from this this afternoon as the retreat continues in cambridge, maryland, despite this snowstorm. that briefing will happen at about 4:00 eastern. we'll have it live here on c-span. a live picture now at the hiatt hotel in cambridge, maryland 34d, on the eastern shore of the state where that democratic caucus retreat is being -- taking place. this room is where journalists are filing stories. we'll continue to bring you developments from the gathering. that briefing with democrat leaders this afternoon, starting at 4:00 p.m. eastern. a picture of the state of maryland and eastern shore, aim bridge, maryland, right in the lower part there, where the house democrats are meeting today. and live picture now of the u.s. capitol here in washington, the city quieted by the major snowstorm hitting most of the eastern seaboard. more snow and rain expected across the region through this afternoon. it interrupted government

operations. the federal government closed today. many of the live events we planned to have for you today including a couple of congressional hearings, white house briefing, have been postponed due to the weather. the house and senate not in session for the rest of this week or next for the presidents' day break. we will have live coverage of the house here on c-span when members return. can you see the senate on c-span2. >> here they are coming in, closing in on me, i'm still thinking, evade. and when i went through survival school, they taught us that the people who capture you are probably the least trained to capture p.o.w.'s and maintain them. so you best time to escape is right then. i thought, ok, these are rookies. so i pull out my .38 combat masterpiece, hi two rounds of tracer and three other rounds. i went like this, get away, get back. then i fired a round of that tracer right over their head. they didn't flinch.

they just raised their rifles like this, and one of them pulled -- reached in his pocket and pulled out a little pointy talky, which is like a comic book, some of them carry in their pocket, it had drawings on one side and vietnamese phonetics on the other. the drawing showed them capturing an american pilot in his uniform with his helmet on and he has his hands up. and this one guy said, [speaking in foreign language. ] hands up, hands up. so here i am facing about nine long guns staring at me, and i decided that's probably the best advice i was going to get that day. i went hands up. >> former air force pilot and vietnam p.o.w. lee ellis, sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's "q&a." >> the context here is that lee enjoy as reputation in the modern day as someone who counseled acceptance and submission and resignation to

the situation. that has always struck me as -- it's sort of a series that doesn't add up in the sense. we know lee was the most prestigious man in the south. we know in the end the south didn't simply submit to the political will of the north. that southerners, ex-con fed rats began quickly to contest the northern understanding -- confederates began to quickly to contest the northern understanding of submission. what i found is that in the eyes of confederates lee was not a symbol of submission. he was a symbol of unbowed pride and a kind of measured defiance. >> rethinking grant and lee at appomattox. saturday night at 10:00 eastern, and sunday morning at 11:00, part after three-day presidents' day weekend on c-span3's american history tv.

>> f.d.a. official says the nation's drug shortage is declining, but the numbers still remain too high. and the agency is doing what it can. the f.d.a. regulatory programs deputy director testified before the house energy and subcommittee on health monday. marcia cross with the g.a.o. testified. both' greed that the food and drug administration's safety and i novation act has played a role in reducing shortages. congressman joe pitts shares the subcommittee. congressman frank pallone is the ranking member. it's about an hour and 15 minutes. the

>> in recent years we have seen a short and of drugs in the united states, particularly with generics. while the number of new shortages dipped into 2012 and 2013, the total number of ongoing shortages has continued to increase. this is unacceptable. numerous drugs have remained on f.d.a. shortage list for some time. what is the agency doing to help address these situations? recent news reports have highlighted shortages of oncology products, nutrition products, and even common yet critically important saline solutions. such shortages lead to delays in treatment, rationing of care, and higher cost. they can also pose greater risk to patients in the norm of medication errors, and as providers are forced to seek alternative treatments. drug shortages are a very challenging problem, and it is clear that there is no simple

solution. we recognize the complicated nature of this issue, as well as the severity. last congress the subcommittee took action by including a stecks on drug shortages in the food and drug administration's safety and innovation act. which was signed into law on july 9, 2012. title 10 of fadsia sought to give new authorities and responsibilities to the food and and having ration drug manufacturers notify f.d.a. of a discontinuance of production. among other provisions under fadsia the secretary of health and human services is required to, one, maintain a publicly available up-to-date drug shortage list, two, teash a task force to implement -- establish a task force to implement a strategic plan to mitigate drug shortages. three, submit annual reports to congress including relating actions taken by the agency.

fadsia's also required g.a.o. to examine the cause of drug shortages and formulate recommendations on how to prevent or alleviate drugs on such shortages. last october, f.d.a. issued its stranl plan for preventing and mitigating drug shortages. further, we now have f.d.a.'s first annual report on drug shortages, though it only covers the first three quarters of 2013. and today g.a.o. released its final report pursuant to fadsia. while drug shortages continue to plague our health care system, statistics do indate progress on some fronts. -- do indicate progress on some fronts. i would like to welcome our witnesses, marcia cross, health re director at g.a.o., and douglas throgmortan, director of

programs at f.d.a. i would like to thank g.a.o. for their competitive report -- comprehensive report and the time they have spent with my staff on this issue. i yield the remainder of my time to vice chair dr. burgess. >> thank you, mr. chairman. when doctors don't have the essential tools, they are restricted in what they can do for their patients. members of this committee have taken the lead and made major strides in working to reduce drug shortages by passing the food and drug administration safety and innovation act of 2012. in addition, i have worked very closely with chairman upton and chairman pitts on several of the provisions contained therein, and things have gotten better, but the problems are not completely gone. as recently as last week, food and drug administration listed sodium chloride injection bags as a drug shortage. sodium chloride is not a particularly esso tarek or

exotic molecule, for having that much trouble with salt it only makes you wonder what other more difficult molecules we may encounter there. the food and drug administration has a role in addressing drug shortages, but it is a complex issue. in 2010 over 240 drugs were in short supply, and over 400 generics were back ordered. many generics have a line so tight when the production is corrupted the company cannot afford to continue its manufacturer. this inevitably leads to more than 3,000 backlogs of generic applications. physicians are still faced with having to tell patients they can't receive the care they need not because there is no treatment but because a product is simply not available. i thank the chairman for holding this hearing so we can learn more about the progress that is being made on the nation's drug shortage problem. general ed the

accounting office report is being released. i look forward to hearing from them on their findings. the law is aimed to ensure that providers have the tools they need to alleviate suffering. the suffering of every patient and certainly i'm anxious to hear the testimony today. yield back to the chairman. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. now yields five minutes for opening statement to mr. pallone. >> thank you, chairman pitts. i'm glad we are having the hearing today on this critical issue of drug shortages. over the past several years we saw an alarming trend of increases in drug short ands, and we knee the devastating effects this can have on patients, potentially prolonging disease or causing permanent disability or even death. this is an issue i and many of my colleagues on the committee have long been concerned about. congress took action to provide the food and drug administration with tools to help address this problem through provisions in the food and drug administration safety and innovation act, or fadsia, which passed on a strong bipartisan basis in the summer of 2012. in fadsia we asked the

government accountability office to review several factors related to drug shortages. update work done previously, and they released that report today and i'm glad dr. crosse is here to discuss it further. i want to take a moment to highlight some of the other aspects that address the drug shortage problem. in its 2011 report on drug shortages, the g.a.o. recommended, and we heard from -- heard this from her stakeholders, too, an earl-i notification requirement for potential shortages so that f.d.a. can work with manufacturers sooner to take steps to prevent or mitigate shortages. we included such a requirement in fadsia and it's encouraging that the number of new drug shortages declined in 2012 compared to the previous two years, and that partial data from 2013 indicates that the trend is continuing. the f.d.a. has cited this and other fadsia drug shortage provisions as contributing to their ability to prevent by their calculation 140 drug shortages in the first three

quarters of 2013. we also heard from stakeholders the need for review times for generic drug applications and reduce the significant backlog of pending applications and the generic user fee agreement that was passed as part of fadsia was important in getting f.d.a. the resources it needs to make that happen. we have learned that it can be important to have multiple manufacturers, especially for the most medically important drug, to help alleviate drug shortages. as we heard from f.d.a. a few months ago, the agency has been aggressively hiring f.t.e.'s first generic drug program, meeting hiring goals as part of its efforts to tackle the backlog and speed up review times. these are some of the steps that have tan taken to address drug shortages which is a complex problem. as i'm sure we'll hear today from our witnesses, drug shortages remain high and remain a problem. many of the shortages are still sterile injectable drug, and i am aware they face unique challenges because they are

technically difficult to manufacturer. each drug is often manufactured by one or small number of companies making it difficult for other companies to be able to fill the need if any one company develops manufacturing problems. it's clear while we have made progress in some areas, our work is not over. i thank our witnesses from f.d.a. and g.a.o. for being here today to continue our discussion on the topic of drug shortages. i look forward to learning more about what we can do to further prevent them. thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to welcome our witnesses, i thank you-all for being here. i thank the chairman and vice chairman of the committee for their attention to this issue. as you-all know, 2011, 2012 we held hearings, we have worked to -- through this process and what

the factors are that are causing the drug shortages, and we know that they have increased in recent years, and i'm one of those, i believe, let's get to the root cause. and to the root problems so that we are solving this. i continue to talk with those health professionals in the community and tennessee and get their input on this. we did take a bipartisan action, as the chairman and ranking member have mentioned, and that was to address through fadsia the shortages and fadsia did provide f.d.a. with short they need -- with authority they needed. it put new requirements on the manufacturers to help prevent and mitigate the shortages shall or supposedly on paper that's what they are to do. this is a wonderful opportunity for us to look at the g.a.o. report, to question you, to hear from you, and to continue to try to look at this systemically,

holistically, and get to the root causes of solving this problem. mr. chairman, i yield back to ou for further yielding. >> the chair thanks the gentlelady. that concludes the panel's -- members' opening statements. on the panel today we have two witnesses, dr. marcia crosse, director health care u.s. government accountability office. and dr. doug throck morten, deputy director for regulatory programs. center for drug evaluation research, u.s. food and drug administration. thank you for coming. your written testimony will be made part of the record. you'll have five minutes to summarize your opening statement. and at this time the chair recognize dr. crosse for five minutes for her summary. >> chairman pitts, ranking member pallone, and members of the subcommittee, i'm pleased to be here today to discuss our work on drug shortages.

as you know prescription drugs are a critical part of medical care, but over the last decade there's been an increase in the number of drugs that are in shortage. this has included drugs to stabilize trauma victims, to control pain during surgery, to treat heart disease and cancer, and to provide nutritional support to premature infants. today g.a.o. released our report on drug shortages, a study you mandated in the f.d.a.'s safety and innovation act and i'm happy to discuss our key findings. we found that the number of drug shortages remains high, and that providers experienced challenges responding to shortages without adversely affecting patient care. beginning in 2007, the number of w drug shortages increased each year until 2012, when the number of new shortages declined, and that downward trend appears to have continued through 2013 based on the partial year data we analyzed.

while the number of new shortages has declined, the total number of shortages, including both new shortages and ongoing shortages that began in a prior year, has continued to increase because many shortages are prolonged with some spanneding multiple years. -- spanning multiple years. the majority are injectable drurks particularly generics. shortages of medically necessary drugs can have a range of negative effects. a drug shortage may require providers to delay or ration care, create difficulties finding alternative drugs, increase the risk of medication errors, lead to higher costs, reduce time for patient care, and result in the hoarding or stockpiling of drugs and shortage. for example, providers may have to ration care by prioritizing the patients who have a greater need for the drug. the immediate cause of a drug shortage can generally be traced to a manufacturer halting or

slowing production to address quality problems, triggering a supply disruption. other manufacturers have a limited ability to respond to supply disruptions due to constrained manufacturing capacity. we also identify potential underlying causes specific to the economics of the generic sterile injectable drug market. such as that low profit margins have limited infrastructure investments or led some manufacturers to exit the market. although there are few studies of underlying causes, among the issues that have been examined are that purchasers focus primarily on price rather than quality, reducing incentives for manufacturers to invest in maintenance or quality improvements. that group purchasing organizations negotiate reduced drug prices on behalf of hospitals and other providers, lowering profit margins for manufacturers that win contracts, and leaving losing

manufacturers to exit the market. and a 2005 change in medicare part d drug reimbursement policy for outpatient providers decreased both demand and prices for generic drugs. the stakeholders we met with, which included manufacturers and group purchasing organizations, had mixed views on these potential underlying causes with no general agreement on the role such factors may play. in compg f.d.a. activities -- examining f.d.a. activities, we found the agency has prevent more potential shortages and improved its ability to respond to shortages in the last two years. the new requirement that manufacturers must notify f.d.a. in advance of a potential shortage has allowed f.d.a. to take steps to prevent and mitigate shortages sooner. for example, it has expedited application reviews and inspections, exercised enforcement discretion, and

helped manufacturers respond to quality problems. these steps are important to respond to some of the immediate causes of shortages. however, some of the underlying causes we identified are beyond the agency's authority, as f.d.a. does not have control over private companies' business decisions. for example the agency is unable to require manufacturers to start producing or continue producing drugs, or to build redundant manufacturing capacity, regardless of the severity of a shortage. nonetheless, f.d.a. can take steps to maximize the agency's use of the information it has to address drug shortages. we identified shortcomings in its management and use of the agency's drug shortage data. in our report we made recommendations to f.d.a. to improve its database and coven duct routine analyses and the agency has agreed with these recommendations. in summary, while f.d.a. has

made progress in preventing potential drug shortages and responding to actual shortages, the number of shortages remains high and many persist for months and even years. the large number of potential shortages reported to the agency suggest the market is still at-risk of supply disruptions. as a result, patients and providers will continue to struggle as essential and lifesaving medications remain in short supply. mr. chairman, this completes my prepared statement and i would be happy to respond to any questions you or other members of the subcommittee may have. >> thank you. the chair now recognizes dr. throckmorten for five minutes to summarize his opening statement. >> mr. chairman and members of the subcommittee, i'm douglas throckmorten, deputy director for evaluation and research. thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today about what the f.d.a. is doing to address drug shortages. drug shortages as others have said are usually preceded by a

disruption in manufacturing of a product. some product disruptions are manufacturer controls such as decisions to permanently discontinue production of a drug that's no longer profitable. other factors are outside the manufacturer's control such as natural disasters or the unavailability of materials needed for manufacturing. a particular problem when materials are only available from one supplier. most often, however, shortages are the result of quality failures within manufacturing facilities. such as failing to follow proper procedures that allow bacteria to grow in a product. quality failures can result from maintaining a manufacturing line. for example, poorly maintained old equipment has led to the introduction of iron particulates in injectable products. prevent this requires the manufacturing to commit to quality manufacturing. turning to drug shortages in the us us today, while work remains, progress has been made in the prevention and resolution of

drug shortages in the united states. the agency is well positioned to work with manufacturers to find ways to prevent or reduce a shortage's impact on patients, provided we are aware there is the poe tngs for a shortage. -- potential for a shortage. timely notification by manufacturers has helped. and has enabled f.d.a. and manufacturers to prevent 170 shortages in 2013. we are also seeing fewer new shortages. . the number of shortages rose 60 to 251 new shortages. the number of new drug shortages have fallen to a low of 44 in thrown. there do, however, continue to be shortages that persist for longer periods. here, while progress is being made, is tracking and working

to resolve a number of shortages earlier. this is established by working with f.d.a. and working with manufacturers who are willing and able to increase shortages, expediting f.d.a. inspections, both from manufacturers who are currently producing as well as hose who are -- and products not meeting established standards to allow them to remain available safely. while f.d.a. standards for safety, efficacy do not change in shortage situations, they balance the need of patients, especially with patients with limited treatment options. f.d.a. makes sure that drugs are considered before issuing warning letters. in appropriate cases, regulatory flexibility is an

important actual in ensuring access to needed drugs. as a part of f.d.a.'s work on drug shortages in 2013, the f.d.a. released its strategic plan as called for. the goals of the plan is to improve the agency's response to drug shortages and have longer term to addressing shortages. first, to address existing shortages, f.d.a. is focusing in three areas. first, we're improving communications within the f.d.a. to ensure that our decisions are efficient and appropriate. second, we are improving our databases related to drug shortages, dedicating a system to improve drug shortages and allow us to have prevention and drug shortages, including the work we do to produce the annual report to congress. third, f.d.a. continues to work to improve timely and accurate drug shortages to patients and

caregivers. recognizing it begins with the spry disruption related to product quality. it encourages and sustaining improvements in manufacturing quality. for over a decade, f.d.a. has een working with academics and experts to have technologies linked to manufacturing quality. in conclusion, progress has been made in efforts to prevent and mitigate important drug shortages aided by early communications about shortages. shortages do continue to occur. f.d.a. will continue to work to address them. importantly, f.d.a. will continue to work with others to support the pharmaceutical industry in their long-term efforts to modernize drug manufacturing to prevent shortages. by working together, we can prevent drug shortages from occurring, address them when they do occur and i'm happy to

answer any questions that you have. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. that concludes the opening statements of the panel. we'll now begin questioning and i'll recognize myself for that purpose for five minutes. dr. throck morton, while the report be submitted no later than december 31, 2013, f.d.a.'s first annual shortages report was submitted to the committee on february 5. and with data from only the first three quarters of 2013. you notice in your testimony that 170 new shortages were prevented in 2013. this is up from 140 in the report f.d.a. submitted to the congress. i assume that means that f.d.a. claims to have prevented 30 shortages in the fort quarter of the year, is that correct?

>> we do have our full year data available now and we'll be happy to share that with you, mr. chairman. >> let's use that smaller sample size for sake of discussion. it will be helpful to have more detailed examples of how f.d.a. prevented these shortages. what specific actions did the agency take? which drug products would currently be in shortage if not for the agency's actions? >> i can get you some spiff information but i can -- specific information but i can give you some general examples if that would be helpful. one issue is something called regulatory flexibility. these are places where we either expedited additional actions that would otherwise have taken a bit longer or done additional work on it. last year we had 76 instances of regulatory flexibility that we exercised, effecting a total of 68 products. there's a another way to try to

speed the development of products or assure that products poe potentially go into shortage -- potentially go into shortage. so several of the offices receive applications from sponsors for new factories, for new lines within a factory. last year my office of generic drugs expedited 118 applications involving a total of 62 accelerated new drug applications. so an important number of products where we worked hard to make certain they were more quickly reviewed than normal. our office of new drug quality, which is another office looking at supplemental applications to approve drugs, approve innovator drugs. looked at 52 flue is up will hemental app i will -- new supplemental applications. in terms of therapeutics, they

expedited seven review applications last year. so in total those things reflect the kind of commitment my center has towards looking at these things, devoting our resources to do it. >> ok. you mentioned the office of generic expedited 118 applications, including 62 abriefiated applications. -- abbreviated applications. in order to prevent a shortage, how many of those applications were actually approved? >> you know, i need to get back to you with that information. obviously we're applying those new standards. but 118 speaks to the effort we undertook. >> on average, how long did f.d.a. take? >> that's a good question. i'll get back to you. >> i want to know what expedited review means in this situation.

does it referencing a provide duct in shortage go to the top of the co-2. is there a special team -- of the que. is there a special team in terms of moving the product faster? >> this would be a longer conversation. i'm assure you are aware, we've re-organized the office of generic drugs where we're evaluating in terms of the center for drugs. as part of that action, we are looking to be as efficient as we possibly can. i need to look back and look at the kinds of changes that office has made about their review staff. >> dr. crosse, did you have any review for a shortage proconduct to receive expedited review status within o.g.d.? >> we did talk with f.d.a. about this. we are continuing our work on

shortages where we'll look at an in-depth review of the drug shortages that have been expedited and how it relates to the number of applications sitting in the queue. one issue, even when you expedite an application, if it is approved, that doesn't mean that the manufacture is ready to begin production that day and there is some concern that approving one anda may displace another drug within that manufacture's facility if you're trying to move very quickly to move something to the top of the line without the sort of normal planning time. so that is something we heard about but we are looking forward to try to get some statistics for you on how frequently f.d.a. is moving on these applications and what proportion of the application is getting moved on.

>> and i'd also be interested in how f.d.a. works with the manufacture to address their targets to assess when production capacity and output has addressed the shortage. my time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman, mr. pallone, for five minutes. >> i'd like to know how helpful ou're finding the drug shortages and what things you think congress should do to address drug shortages and i'd like to hear about f.d.a.'s strategic plan for preventing drug shortages. i was pleased to see it was released last october in terms of your obligations. so essentially three questions. update us in regard to drug shortages and the agency's plan to address them and now are in parts of the law that does not

work as intended as well as they should? are there other areas we should be looking how to address the shortages? >> thank you. first, let me say the provision that expanded the notification that manufacturers have been providing for us has been enormously helpful. it's hard for me to overstate that. we are learning about shortages earlier than we had previously and it's giving us the opportunity to talk with manufacturers in ways that we hadn't had an opportunity before and we've been able to prevent shortages as a result. so unquestionably that aspect has been useful from the f.d.a.'s perspective. we continue to make use of this. as you know, we're continuing to write rulemaking and things related to it. that is fundamentally a valuable aspect of the work we're doing that's very useful. the other aspects i think have been useful for us as well. the requirement to produce an

annual report i think is valuable because it does give us an opportunity on an annual basis to look back and assess whether there are things we need to continue to work on or where progress has been made. that's a piece that we were able to provide to you recently. for three quarters of the data, we obviously need to update you with the full data because we think that will give the fuller picture of the f.d.a. -- that f.d.a. has conducted. and so fundamentally it has been valuable to us from a shortage prevention strategy. now you asked us whether additional things were identified in the strategic plan that also needed to be done. the short answer is yes. so there are many things we can do internally, there are things we can do to make sure that f.d.a. improves our responses to the drug shortages issue. and that relates, many of them, to process.

so i chair the task force. that's been steering our response to drug shortages since the passage. that task force is made up of individuals from across the agency. so not simply my center but also the center for bilogics, the inspectional branch of the f.d.a. all of us are coming together to talk about the things we need to do, the things we need to communicate about better to be able to basically do the job more efficiently and more appropriately. we also recognize we need to improve our communications. the communications we place on the website are looked at hundreds of thousands of times by individuals looking for information about shortages. we heard loud and clear when we talked to our stakeholders that needed to be improved so that the information was easier to find, so that topical information was easier to identify. that the normal shortage, for instance, was at the top of the queue, and we

are trying to improve those communications. separately, however, there are things that are -- as dr. crosse said, outside of our scope, outside of the things that f.d.a. is able to undertake. there are things that the manufacturers, we believe, have a role to explore. there are other things that other stakeholders could explore as well that have great potential, i believe, in addressing the underlying causes of shortages. i'll be happy to talk about those if you are interested. >> let me ask you one more question. one of the recommendations is that f.d.a. conduct routine analysis of the drug shortage database to identify trends and that seems like a reasonable assumption. perhaps not a formalized process. o you know what accomplishes

will be? and recommendations for shortages. i have 15 seconds. >> fundamentally, we agree with the recommendations that the g.a.o. has made. we understand that the quality of the decisionmaking that we can have with regards to shortage depends on the quality of the data so we're putting in place a new data drug shortage data system that's going to robust. data more . ke it more standardize >> i recognize the gentlelady from tennessee, mrs. blackburn, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and, again, thank each of you or being here with us. i want to -- i got just a couple of questions. i know that the f.d.a. report said, you know, the number of reported new shortages has declined in 2012 and for the

first third quarters of 2013. but then g.a.o. says the total number of active shortages continues to be high. o do you each agree with that? >> the number of new shortages has decreased and we think that the early notification has been helpful in that regard but a number of -- >> ok. >> i think we present there information -- that information in our report. >> dr. thockmorton, do you think the shortages it be too high? >> absolutely. >> just want to be sure everyone is in complete agreement on that. what i'm hearing from the providers in tennessee, they agree with the g.a.o. report. dr. throckmorton, they look at yours and it's kind of a head scratcher because they are not seeing the kind of improvement

that your report would lead people to believe is there. and we continue to hear about the shortages with the generic, sterile, injectible drug, the i.v. fluids, the medications for anesthesia, some of the cancer therapies. so these are problems and you might be making some progress but it is not coming fast enough. d so let's talk about f.d.a. implementing the system and preventing getting to the point they can prevent new shortages and decrease the backlog of the current shortages. so ms. crosse, give me the couple of things that we need to be holding them responsible for doing. what is going to speed this up? because we can't do this where we're saying 10 years from now we are going to have in place.

>> we continue to look at some of the underlying causes. i think we need to look a little more closely at those generic drug applications that are sitting at f.d.a. and the extent to which f.d.a. has been able to expedite the applications. which could be something that would help. but there are still a number of -- >> if i could engage you right there for just a moment. dr. throckmorton you said you expedited 118. >> generic, yes. >> if you were setting a goal for him, how many should they be expediting every year, 200? >> i don't know and i think there is a concern if you expedite too many then you're creating a clog at the top. >> ok. >> it's difficult. even within the priorities -- >> maybe approved but then they can't put it straight into manufacturing. >> right. so there needs to be

conversation with the manufacturers of how quickly they need to come online. >> so addressing them at the back end at the point of approval. would predictability in in process with the review system -- because as i talked to some that are working the generic space, the biotherapeutic space, the unpredictability at the f.d.a. seems to be a problem. dr. crosse, would that help? >> that's not something we heard from the manufacturers, particularly. i think, you know, certainly that's always an issue in any review process, the applications, but it's not something they particularly pointed to here. because of the unpridictibility of when a shortage might occur. >> dr. throckmorton. >> i want to try to draw a distinction between the number of ongoing shortages that extend for longer periods of

time. that's one group of shortage that i think we know less of than we need to. the number of new shortages and the number of new shortages prevented. so when i answered your question there are too many shortages, their shortages have impact on impacts in the u.s. we would have to do away with not having too many shortages. we have to acknowledge there has been work that's been important that has been able to have new shortages adding onto that pile, if you will. we have been able to prevent shortages that matter. an important task we need to undertake is understand those longer duration shortages. those shortages that mean no product is in the marketplace at all. there is no manufacture willing and interested in manufacturing -- >> my time has expired. i thank you for that additional explanation. mr. speaker, as i yield back to

you, i do want to take a moment and wish happy birthday to congressman guthrie. yield back. >> the chair thanks the entlelady. wish mr. guthrie happy birthday. e chair recognizes the ranking member of the full committee, mr. dingell. >> i'm pleased the committee is turning again to the important topic of drug shortages. there are many causes for this. the availability of raw materials, complexibility of manufacturing, certain treatments, certain increases in demand. we also have a significant problem in adequate funding for f.d.a. and adequate number of personnel to properly address the business of that agency. while we have made some progress in that area, such as

the passage of f.d.a.'s safety and innovation act, which improved drug short sadges, we all agree, i -- shortages, we all agree i think more work is needed to be done. i hope the witnesses will say yes or no. the last time we held a hearing on drug shortages, the situation is dire. is it a fact that the drug shortages quadrupled from 2005 to 2011? >> yes. >> doctor, is it correct there were 117 shortages during the year 2012, yes or no? >> yes. >> now, doctor, is it correct that f.d.a.'s successfully prevented 170 drug shortages in 2013? >> working with manufacturers, yes. >> now, dr. crosse, although g.a.o. used slightly different

metrics, did your agency also find a decrease in new drug shortages during 2012, yes or no? >> yes. >> dr. throckmorton, did the new authorities provided to the s.i.a. help a. .d.a. reduce drug shortages, yes or no? >> yes. information ive us when shortages occur? >> yes. >> i'd also like to know would personnel and more money assist f.d.a. in terms of addressing these questions? >> we're devoting resources we need to to this problem. >> and so, doctor, would you submit a short monograph on that to this committee? >> yes. >> does dr. throckmorton need

additional moneys to combat shortages?d future would you submit the resources needed by the agency? >> yes. >> dr. cross, e, g.a.o.'s report on drug shortages makes two recommendations to f.d.a. specifically you recommend that the agency uses drug shortage database in a more proactive manner to identify trends and patterns to help prevent shortages before they occur, is that correct? >> yes. >> now dr. throckmorton, does f.d.a. agree with this recommendation? >> yes. >> would you please both submit a detailed response for the record regarding how f.d.a. could use this database more proactively and whether you need more resources to implement the recommendation?

>> yes. >> yes. >> now, i am pleased with the progress made in preventing drug shortages since the passage of f.d.a. s.i.a. we need to take a step back and look at the big picture. fundamentally, drugs are in shortage because we simply aren't making enough of them. you know, current shortages of generic, sterile, injectable drugs. dr. throckmorton, does f.d.a. believe there is incentives to enter this market today or are more needed? >> important question i can't answer without a fuller discussion and with more -- >> would you submit a proper analysis in response to this? >> yes. >> now, i think it's time to start thinking outside the box of how we can continue to make progress on preventing these

drug shortages and combating existing shortages. we need innovative ideas to help solve the problem as well as cooperation from all stakeholders. i look forward to working with my colleagues on the committee, the f.d.a. and all stakeholders on this critical issue of moving forward. mr. chairman, i thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. now yields five minutes to the vice chairman of the committee, mr. burgess, for question. >> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. throckmorton, we had the executive order from october of 2011 and then of course food and drug re-authorization in july of 2012. but for the casual observer to this problem of drug shortages, can you kind of just give us a thumbnail of what's being done to deal with the existing drug shortages? >> we have a number of things.

first off, i would say existing drug shortages, especially those that have lasted for a prolonged period of time are hard. they're hard to resolve because the factors that have led to them have meant manufacturers have left that space entirely. so resolving those are going to require finding tools to encourage a new manufacture to decide to add a product to a manufacturing line, make a decision that's a product they can make a profit at, decide to design that line and get approvals. so those long-term shortages are things we need to explore further. >> hold that thought for a second. have the manufacturers been responsive? >> manufacturers understand this issue. we have been in close discussion with many of them. they've identified this group, these longer term shortages we need to continue with.

>> dr. crosse talked about enforcement discretion and you talked about exercise of regulatory flexibility. can you give us some practical examples of where that exercise of regulatory flexibility, for thestic drug -- drug, has there been help? >> let's talk about the nutritional supplements that were in critical shortage recently that are use in newborn infants where it's really life or death for them to get access to these medicines, those products were in limited availability because the manufacturers are having a hard time producing enough sufficient material.

f.d.a. exat the dieded any review, all of our activities to make certain whatever the manufacture was able to provide we were able to make certain was able to serve the infants, the newborns as quickly as possible. we had examples where particulates were found were on surface required cessation of the manufacture. because of their critical nature, we worked with the manufacturers. we worked to find filters that can be placed in line when that is administered to the patient, allowing them to continue to be used even though there is this product defect. we determined there has to be made available to the patients. we worked the manufacturers to make that happen. >> so that has been successful. talk about profofal. anesthetic is a

big deal. >> there the issue is a large faction of it comes from outside the u.s. well over 90% is imported into the country and there have been some concerns about importation as -- because of some use in unapproved uses. the f.d.a.'s interest, fote cuss we had -- focus we had is to make sure they are using it on label, indicated in outpatient settings for anesthesia. our work has been to work with the sponsor to make sure the patients received when it is indicated for them. five million dosages, it's an important product we are paying close attention to. >> the recovery time is so abbreviated with that as opposed to the other compounds.

>> in the past when there was a shortage a few years ago and what we learned in that shortage was when physicians moved from that to other products they were less familiar with, you know, mistakes occurred because they were not as familiar with the dosage and how to monitor patients and things like that. so making certain that product is available is something that's very important for the u.s. >> just very briefly, i heard difficulties getting proper amounts of tamaflu during this last flu season and the cost of tamaflu had really exponentially increased. can you speak to that at all? >> i hadn't heard that the cost of tamaflu spiked. there were other increases in pricing, but that's not something that the f.d.a. has the statutory authority over. while there were some shortages with tamaflu, we feel like they oduced the amounts of tama

dls flu when necessary. >> i have questions but i'll submit it. >> i yield to the gentlelady from the virgin islands, dr. christensen. >> i want to thank you for this hearing today. while i am very happy to hear that the drug shortages are reducing, as everyone said, they still remain too high, and e know that rural areas, communities of color, territories like my district, are where we'll feel it the most when there is a drug shortage. i have a question that digs a little deeper of my colleague from tennessee, the vice chair's question, i think. asking both -- i'll start with dr. hrockmorton, but ask crosse for comment. f.d.a. was forcing manufacturers to come up with

the state-of-the-art manufacturing practices, even though the old tried and true were completely adequate to ensure safety and effectiveness. meet ument went that to the new standards, manufacturers had to shut down. i heard something that's almost the opposite the argument that f.d.a. had been telling some companies for years that their facilities were in decline and needed to be upgraded to avoid problems in the future even though they were meeting inspection standards and eventually those warnings unfortunately came through. so dr. throckmorton, can you comment on these two different perspectives? you mentioned in your testimony that f.d.a. is trying to encourage industry to adopt new technologies but at the same time f.d.a. is not raising the bar, not raising the bar in standards for existing appropriate technologies. hat seems a very nuance point.

can you just elab rate -- elaborate for me? >> certainly. there is quality manufacturing that we would expect from making a tablet form, whatever. the set of standards they have in place that would quide the manufacture a product so they're safe and quality manufacturing. those things are working. and we're not changing those standards at all. hat we also see is there are more efficient ways to be manufacturing products, especially products that are complicated, products that are bilogics, products where you want to use the state-of-the-art manufacturing process where we have been working over a decade to troy -- try to help those guide drug manufacturing and make recommendations in the form of guidance and ways that manufacturers can look at to do better than the current.

so we're not looking to change the current acceptable processes, we're looking to find a way to move towards a more efficient, a more continuous kind of manufacturing that we think offers a lot of potential for proventing shortages to -- preventing shortages. >> thank you. dr. crosse, would you like to add anything? >> we heard, too, the same concerns from industry and from f.d.a. the same response. f.d.a. has moved increasingly d now under fdasia is moving to a risk-based inspection decisionmaking process to which manufacturers they should be inspecting with which frequency. the drugs that are in shortage are inherently risky in their manufacturer and you would expect them to be a higher level of inspection of those

facilities. just because of the risk of the product. we as part of the ongoing work i mentioned before, we are going to be looking at the pattern of inspections that f.d.a. has had across the number of years of these facilities to see if we're seeing any change because it was a concern raised to us by manufacturers but the standards, as regulations have not changed. >> thank you. i have a number of other questions that i'll submit for the record but i have a short one. dr. crosse, this g.a.o. report doesn't focus on medically important drugs. can you tell us the trends provided in the new report are likely to product from those medically important drugs, is that something you can focus on in the future? >> we are very -- it tracks very closely. we did use a different data source. we used information from the university of utah drug information system because they have had a data bation for much

longer. -- database for much longer. we were able to look at trends across time. f.d.a. didn't have a database until 2011. we wanted something that went back to 2011. the vast majority of the data that utah posed of medically necessary drugs, there is close alignment there. there are differences in the way the two -- f.d.a. and utah count the drugs. so the numbers may look different even though you're talking about the same drug shortage. >> my time is up. thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair thanks the gentlelady. now recognize the gentleman from illinois, mr. shimkus, five minutes for questions. >> mr. chairman, thank you for being here. obviously a follow-up to the g.a.o. report. a few comments before i again. we're never going to have enough money to do whatever we want to do and more people and more money assumes that will make things better but this really -- it's important for me

to always remember the whole budget pie. when 65% is mandatory spending, 35% is discretionary spending. if we don't get control over mandatory spending, spending stays the same, discretionary keeps shrinking which will affect all agencies. the military and the like. so in this budget debate, as people say, and we hear the discretionary part of the budget, we are ill-advised not to always talk about the problems of mandatory spending. i'd also say that f.d.a. is one of the few agencies that got additional money through these budgetary fights than a lot of other agencies. so with that, sidney, can you put up this -- because a lot of the questions i think are pertaining to this that's in the g.a.o. report. why have it on -- that's i've been playing around with my ipad.

whether it's marsha blackburn or john dining mr. dingell:le, i think they've all been referring to this chart. the dark blue is ongoing shortages which began in prior years. now i guess the first question have -- so like in the 2000's, 540, some of those must fall off. is that true, dr. crosse? >> that's true. >> cumulative. >> it's not cumulative of all of them. some drug shortages are resolved so they drop out. those not resolved at the end of the year roll over into our data for the next year. >> and forgive me if i didn't read the report as closely as i should. have -- from 2007, even until it was projected on the final -- the final bar chart which isn't finished with the fiscal year, are there pending drugs that follow that whole time

period? >> i'm not aware of any that follow the entire time period. we do have some that extended for five years. a very small number. most drug shortages are resolved within one year or to two years, but there is a small number of shortages that have continued across multiple years. >> so the lighter blue portion, dr. throckmorton, you're saying success has been made in the new shortages, right? we see that on that chart. dr. crosse, you have concluded there has been progress made as we see from that pending chart, correct? and that's both in the testimony? >> that's correct. >> so that's kind of my sumation. this chart is very illustrated

in the report and kind of highlighted what most people talked about. i guess a couple years ago when we've been having this debate, i always wondered why the market itself doesn't respond to alleviate the shortages based upon a price signal. now, dr. burgess kind of mentioned, which dr. throckmorton, you may dismiss there was a tamaflu signal sent. i don't know that. you said you didn't know that. why, in my minute left, is there something structurally about how we -- either the government in its coding or its spending through medicare and edicaid or the insurance applications of purchasing drugs, is there something that distorts the market signals for

shortages? >> i'm not sure. >> maybe that's something, mr. chairman, to follow-up in another question in the future. dr. throckmorton, what do you think? >> i think as others have commented, the economics got to play in the decisionmaking that the manufacturers are making here. speaking for myself, then we might like to. those are important -- >> a lot of these shortages are low margin generic drugs, too, so if they are very low margin, they're making a penny on whatever the application is and that's hard to get a price signal on a return on a major -- if you only have one plan operating full speed, producing all of this product. >> someone said the profit on a dose is in the tens of cents. >> excellent. thank you very much.

mr. chairman, i yield back. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. now recognize the gentleman from kentucky, mr. guthrie, for five minutes. >> i appreciate what the gentleman from illinois was asking. i had a high school reunion with my friends in auburn, alabama. he was talking about the short annals of drugs. he said it wasn't the expensive stuff. he couldn't do his service properly because of that. classic price controls and economics. when there's not an ability to move the price for some reason, then you say it will be shortage and quality. that's what you mentioned, shortage and quality and there doesn't seem to be a price signal. we are not talking about hundreds of thousands or thousands of dollars. we are talking about sometimes cents and sometimes dollars. dr. crosse, i'm sorry, in your testimony you said that f.d.a. told you that requirements that

manufacturers notify the f.d.a. in advance has helped the situation, that they're able to take some steps. while f.d.a. is planning to establish a new information system to track data, there are significant concerns specifically they are not conducting routine analysis of existing data, drug shortages in the database to identify or respond proactively. can you elaborate on that point? >> we did have concerns about what we call eternal controls which f.d.a. was not ensuring e accuracy in their database and they are doing broader analysis of looking at the ongoing shortages, as owe opposed to using it as a tool. what we weren't seeing was those kind of larger analyses, looking at trends. as time goes on and they have more fully developed data, we believe it's important for them to engage in that and they

agreed that's something they plan to start doing now they have a little more data for a little longer period of time. that that is something they can do. we talked to your earlier point about the economics. that is something we are trying to look at. there have been issuesed raised to us but -- issues raised to us but no agreement on the source of what's holding down those prices. >> well, thanks. so also, i noticed in 2011 that inspections were at their peak, f.d.a. inspections were at their peak and shortages were at their peak. have they looked at the correlation between inspections and shortages? >> we haven't. we'll go and see if there was a change across time in inspections. as i noted before, these are high-risk products. most of these are the sterile

injectable drugs and where you expect f.d.a. to go to those facilities than to someplace that's making a tablet that's been in operation for a long time with a good safety record. >> ok. thanks. drug shortages often require practitioners use alternative treatments that may not be as effective. does f.d.a. have alternative treatments for practitioners and patients? >> we have typically left that for other groups. particularly the pharmacists with the website that dr. crosse has been using for her data. do identify alternative uses? we're able to identify those with other occasions. people look for other alternative therapies that may or may not be on label. we tend to use -- take advantage of other people's expertise to have them do that for us.

>> thank you for that. dr. crosse, can g.a.o. provide more detailed f.d.a.'s regulatory actions to prevent or mitigate drug shortages based on your discussions? bottom line, are f.d.a.'s ctions being exercised consistently? >> we can provide you with additional detail on what actions they've taken. >> ok. r. chairman, i yield back. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. i yield to mr. griffin for five minutes for questions. .> thank you for being here sterile injectables lid to some health care providers feeling dependent on the supposedly sterile compounded drugs that led to the fungal meningitis outbreak in 2012 that killed 62 americans, thrug two in my

area. illegal manufacturers that called themselves compounding harmacies like necc, and thankfully congress put the f.d.a. on notice to deal with the drug shortages. much like the drug quality and security act with compounding and illegal manufacturing. we have signaled to better predict quality issues at manufacturing facilities. dr. throckmorton, can you comment on these improvements? >> mostly to say that we understand the importance of getting that right. so identifying what those metrics are and then having a discussion about how they would be used is very important. so our part of our ongoing efforts, efforts this coming year speak with manufacturing

experts that can talk about the kinds of measures that a plant uses to follow their own manufacturing quality. understand those things better and then talk about how a purchaser might make use of those kinds of information. >> i thank you for that. one of the concerns i had, it appears in that fungal meningitis outbreak that the lawyers at f.d.a. were not using all the powers that were available to them to oversee and while we don't want too much oversight that stops manufacturers that are doing the right things from producing their product, i hope the lawyers are being more aggressive if they see something that's out of line. while we want to have a good supply, we want to have a safe supply as well. would you agree with that? and do you think the lawyers are being proactive post the outbreak of fungal meningitis? >> i'd agree with that there nidse to be a safe supply. >> dr. crosse, the agency can employ more predictive analysis

to its preventive activities, how did the agency respond to this critique? >> f.d.a. agreed with our recommendations and my understanding they are beginning to do it immediately. >> also, the g.a.o. report found that the f.d.a. lacked procedures and training materials related to management and use of its existing drug shortage database. what impact has this had on the database to prevent or mitigate shortages? >> we think they need to have these kind of standard procedures in place to ensure the ack racy of the data and the understanding on the part f their staff to be sure how it is analyzed. we agreed they should move forward. >> and what do they need to do for the future? >> we think they need to have good information because they need to be able to look at this more broadly, to look within

classes, to look across time to measure whether or not they are putting the right steps in place and having the kind of impact to improve the situation these as n treating each individual things that need to be solved. >> i appreciate it. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> now recognize the gentlelady the gentlelady, mrs. ellmers. >> my district, this is a very specific situation, that i'm hearing from all of my hospitals. in particular all focused on wake med hospital system. they are an 870-bed hospital system with a lot around raleigh, north carolina. they basically deal with the three primary vendors for i.v. infusions and all three have experienced quality manufacturing issues as well as holiday production shutdowns that contributed to the shortage.

wake med's pharmacy spent an additional $80,000 in january to stock up on the drugs in anticipation. i appreciate the efforts of the f.d.a. to address the shortage but it appears they're addressing the symptoms and not the real causes. i'm also concerned about the medicare reimbursement system, especially the explosion of the 340-b discounts that's reducing margins for generic manufacturers. it. stop producing it also appears that these manufacturers simply don't have the margins to invest in their manufacturing plants which is why we see many of the quality problems. my question has to do with what is and how are we addressing these issues right now. i want to focus my questions today on the f.d.a.'s work with the industry to make sure everyone is working together to

find solutions. dr. throckmorton, there remains virtually no transparency in the process for how drugs that make it onto the shortage list ultimately get off this list. how does an agency decide that a product is no longer in shortage and is there a consistent and standardized formula for f.d.a. uses to produce a product from a shortage list? >> thank you. the short answer is, yes, we do have scomprinetsess to apply to -- process to apply to when they get on the shortage list and when it doesn't exist and they can come off it. our focus is determining whether or not patients in the u.s. can get the treatments they need. so it's not focused on product-by-product shortage. so there may be a shortage of aspirin because one manufacture of one aspirin may no longer be

manufacturing but there may be four other kinds of aspirin being producted. the other products can and will ramp up. that's something our people know about, talk to those other manufacturers. we're able to assess using prescription data, using other data that we have access to, we can determine whether those other manufacturers can fill in for that manufacturer that's made a decision to not manufacture or needed to stop manufacturing to improve a product line. that's slightly different than the kinds of data that the university of utah -- that dr. crosse is referring to. we are looking at the totality of the data. the ability of a given therapy, not an individual product. and so our numbers are slightly different than ashp, that the utah of information have. we believe that ours reflect -- our public health goal, if you

will. but behind that we have a process in place to determine when available production is not able to meet demand and then work with manufacturers and when production returns and is once again able to meet demand to take something off of the shortage list. >> ok. also very specifically, there are again, dr. throckmorton, the inspection of a. pimpletpmplet i. can remain a barrier and anda can market the generic drug. how has the agency tried to improve its record on this issue to ensure that the anda holders can market a drug and potentially address a drug shortage? >> so two parts to that answer. the first part would be some of the actions we already talked about, the expedited revunesd expedited inspections -- reviews and expedited inspections. there is a second longer term

and that relates to the passage kadufa, an opportunity to sort of balance the playing field, if you will, so we're able to devote the resources we need to to the generics market which 85% of the u.s. drug market is generic now. we're able to allocate to it to make sure they're getting the attention they need, the reviews -- that they need to. that's an important addition to us. >> thank you so much. i see my time has expired. i thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair thanks the gentlelady. that concludes the questions of the members who are present. we'll have additional questions we'll send to you in writing. if you'll please respond promptly. remind members they have 10 business days to submit questions for the record and members should submit their questions by the close of business on tuesday, february

25. thank you very much for the testimony, the good information and we look forward to continue to work with you. with that, without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned. fdfd [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national able satellite corp. 2014] >> house democrats: meeting at the hyatt hotel in cambridge, maryland, for a second day. we'd have vice

president biden. president obama will be speaking to the assembly tomorrow. nancy pelosi are expected to brief reporters at about 4:00 eastern and we will have live coverage for you here on c-span. looking now at the u.s. capitol, live picture of the capitol in washington as the city and the rest of the eastern seaboard continues to deal with the major winter storm. continuing to dump snow and rain across the region. everything pretty much shut down and canceled, including the federal government. we had plans to bring you several congressional hearings today. all of those have been postponed. that hasn't stopped some news from coming out of the 113th congress. some new committee chairs were announced. ron wyden becomes chair of the finance committee. mary landrieu will lead the energy committee. cantwell will become chair of the small business committee. and jon tester will now head up the indian affairs committee.

>> i think every first lady brings their unique per expectively to this job. if you didn't you couldn't live through it. i think to the extent that this feels natural to me at any level and i never would have thought living in the white house and being first lady would feel natural, it's because i try to make it me. i try to bring a little bit of michelle obama into this, but at the same time respecting and in valuing the tradition that is america. >> watch our program on first lady michelle obama at our website, c-span.org/firstladies. or see it on c-span at 7:00 p.m. eastern. and we conclude a special two-hour program looking at all of the first ladies from marsha washington to michelle obama. >> cotton avenue serves as a

metaphor r macon's -- for macon's history. they laid it out in blocks alternating from large, wide boulevards, wider than the washington, d.c. boulevards. macon has its as they were laying it out, a farmer with a load of cotton on his wagon headed toward the iver to market it downstream drove right through the stakes the engineers laid out. the engineers wove the angled road into the layout of macon, georgia. >> this weekend, book tv and american history tv look behind the history and literary life of macon, georgia. saturday at noon on c-span2 and unday at 5:00 p.m. on c-span3.

>> a discussion now on the potential benefits to constructing the keystone xl pipeline from today's "washington journal. , the former acting administrator of the pipeline safety administration. keystone pipeline. where are we with it? it is still in process, and is pretty much the same place we have been for the last several years. the state department came out a few weeks ago with the fifth environmental study, project, and that way we keep moving. host: what are they saying on january 31 when they release this latest study? guest: they set a couple different things. number one, for the proponents of it what they heard was no significant adverse environmental impact and it was likely to create 42,000 jobs. and other ways of transporting the oil would be less safe.

what opponents heard from it was there is still enough wiggle room for the president to deny the project and, unlike a lot of noironmental assessments, real clear answer was given as far as an endorsement on the pipeline are not. so it leaves the door open. host: what do you think the secretary of --john kerry will say on this? guest: ultimately, i think the pipeline is going to be approved, and i say that because president obama approved the southern half of keystone xl. that went into operation in the last month. he approved several other pipeline projects. in the barnyard door is open. more oilready getting from canada than we do any other country. it is too late to put that genie back in the bottle. host: when secretary kerry was a senator, did he weigh in on this? host: guest it is very guest: senator kennedy was a

proponent of reducing our reliance on fossil fuels, was a champion of the environmental movement. president obama is stuck between two camps. he has the union on one side saying build this thing now and the environmental movement saying we expected more. host: when? draft final now the environmental review is out for agency currants and that will get looked at at all the different executive branch agencies. after that, we enter the national interest determination. that is what this says all about. the questions the president has to answer. is building keystone pipeline in the national interest of the united states? that is the singular question. host: what the numbers say on the economy? guest: the numbers say that we would benefit greatly from having this pipeline. again, the state department claims 42,000.

some experts have disputed that number, but clearly, there is no dispute that the oil that is coming from canada, being refined in the u.s. has been a significant plus to the u.s. economy. host: what does the state department analysis say? did they address the economy? guest: they said. they said-- they did. they said there would be direct jobs during the building of the pipeline as well as outside jobs would be permanently created. host: how would environmental concerns be addressed? guest: the environmental concerns can be summed up as follows. they are concerned that the type of oil extraction you get from canada's oil sands is carbon intensive and the state department says it is. the things they can be done is seeing whether canada will commit to other offsets or other methods, but when you take into account continued reliance on opec for oil and the

transporting function of bringing that oil halfway around the world, you know, canada is the best option for moving forward. oil: how long has our sand been coming into the united thees from canada, and do existing pipelines that cross the border from other companies, do they have the same environmental issues? guest: so what is interesting is in building a pipeline, transcanada could know this pipeline up to the very edge of the u.s. border. they threaten to do that and have no environmental assessment, no environmental impact survey at all. effective crosses the international boundary calls for the environmental review. as you mentioned, there are other pipelines that cross the border. canada is going to continue to develop and exploit and pull its resources from the oil sands. it has been doing that for a couple decades. and i will say that the

technology that is being used in the oilsands is certainly better than it was before, but as a former regulator, my view on this is if canada is going to bring these resources to market, the question to be asked is how do you get them from point a to b the safest way possible? and i think that is the keystone pipeline. host: why is that? some are saying it is not needed. that oil is coming with or without keystone. there are different prices between truck and rail. there is a difference in the cost and the safety. of transportation, vessel, truck, rail, have an important role to play, but when it comes to moving these types of products over great distances, pipelines have clearly been the preferred medium to do that for half-century. host: we are talking to brigham mccown. he was the former regulator of pipelines in this country from 2005 two 2007.

talking about keystone pipeline. you are the principal managing director for the united transportation advisers and a contributor for the national journal. do you personally or your company benefit from pushing keystone xl? don't.no, we we get lots of calls from people who want to know what is going to happen, but no, we don't. host: brian in michigan, democratic color. high. caller: i have that question about the keystone pipeline. i want to the in -- to know the interior diameter of the pipe line. guest: it is a 36 inch. caller: what does xl stand for? guest: i don't know. caller: i know guys that have been talking about this thing and no one seems to know what the xl stands for. extra large or extra long? one of the things if you

look at the system, there is an existing keystone pipeline that was putting in the mid-2000's. and that ran from alberta to the midwest. it originally stopped in nebraska and then delivered oil supplies to the midwest through illinois. and then there have been different extensions on a. one brought it down to cushing. and most recently, the piece from cushing down to the gulf coast became operational, and that was supposed to be the southern half of keyston xl. all we have left to talk about is a piece that is going to run from alberta to steel city, nebraska. thatf the issues of pipeline, why i think it is needed is 25% of keystone xl is going to carry u.s. crude. that will release some constraints we're seeing up we're talking about north dakota. the shale in north dakota. caller: my major question was,

l goes down to the golf of mexico near houston. is that going to be more in the united states and sold overseas? guest: there has been a great debate and both sides have weighed in on that. opposition says that oil will be put on vessels and shipped overseas to be refined. others are saying no, you have to have a license to export oil. once it comes in to the u.s., it becomes u.s. oil. there is debate. we currently are a net exporter of energy products because when you refine a barrel of oil you get so much diesel, so much gasoline, chemicals, asphalt in such. the u.s. does not need all of the diesel fuel we have. so we are a net exporter of diesel and i would expect that to continue. host: marie in north carolina. hi. caller: thank you for taking my

call. first of all, the 42,000 jobs is totally false. i do not know where that number keeps coming up. and then i would like as this gentleman, have you heard about this bill from kalamazoo, michigan. guest: absolutely. i have been to mayflower, arkansas. and that was, i think frankly, that has been one that has been reported so much it has been well overblown. when you look at pipelines and the fact that we transport 11.4 billion barrels a year of both crude and refined oil product, and last year we spilled 32,000 barrels. that is 32,000 barrels i would like to we spell more gasoline from gasoline pumps and then pipelines. these are products that are optional, the products we have to use. that's why we have pipelines. host: are you still there?

caller: yes, how would you like to be a family and mayflower, arkansas that was told you have 10 minutes to get out? kalamazoo, michigan, they have no home and they are not getting paid for it. i have been told to get out. black sludge coming into these subdivisions is incredible. it's incredible the damage that has been done. the kalamazoo thing happened maybe three or four weeks after the gulf horizon blew up so they got no coverage at all. there are people up there with nothing. guest: i have been to arkansas and met with the central arkansas water district and met with the politicians and others and even exxon officials and other government officials. there are a couple of different points you raise -- we trance

point a lot -- we transport a lot of oil and gas per year and it is done safely. there are incidents and they should be reduced to me to look for ways to modernize our infrastructure. in the case of mayflower, all the houses have been cleared, not just by local authorities but also by the state and federal epa equivalents. people have returned. i think the company has had a robust response in that area. kalamazoo, yes, that should not have happened and better training there and better management of control room operators could have cut that spill size by 80%. my former agency is looking at ways to improve the control room technicians and requirements for those operators. host: how does it work now? were in cushing, oklahoma and we were at their control center and saw that they have it man's 24/7. if there is something off inside a pipeline they get alerted and then what happens?

called a control arm in that alarm either has to be validated or somebody has to be dispatched. one thing the federal government and the national transportation safety board and femsa have been looking at is ways to make those alarms more easily readable, how to change the displays so those control room operators can more easily understand what is happening on the system. all of those are aimed at reducing false alarms and giving the operators the information they need3. i was a former navy pilot and when you fly an airplane, it's about information display and how that information is displayed to enable a person to make a real-time decision. that's the same type of technology we are looking at for control rooms. george in but we, maryland, democratic caller. caller: how are you today? time ia question, every

see this keystone pipeline being pushed, it makes me think that the former president whoosh -- how much of this pipeline is a benefit? hunt oilit benefit the organization? guest: that's a good question. i'm not an expert on who owns what piece of the oil companies. my understanding is that the pipeline is owned by a canadian company and has a u.s. subsidiary called transcanada. like fedex or ups or anything else, they only own the oil. they have the mechanism to get from point a to point b. shippers have to then sign up. a texas company has signed on but not sure who the

other shippers are. host: we will move on to greg and carlson, virginia, good morning. caller: i would like to know why we are building a pipeline to the gulf coast when there are more than 34 refineries in the united states, two of them in north dakota and montana and one on the canadian border? we could build a pipeline to one of those refineries and that would not put americans at risk by putting another pipeline through tornado alley. it does not make any sense, why would we do that? i have to agree with you having lived through several hurricanes, for whatever reason, most of our refining capacity is located along the gulf coast between baton rouge and houston. it has been that way for years every time we ever hurricane, we wonder if we should move refineries. moving refineries are getting a new refinery permitted aside from just expanding existing

ones are almost impossible these days. i agree with you and there are midwest refineries that keystone delivers to. once you have the refinery, then you have to have another pipeline system out of the refinery to bring the refined gasoline or diesel fuel to market. in washington, d.c., we get all of our gasoline, the aviation airports, get all of their jet fuel out of one of two pipelines. even though you see a truck bring that to your neighborhood, that truck is getting that gasoline from a pipeline. that infrastructure is very expensive. host: this is an e-mail from one of our viewers -- guest: it is true. pipelines generally move oil at a brisk walking pace. if you are going to go from one side of the country to the other, that can take 15 days. host: why is that? guest: the rail cars are

designed to be immediately filled and moved off into a line. you can move the product more quickly but it's not necessary. you use more energy. it costs more and then you have higher pressure. when you put oil on one end of put 1000ine, if you barrels in at one end of the pipeline and you're given 1000 out the other end but it may not be the same oil. host: why? guest: it's a credit. you are given a credit for the oil. it's similar type oil but it is co-mingled in the pipeline. host: how does it physically move the right pipeline? guest: in the case of natural gas and crude oil pipelines, we have pumped stations. it is a compressor type of flowtion that shoves the down the line and about halfway to the next pump station, the

pumps start to pull the oil through. that is one of the keys the control room is looking at. you can now have internal leak detection sensors, sensors that measure the flow between different gates. you may have sensors that literally are counting the fuel as it comes in and at some predetermined point further down, it is counting the fuel as a goes out and it is comparing the numbers to make sure everything is accounted for. there is other leak detection equipment that is either infrared or heat sensitive. there was a day when if he wanted to turn the valve on or off, you had to jump in a truck and drive to the middle of wherever and stand up on top of

a pipeline and physically turn about. now they are remote-controlled and they are gps-enabled and may have land lines and satellite backup signals. this area of the industry is exciting because it is changing. host: when we were in oklahoma and one of the terminals, we saw there were about a dozen people on a daily basis that work at these terminals. in one place, millions of barrels of oil are being stored coming in and out. it only takes about a dozen people to operate these things. guest: it is amazing. we are leveraging the technology . it's an amazing sight in cushing, oklahoma. when you come over the hill and look at the city and off to the side, it really is two things -- it is one of the largest storage facilities in our country and it is known as the crossroads for pipelines. thes amazing that wti - west texas intermediate price is

right there. an additional in a fit of keystone xl coming online is the glut that has been in cushing which means we have -- we get the oil to cushing but we have had trouble getting it out. when you relieve those constraints and allow the oil to flow, that will result in better pricing. host: here is a tweet from one of error viewers -- -- one of our viewers. guest: all of that data is available through the federal government website. if you go to the u.s. department of transportation website, dot.gov, you can take a look and in their they will have all the comparisons. the state department's eis - i don't know if it was margie or a previous color that was talking about 42,000 jobs, that's within the report.

numbershas efficiency and the environmental assessment for different ways of transporting things. what i'd like to say is there has been a tendency recently to get into a debate about rail versus pipeline or truck versus pipeline. like in all of the above approach to energy, we have to rely on all the different types of transportation to move products from point a to b. some places we don't have pipelines and other places you cannot pull a railroad car to your local gas station. we need all forms of transportation to move these supplies. host: here is another e-mail -- been one of the things i have heard a lot about. i have tried to track it down.

if you talk to the president of transcanada, he has been out in the press publicly stating that he has commitments from all of his shippers that the oil staying in the u.s. will be refined there. east toust approved an west export pipeline that will end up somewhere over by vancouver. they do intend to export some of their oil to asian or other markets. i think we have just started tapping the reserves. we still have a lot of reserves in alaska and elsewhere also. north america which includes canada is highly integrated. we export oil to canada each and everyday on these coast. canada's is not have pipeline infrastructure good to go from alberta to the east coast. although we import oil from them, we exchange and next for u.s. oil to the eastern part of canada. host: let me show our viewers a map of the proposed keystone xl

pipeline, this black line, starting in morgan, montana and heading the tip of north dakota. where is the bacchan shale? guest: it is the western part of wyoming and the eastern part of , just north of that line. there are several other u.s. pipelines that plan to tie into keystone. host: was that the reason why this was proposed? original plan was twofold. the original keystone takes a longer route. it travels further to the east in canada so they could use an existing pipeline. this route was chosen for two choices. it is the most direct route between the beginningpoint and

the and. separately, it is purposely designed to be able to pick up up to 25% of its capacity with u.s. crude oil. henry is next from asbury park, new jersey, republican caller. caller: thank you. i have a couple of questions. i have a theory -- i believe the u.s. economy really runs on diesel fuel. if we could lower the cost of diesel fuel, i believe we can help the entire economy. diesel, am a big fan of two. from my time in the military and europe, as you probably know, the rest of the world loves diesel. for whatever reason, it has been more difficult for the american manufacturers to sell diesel cars. you are right, you get better mileage, it costs less to produce. diesel prices have gone up substantially in the u.s. in the last 10 years. a lot of that was due to the

introduction and requirements by the epa to have ultra low sulfur diesel. that has taken a lot of the particular its -- particular ates out of the mix. at one time, diesel fuel cost less than regular unleaded at the pump. i'm not sure what it is a pure way but i think it is about $.80 per gallon more than unleaded these days. host: from twitter -- if you go to the transcanada website, there is a keystone xl length. is that true, not the landowners, not the government? it is that's correct,

keystone. the federal government will exercise oversight. my agency and the former agency, the ntsb, the state partners that partner with the federal government, the epa, will come in in the event of an incident to look at medication and how to clean it up best. just as importantly, they will learn from what happened. as i pointed out earlier, pipeline safety and all transportation safety, has a good record especially when you consider today that we will transport roughly 21 million barrels of crude and refined product around the country. odds are, not a single thing will happen. that being said, the operators always is possible for the cleanup. there has never been an incident i have been aware of where the operator has not had the sufficient funds or resources to clean up a spill. host: the previous caller talked about what happened in michigan saying the people there had to pay? were they are not getting paid?

guest: i don't know enough about the issue. typically, the pipeline companies, they have their own financial resources. they also pay into the oil spill liability trust fund. congressases where should look at changing the law, certain synthetics and other blends are not covered as far as the tax portion. that fund is that $12 billion, somewhere around there. that money is also available regardless of whether companies pay in or not to act as an advanced to respond and then the federal government expects company's to replenish that fund. it has been touched very rarely. host: why is that? guest: because we have not needed it. host: even in these spills we have seen? guest: typically, the operators step up and do the right thing. a single large spill can erase

years of profit from it pipeline company. whether it is a pipeline company or a railroad or any other type of entity, it is not good business sense to have a pipeline spill. when i was in government, i could fine them millions of dollars but by the time you get done with the clinic cost, by the time you get done with the lawsuits, it is a very expensive proposition to have an oil spill. i firmly believe the industry understands that better than ever that they can't afford to have that happen. host: does this trust fund pay individuals or just go for the cleanup efforts? guest: i'm not 100% sure. it goes to the cleanup efforts. i would think it would go to temporary housing and other factors but not completely sure. in the case of the spill in arkansas, the company stepped up and put people in temporary housing and hotels and even

allow them to stay there even after the site was deemed safe to return because some people needed a little extra time to get their heads wrapped around that everything was fine to come back to. host: from maryland, democratic caller -- caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. a couple of brief comments -- i think you have the most fair and balanced of all the presentations. i worked for a company called think tank many years ago in northern virginia. i went around inspecting pig farms in houston and the refineries down there. before that, i worked at a nuclear power plant as a radiation safety technician.

the one thing i found about big business consistently across the field is they do not want to pay for proper maintenance to keep this stuff from leaking out. formula that offsets the amount of maintenance to offset 100% versus the amount of safety for the amount of material they spill and they run it as close to the edge as possible. if anybody thinks bp went bankrupt from what they did in the gulf and what they continually do, the pipeline in alaska with their spills, you have another think coming. i'm not sure what years he worked in the industry but the industry has changed dramatically over the last years. cleaning a time when

up oil off the ground was seen as no big deal and those times have changed. we take the environmentalism far more seriously and the damage to the environment. missionthe femsa statement is to protect people and the environment from the unintended consequences of energy releases. congress has raise the fines are medically and femsa is flexing its muscles more and the epa and other government organizations have as well. the federal government agencies are also courting their response. there is a unified government response coming. i think the industry is in a different place than it was five or 10 years ago. host: the pipeline hazardous materials, what role will they play it keystone xl is built? agency is playing a fairly sizable behind the scenes role. even though the state department is the coordinating agency, all

of the pipeline expertise rests with femsa. the men and women that work there are dedicated and don't have a political agenda. they take safety very seriously. could sitrybody around and talk to these men and women because i think they would be not surprised that they would be reassured that they take their jobs seriously. they are providing the expertise on the safety aspects, on the criteria that transcanada has been asked to do prior to commencing the pipeline. the federal government put one extra requirement on transcanada in the last few weeks. that was to use third-party validator's and auditors on the construction site. think the federal government has got this and people should understand that pipelines and hazz-mat transportation has been a long along -- has been around

a long time. host: if it goes forward, what will happen? guest: before is operational, they will complete the inspections. there will be pre-service testing and femsa will be the overseeing agency day in and day out. -- ifwhat about the role something happens, how do they respond and how often is this agency going out into the field and looking at pipelines that exists? guest: the agency has a diverse workforce. unlike a lot of agencies, they are not all here in d.c. they have remote employees all over the earth. i'm sorry, all over the u.s. and in some cases, femsa even goes to china and other countries to inspect fireworks manufacturing facilities and other things. at by airversees haz-m as well as vessels. femsa is a small agency but they

are very efficient and robust. we also push down a lot of grant money. $.75 on the dollar to states which only have to match $.25 out of every dollar. they will be out on the field each and every day and they are there now. host: are they also regulating the pipeline being transported by rails and trucks because of the hazardous materials? t, the agency is composed of two main offices, the office of pipeline safety, and the office of hazardous materials safety. ms is responsible for writing the regulations in helping to enforce them against the entities and the industries that ship hazardous products. space andpretty white its trucking, vessel, rail. it is also aviation and pipelines. host: do they have adequate resources?

this is the footprint of u.s. oil and petroleum product lines in the united states. guest: i think they do. the question is not always one of -- in d.c., it seems like if i had more money, i could do more. they are very efficient. i think you will see a plus up of the agency on the haz-mat side. this seems to be a bipartisan effort there to include more inspectors. inspections for all of dot whether it is trucking or pipeline inspections are done at the state level, not the federal level. host: anthony, washington, d.c., independent caller. caller: good morning. is the oil that is coming from the pipeline is what they called tar sands, is

that correct? guest: some of it is. there is a heavy crude that is conventionally produced and then there is tar sands oil as well. caller: i understand that oil cannot be refined to gasoline or diesel. guest: that actually can be refined. it is a heavier crude oil and it does require more processing. also is been a debate if it can be exported. not every country has the refining ability to break it down like the was does. caller: thank you. host: larry, tennessee, republican caller -- caller: good morning. you made a statement earlier. you say we will be shipping oil overseas. they say the pipeline will help our economy.

what about the price of diesel being so much higher than gasoline? there should be some way to offset that cost rather than the oil companies having to give it to the taxpayer since everything we buy literally affects directly our livelihood and the economy of the country. perhaps there can be legislation in with the epa which is a monkey on the back of the oil companies. i guess we are selling oil overseas offset that cost maybe there could be a program to allow the government to set fees for the epa cost. in large part, the price of oil is now set globally. differences inom spot prices to changes affecting things globally. although brent or wti has a bit of a price break am i think

you'll see that reduced now that we can get the oil out of cushing. the u.s.erspective, production has been a big and if it in multiple ways. even with unrest in syria and iran and other places, we have not seen the price spikes we have seen in the past. i think the law of supply and demand really comes into play. it reduces volatility. the regulations are daunting. we do not have unleaded gasoline anymore. we have 20+ blends of fuel depending what are the country live in. all of these things have a direct impact on the cost that we pay at the pump and the cost to the economy. moving forward, i would like to see more diesel, i would like to see more fleet vehicles and natural gas as well. host: i want to show our viewers "washington post" headline --

here she is featured in "the washington post" pushing for the approval of keystone pipeline with some of her senate colleagues. absolutely, she comes from louisiana and understands the importance of our natural resources. i think we have been stuck in the last four or five years in this debate of renewables versus fossil fuel. i think that is probably the wrong debate to be having. the debate we should be having is how to we free ourselves from oil products overseas, from unstable or less friendly places? how do we continue to conserve and reduce our consumption at the same time we are raising the ability to generate more domestic supplies? i think mary gets that.

she is in a tough reelection fight as well. she has pushed hard for keystone. it proves that keystone need not be a d&r. it has been framed that way but ultimately, it was the wrong platform to stand behind. host: in the background, you have senator mansion and senator hoban. by the way, our producer has been trying to find what xl stands for. a couple of different websites to reference. another website says it stands for export limited. guest: that's a message that the opposition is try to frame. first it was the safety message and then when that got to bunt, it said we should not have it in

the sand hills and we cannot have it in the aquifer. they realize there are thousands of miles of pipeline in the same aquifer and it was also an expert pipeline. that is messaging but i don't think that's the case. host: pittsburgh, democratic caller. caller: a couple of things -- i think the aquifers are absolutely critical. when the aquifer is contaminated, you can never un contaminated. e it. the yellowstone river was contaminated badly by oil spill with exxon not more than one year ago or a little more than a year ago. i think his contention that the industry is changed is patently false. guest: in that case, we are talking about the silver tip pipeline. the donor and the state response, they were satisfied with the response.

beenroposed fine has heavily fined on the cleanup costs in silvertip exceeded 80 million-$100 million. keep in mind, that was a result of record high water from the snow melt the year before that exposed a piece of the pipeline. even my own agency suggested that may have not been a preventable incidents. nonetheless, the that went in, i think with horizontal directional drilling that we can now do, i think that line was replaced close to 80 feet below the water bed. that cost more to do that so i think they got the message. as far as the aquifer, the pipeline regulations are set up that where ever you have a sole- source water supply and aquifer in an unusually sensitive area, the regulations are set up differently. we have pipelines through the

everglades and pipelines through the marshes of louisiana, thousands of miles of type line other ocalala aquifer and studies have suggested it would not be possible to contaminate the aquifer. ultimately, the proof is in the putting, that we have been running pipelines and other energy supplies for a long time. these are not optional supplies. until we can figure out a way to move our economy into a renewable base, we have to use these supplies. keeping at home is not an option so we have to get them there as safely >> house democrats are meeting in cambridge, maryland, for a policy conference this week. this is the second of a three-day meeting. vice president biden canceled his appearance there due to weather conditions in the area. president obama is still

planning to travel there to a dress the caucus tomorrow. we are planning life coverage of a press conference later live here on c-span. looking at the capitol here in washington, d.c., as snow continues to fall down, we pect more snow and rain this afternoon, the eastern seaboard a whiteout this afternoon this major winter storm making its way up the eastern sea board, continuings to dump snow across the region. everything pretty much shut down and canceled here. we had plans to bring you several congressional hearings today, all of those postponed. that does not stop news coming out of the 113th congress. representative doc hastings is retiring, he joins arkansas republican tim griffin who also announced he will not seek re-election. join us tonight for remarks from supreme court justices ruth der ginsburg and elena kay

began. they recently appeared at an event called ginsburg's greatest hits. that will start at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> here they are coming in close, closing in on me, i'm still thinking evade. when i went through survival school they taught us that the people who capture you are probably the least trained to capture p.o.w.'s and maintain them so your best time to escape is right then. so i thought, ok, these are rookies, i pulled out my .38 combat masterpiece and i went like this, get away, get back. i fired a round of that tracer over their head. they didn't flinch. they raised their rifles like this and one of them pulled -- reached in his pocket and pulled talky, like pointy a little comic book they carried

in their pocket. it shows drawings and the vietnamese translation. this one guy said surrender, no die, no die. surrenders. hands up, hands up. so here i am facing about nine long guns, staring at me, and i decide that's probably the best advice i was going to get that day, so i went hands up. >> former air force pilot and p.o.w. lee ellis sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's "q&a." >> the context here is that lee enjoys a reputation in the modern day as someone who counseled acceptance and submission and resignation to the situation and that is always -- that has always struck me as -- it's a sort of theory that doesn't add up in a sense, we

know lee was the most prestigious man in the south. we're told he counseled submission but the south didn't submit to the will of the north. southerners began to contest the northern understanding of the meaning of the word, to contest them through political means and through extralegal means and violent means. what i found is that in the eyes of confederates, lee would not -- was not a semiboll of submission, he was a symbol of a kind of unbowed pride and a kind of measured defiance. >> rethinking grant and lee at appomattox, sunday night at 10:00 eastern and -- saturday night at 10:00 eastern and sunday at 11:00 on c-span3's "american history tv." >> a discussion on what we can expect to see in the last three year's of president obama's second term from toost's with

the washington -- "washington journal." we are live tweeting. cycle"he cohost of "the on msnbc and is a contributor to "the nation" and reuters. we asked our viewers earlier this morning, democrats only, what should be the priority for 2014? what you think the priority is for democrats this year? >> on the hill or the campaign? host: both the white house and on the hill. guest: where they are on the hill and in actual legislative agenda along with what the president is doing is looking at the economy and jobs agenda and a political environment that is not unprecedented in american history but is rare. that's an environment were almost nothing that is not required will make it through congress. people are always frustrated with congress but the numbers show this is a particularly inactive time.

are trying to lay out economic markers and agenda items even if they are limited in scope because of the dynamic i'm talking about. have a minimum wage conversation that is going around the country. there are several states including some with republican control that are also looking at whether, in this economy, the long-term, medium-term type recession, do we want to have some standards to help people make more money? that is a conversation going on with or without congress. host: republicans respond that you can increase men wages for federal contracts but you will not impact that many people. that a public event and try to put that message out there? guest: there are two ways to the actual can have

debate in good faith over what we want this policy to be. should it be a higher minimum wage and for all companies or all industries? if you are worried about that a causes job loss, not a lot of studies show that is automatic if you are, let's have hearings. do you want to have exceptions or say that companies which think they would have to fire an employee over the wage can get a dispensation? we can do a lot with policy study to figure out how this works. i think manyat republicans have said in the house which is, we are not going to do anything about this and then you move to come a what can we do without them? the problem with that from a conservative perspective as they lose out on the debate. now you have a $10 number that is swimming around and you don't have any of the medication policies i mentioned. -- mitigation policies i mentioned. they have opted out and gotten

out of that conversation. that is unfortunate because most betterelieve it works when there is an actual democratic negotiation and not one side saying we are out in the other side saying we will do it our own way but perhaps at a more limited scale. host: the president has been issuing these executive orders. he has also said i am talking to businesses and i encourage you on the state level to make changes as well. it's interesting to take his message to business leaders, asking them to do several things. do you think that can be effective? guest: i think you can't help but i don't think it is the baseline of the economy. whether you are a conservative capitalist or a liberal capitalist, capitalism is companies trying to generate profit. some do it in ways that are innovative and exciting and

might be good for their employees or their communities and others do it in other ways that we see have greater costs that they are putting on the rest of us. either way, it will be about profits. that's a good company does. company,e running a you have a legal duty to try to maximize profits in almost every situation. thinkaseline, i don't that asking companies to think about much else besides their profits without the force of law or regulation get you very far. there are some things they can do and we can come up with examples like in the area of marriage equality. we have seen a lot of fortune 100 companies and wall street companies say if you don't believe this is part of your church or synagogue, that's her business but at this company, we will recognize people this way. i think that's great and that does happen in that example may cost something but not that much. as a general matter, when you talk about minimum wage and labor standards and trade, i don't think companies are going

to be able to do things that hit their bottom line in a major way just because one asks them to do it is the employees or the president. that's how it works but when you have rules and you say no one can just dump their waste in the ocean, that no longer become something they can compete on. they say we are not allowed to and we are competing on the same level and that's what many capitalists like certain types of rules but not too much regulation. they like standard rules that they can understand because that's not an area where they are competing against other companies. host: has the president recovered from the self- professed botched rollout of the health care website? guest: no, i don't think there has been a full recovery. of thelic perception

competence of this law which is different than the ideology -- the ideological question is is this where we want the federal government to go? it's a big debate that will not end anytime soon. democrats through the four selections and law have one incrementally. but it is a big ideological battle. the comp and question is very concerning. question istence for a concerning. i think we should be a country where we try to get everyone health care rather than having them worry day today about whether they have health care and then end up in an emergency situation. we wonder about the person who has a seizure on the side of the road. what happens to them if they don't have health care? we have a system signed by president reagan that says they get access to the er so we have had it confused view of this. whether you are a hard-line

conservative that says there should be no backstop, then you have a problem with the reagan policy. that is the ideological thing. to your question, the president has now a competence perception problem even though many aspects of this law are working, are adding health care, are getting elderly people into alternate systems including medicaid that work. thethere is no doubt problems of the website and aspects of the timing of the rollout have left people to ask legitimate and serious questions about whether this thing is working as planned. that is a political problem. host: we have viewers lining up to talk to you. viewers know our that we will be incorporating some students into this conversation today. the c-span bus continues its conference tour with a visit to kansas state university. there are six political science and engineering students that

are in the program and they are aboard the bus. want to go to the first student, dola, kansas state university -- he's not ready so we will go to a phone call. warren ohio, republican caller. caller: could morning. i'm glad to hear some honesty for a change about the health care. ble thing to begin with but i called to talk about the minimum wage. i'm in minimum wage with worker, i hate to say it. if we raise the minimum wage, that means the price of all the products, every single bit from a to pick on up will go up. i feel i really don't get a raise. i will have to spend more for this step are the only ones that make out is the congress. country, obama, i should say.

it's all about taxes. he gets more taxes if i get more in my paycheck. the health care is not workable, thank you. guest: that's an interesting perspective. it's a gentleman saying is a minimum-wage worker but is not convinced a raise there does not have other costs or trade-offs. i think that is an understandable concern. you have to look at what we know about where this is this where this has happened. we call the laboratories of democracies the states which have experimented with different wage hikes. there's a lot of scholarship on this and there are studies that a manageable, small increase in the minimum wage does not necessarily project extra costs on the rest of the economy nor does it lead to eliminating jobs. in of the main determinants whether a company response to a regulation by limiting a job is

whether that job is mobile. that's why we have these debates over nafta. if you can outsource the job because someone is selling issue together and can do that far away and ship it for cheaper than it costs to sell it here in washington, d.c., the net come -- the next company has an incentive to move. a lot of minimum-wage jobs that are in this country now are not mobile. they are service jobs. to humans of human contact and are localized. that means they are not likely to be moved. the only other question is, does it raise other costs? that depends on the company. employers the biggest in the united states and the one reason they can offer such low cost is because they keep their labor costs down. the cost of things at one company could potentially rise to some degree. does it increase the cost for everything in the economy? i don't think there is evidence of that. reason why a lot of

republicans in certain states are open to this is because they have found some idea that we have had a minimum-wage at the federal level for some time and can do it at the state level depending on local costs and not lose a bunch of jobs. i think the opposition here is not so much about that as it is about more ideological concern about intervening and private business practice. host: let's get our first student involved -- ariel med ola. caller: good morning. i had a question about immigration. over the past couple of years, the dream act was passed. illegal immigrants over there to school andgo continue their education but how does that look on the national level and where is the timeline to where we can see it federally

to her every student in the united states will have a chance at a higher education? guest: that's a great question. there has been tremendous traction for the idea of having some kind of immigration reform in the capital even though it often feels like nothing is happening. when it was controlled by the democrats, the house passed a version of the dream act in the first two years of the obama administration and there is a majority of votes for it in the senate. it was ultimately filibustered so did not become law. this is something you had with an incumbent president and both houses behind but that is not true for every major piece of international and social policy. a lot ofe have seen different messages from republican leadership in the house. john boehner said that there are principles they want to act on and then he backed off. also republican primaries coming up in february, march, and april. the calendar may look better

after you get some of those primaries out of the way. was: congressmangutierrez on our show yesterday. he has been negotiating for some kind of comprehensive reform. theaid when he heard from speaker was not that they will not do it but that it's hard. it is not the speaker had ruled it out. guest: i don't think so either. the speaker put down several markers of the idea that you could do something here. he talked about it being piecemeal reform. that is one approach and he has hired prominent immigration expert to be on his staff of the time when this is front and center. he put out those principles. there are many signs there but one of the problems we have generally and our political has this- c-span problem less than other places barlett because c-span does some of primary reporting where you can listen to these folks themselves and see what they are

saying on the hill on both sides -- part of the problem is when we hear something in political culture from the speaker or someone important, we immediately want to go to the outcome, almost like day trading. it's very hard to understand especially in an institution that has so many different members what the final word is. the speaker gets up and says this is harder than it ought or i need to really have border security on the issue around complaints at -- about the president's response to enforcement action and that's an interplay. chuck schumer said if you don't think he is enforcing the border, let's get the policy in place. some republicans might be willing to do the same policy if you had a president christie in

charge. host: let's go to dave in quincy, michigan, republican caller. caller: good morning. i have a question about europe,ment area in when they have unemployment, it lasts for seven years and the first five years, it's the full wage a person made. if they made 100,000 dollars per year, they get $100,000 per year in unemployment for the first five years and then it decreases a little bit in the next two years so they have a full seven years. in the united states, we have a much shorter unemployment pays near minimum wage. if you are making $100,000, you would make $15,000 and you cannot make your payments. what will obama do about that? that seems kind of unfair and causes missed house payments and breadth that are -- and bread credit reports. should we go more toward the european system?

guest: i think it's difficult to figure out what to do out of the public-sector funds for people that lose a private sector job area that's what we are talking about. we have had an approach in the u.s. that says you get a certain amount of unemployment when you lose your job if you buy certain things are looking for work. we don't have a model where you get the full amount of what you might have been making when you had a certain job and were producing a certain value. what is the president doing about it? he has been fighting long-term unemployment insurance extended that was filibustered in the senate. i looked up and saw that people that faileds like by a vote of 50 something and felt in the senate -- it did not fail. it's not get a vote in the senate. think, thatinary, i as we are in the overhang of this recession, one of the of financialods

disruption since the great depression, that we don't have an actual congressional final judgment on these issues. instead, we have obstruction. even with those economic problem's and with the attention and a fairly widespread public issues, youconomic have senate republicans that say we will not even allow a floor vote, we will filibuster so you don't get the final vote on whether we should have any emergency extension which would run longer than usual because of the ordinary times. host: will that come up back up when they return to washington? guest: i don't see why not. when you have a congress that is not doing much, one of the main ways to make you feel like it has to do something is to shame it so you bring these issues up. the big surprise about the democratic strategy is that there has not been a more

concentrated effort to put out 10 or 15 top proposals and demand votes on all of them. we have seen more of a one of the time approach. after sandy hook, they said they deserve a vote on gun regulation and ultimately that did not get a vote. we have not seen that on 10 or 15 new pieces of legislation. givingngrich was good at americans a big idea like the contract with america that had a bunch of ingredients and the demented votes on a lot of it and he had control as bigger but they did not pass every aspect of the contract but they demanded all those votes. one place where the president has struggled and i understand why, but he struggled to get the congress to feel like it had to answer on just about anything. interbranch conflict was the subtext of his state of the union. host: from "the washington times" -

our next student is michael murray from kansas state university. go ahead. caller: good morning. i'm sure students are concerned with the fourth amendment. the lawsuit filed by rand paul, do you think this is an effective way to keep the for what in check obama proposed? do you feel like the reforms he talked about were fair? host: can i ask you something? paul is asking people to sign onto this lawsuit rate is that something that appeals to

young people? general thatl in yes, students and anyone our age are very concerned. with what the nsa has done. some guest: plankton like that would appeal to people average age. it can bet: effective. legala different, more way, less political way to create accountability on these issues. having said that, does it matter who's pushing it? it can in having someone positioned within congress to be a part of the lawsuit is significant. lawsuits oneen many this very issue before. is thing that is different for most of recent history since 9/11 when we have seen drastic extension expansion of surveillance, when these losses went before the courts, the

argument over whether a person whether youue -- have the standing to sue -- is where most of these suits stopped and were dismissed. this is a was -- fundamental shift -- the reason was, courts would say you cannot prove that you are even monitored or hurt by this program. if you cannot prove that, anyone could sue over anything and that is one of the doctrines they have. if you wanted to sue me because we got into a conflict, you'd go to court and say here's what happened between us. then they would see whether you were telling the truth. here, you had multiple times the court say here is a person or a few people who believed they were spied on because they were international journalists or were accused and tied to some group or whatever. repeatedly, they were told no.

we are now seeing some of these cases proceed. why? because the reported surveillance is so broad, tens of millions of phone lines have prism tends to hundreds of millions of computer isp addresses. it is no longer credible for the government to maintain to accept the idea that you don't have standing bi cause you could not have been spied upon. it is a legal and political comment. we are in a country now are it is more likely than not that you would sue for expensive surveillance because it is more likely than not that you are being surveilled. that is really a huge shift so these lawsuits with members of congress involved are significant. this is something this

administration has been as bad on as the last administration. there is something called a state secret privilege which can when theree ad ok are real supersecret that should not be litigated in open court and that's fine. but under president bush and now president obama, we have seen that legal document expanded to try to avoid any oversight over programs that we know exist and are not secret and that's something about whether young people care about them -- yes. and have ayoung smart phone and someone said, can i go through your desk and papers? or can i go through your phone , most people would be more concerned about the phone than anything else. as our personal information where our identities and privacy is. you really feel you have very

little privacy and that means you tryer give it up or to change your conduct or lifestyle or the way you talk to people. is it because the government is in their? that's a fundamental question. are they co fund-raisers? you know, i think that is

political. there is nothing wrong, certainly, with trying to take something that can be there and make it tangible for people to say let's do this together. let's hold the government accountable. again, not as i mentioned. it is a power issue. >> host: well, the deputy director is saying these reforms that president obama put forward calling them reasonable, it will not impact the job. let's go to mia in matthews, north carolina, a democratic caller. good morning. >> caller: hi, good morning. i graduated myself. it is great to hear the callers calling from there. >> host: oh, great. thanks for calling in. >> caller: my question is -- mags media generates mass pressure. given all the evidence that building 7 was brought down in a

controlled demolition in 9/11, how can you or any one in the corporate media do your duty as journalist? >> host: ok. let's give it a little back ground here. there is a group of people throughout that believe the 9/11 investigation done by congress was not adequate. they questioned the evidence. they think some of it has been left secret and not made to the public. they call into this show and other shows to get response from people like you. >> guest: i have not seen any evidence of that kind of 9/11 conspiracy. i have followed this issue like a lot of americans. i have not seen that. sure. it is fine to ask questions and be vigorous about it. but you know, i live in new york. there was a lot of evidence. there was a lot of people there on the ground. there were a lot of independent folks who have looked into this. i appreciate the spirit of

asking questions. i have not seen anything like that. i don't associate myself with that. >> host: let me read an el may here from minneapolis. it seems to me elections don't have consequences. they only shifted a van age to the minority. shown the senate change their rules so the majority can influence change? >> guest: that is a deep one. that is a question about america. on the one hand, we did divide the system. it was not supposed to be easy to get things done. it with as supposed to be hard. the force of law is generally powerful. almost always permanent. it is not easy to make laws. can say throughout the history, that has been the case. having said that, it has gotten, i think, worse in the sense that what used to be an option, right, to require super majorities for certain things, and provide some balance in the system has now become a norm, and so i think we are in a different constitutional place,

because the constitution says the president has veto. congress can pass things by majority. what we have now is a minority in the senate basically exercising a veto over everything. that is why things look so screwy so often. add to that in the house, not under the rules, but just under practice, almost nothing comes to the floor without the super majority of the party of power. he is no wonder that congress' approval ratings are at almost all-time lows. it is not only because of what they do and don't do, but because of how they conduct their business. we have a host of issues. we are talking about jobs. we are talking about oversight. these are big things where we need a final vote. we need it to go to the floor. we need to have that debate. that is where we send the men and women in there to do. whenever is held to a veto, think, people rightly lose faith in where l the elections matter and whether enough is being done. they rootingly question whether

the constitution, whether the constitution is actually being put to the side, and folks in the congress have found basically lap holes, i which is one of the most pop unpopular things. i done think we like constitutional lp holes either. >> host: we'll go back to manhattan, kansas, kansas state university. it is part of the big 12 conference. we have six students apoured the bus. the next student is here. go ahead. >> caller: good morning. how are you all doing today? >> host: good morning. >> caller: , well, i am ad wereating senior in chemical engineering. pretty much, what i really wanted to know fis the nation was -- what our nation is doing in order to encourage more recruitment and more retention of african-americans in these environments?

in my five years at this university, i have noticed that despite being close to the wichita, topeka, metropolitan area, we are only 4% black. of those 4% black students, you know, only about 600% of vus are going to come back after the fresh machine and sophomore years. i was just wondering what our nation is doing to encourage more and more recruitment and retention, more important hi, of the african-american students. >> guest: i think it is a great question. i think it is a great question. in a broad lef rel, without regards to race, we have to look at education policy and funding to figure out whether there are opportunities for people if you happen to be born nin a family where there is not money for you to go to college, what do we say to that family? right? you a child. that is different than what we say to adult. we think of it differently. do with the skol hrships and the

support? it relates a little bit to the immigration issue where one of the questions that i think has united more people. what do we do with children who come to this country, rating? they didn't make that choice. what do we do about it? if you think about it, it applies to the nation's children if you allow me to be idealistic her on this snowy day. what are we saying to any child that is born into a certain situation? right? what opportunities howled they have? they don't have a right to do anything indo they have any opportunity, at least, to live a good life, to get an education, to make something of themselves. that question becomes more acute in historically underrepresented communities and communities that are often disproportionately below the poverty line. then, everything i just said guess for everyone, right this then you have a civil rights question. are there areas are we want to in the law look to die diversity and look to history of discrimination and figure out

whether we want to do anything there. the president's answer has been to support apirmtive action. he recently had his lawyers file a very strong brief defending affirmative action for the supreme court and won. the public university, government programs, can use dy railroads ty as a plus factor. cannot set aside a pot and say this spot is nor type of person. you can say we are going to look at the diversity and i try to you make sure that we have system where will we say, i would use this example in a corporate board. we have a board of 20 people. we have a fair process. we believe in it. then you look at the result, oh shall the process must be fair. we will not set aside spots for women. well, no, but if it in today's dy and age shall, you go through the process. cannot find one qualified woman to be on the board. you may want to take a look at the process. that is how goodie varsity programs work as well. the students question both on recruitment and retention, i think you have to look at that

kind of outreach and make sure that you are trying to rng the entire community when qualified. >> well, a student may be interested in addition to your hosting, co-hosting of the cycle ever day at 3:00 p.m. you also anchor and write presumed guilty, a msnbc series on inequities in the law. let's go back to health care. here is a tweet from one of our viewers. here is where the run ber meets the road. now money signed up for health care have paid? >> guest: well, i don't have that exact number off the top of my head. i think you can look to sign-ups. then you look the monthly payments. i don't think there is a concern. i would put it differently. don't think the concern is people who buy into the private market will all be deadbeat health care users. i don't think that is the issue. i think ste systemic issue is do you shift from a system are we left tens millions of people out. as i mentioned earlier in the show, dealt with them in the

emergency room, you shift that system to try to spread the cost and as the administration says bend the cost curve. the way do you that, obviously, is in the system, you are working with the private markets. are working within capitalism. that is why it was considered a conservative approach. it is not single pay. it is not a government program. although, medicare has been extended as well. you try to, then, have it be affordable. that is why it is called the affordable care act. i think the concern is not enough people go in. the republicans do blame or share the blame for that dynamic. because this is a law now. not enough people going to the system, then, he, it is can be expensive that the share of people that can't afford it are greater. i take issue with the question. will end on this point. the same question applies if you don't have obama care or the affordable care act, right inthe same question is what do you do with the person that can't afford health cir and gets sick?

is hurt, spreads that dy sees the family or the community and winds up in the emergency room. yes, it is a ser is where question over what we do. it is no at question that has been confined to this particular reform. it is the question of trying to provide health care in a system that historically has not had it and doesn't want to do it through the government, and has a lot of people that are going to get sick sooner or later. that is why it is tough issue. >> host: "the new york times" has the latest numbers. 1.1 million added to the rolls. 2 a% were between the ages of 18 and 34. randy in georgia, a republican caller. hi, randy. >> caller: well, as journalist and lawyer, i was hoping your guest could help me with this. the care ac was passed by the house and the senate and signed into law by the president. during that time, he has made several delays on portions of

that law. why wouldn't he be able to just delay the presidential election portion of the 19 -- or the 2016 election? thank you. >> guest: i think the question is deliberately dramatic, about it is a serious question, which is whats the president allowed to do? what can he choose to do m what can he do? right inwe care a lot about that because there has got to be checks and ball lantses. there has to be checks. the fact is whether the people like it or not. there is great enforcement of authority or the president, his attorney general and those who enforce the laws to mack what they call digression decisions. has been true. if people are looking at the partisan line and republicans and democrats have exercised that authority. that doesn't mean it is good policy by which i mean you can look at a president or attorney general who said, i will give you a different example from health care that may be

controversial for people. this attorney general has said, they have decided, they are not going to enforce federal laws against marijuana in states that are allowing marijuana for now. they also said they reservice the right to continue to do that. if colorado turns into some, you know, drug kingpin tate with violence, they will go in there, obviously. if they can do it under a safe way, they will allow it. some people may like it. some people may not. some people may say it is good. some people may not. from a legal perspective, that is not a good question. they have that authority. >> host: let me get another student in here. ross, go ahead. >> caller: hi, guys. wanted to talk about something that president obama mentioned in the state of the union address. he talked about how he urged congress to close the prison at guantanamo. i was wondering where is that rain going to head from mere what steps do we need to make what will that mean for the international reputation as the united states?

>> host: ok. >> guest: that is a great question. i appreciate the caller raising it. it is one that we often seem to forget. the prison of guantanamo bay is one of the signature bipartisan failures of foreign policy and human rights in our era. and it is one that we have now had two successful administrations from both parties. they want to close because it is not working. yet it remains open. i put the blame at both parties. i think there has been a lot on this issue. what needs to be done? congress and the president would have to loosen some of the restrictions on it. allow for the transport of more of these detainees to other places including the united states and abroad. close something, that again, security expert say is not working. both parties say it is not working. both parties have been min taining. >> host: am rushing you. i want to get the last two student in.

>> guest: let's do it. >> host: mccailey, go ahead. >> caller: i have a question about gun control. it seems to be a huge issue facing today. i wanted to know what are some of the meeting grounds that we could reach to help resolve this issue? >> host: middle ground? >> guest: well, it is hard. people care great deal. the supreme court has represented that there is an individual right to bear arms which means this is constitutional dimension. right? congress cannot make any ol rule here. there is no doubt that you cannot walk around with a grenade or a rocket launcher, so i think the key always comes back to not whether we have gun, we have allowed guns. we will always have a lot of guns as long as the constitution is interpreted this way. i think the question is do we regulate the access to those guns, which is not -- i don't think it is gun control, right?

you call that identification control. you could call that access control. the gun itself is not being modified. i hi the middle ground is making sure we don't have people who are mentally unbalanced according to will you or have criminal records or otherwise would want to do us harm. most fun owners agree with that. it is only the gun lobby this said actually we should leave open the door so someone might have a criminal record doesn't have to buy a gun. that don't make sense. most people oppose that. that is why where you have to dissing a grate the rhetoric from gun control to say this is keeping a gun out of the criminal stance. >> mcken zy, our last student here. hi, mckenzie. >> caller: hi. >> host: go ahead. >> caller: yes, i just wanted your thoughts on a current issue. they have passed house bill 2453, the religious freedom bill which allows public and private

employees in kansas the ability to deny any individual service. so in your opinion, does this still enhance civil rights by protecting freedom or is this discrimination? >> host: thanks. >> guest: thank you. i have not read that state bill. i want to say that out-front. there are a lot of these kind of proinvestigations and if the caller described it accurately. the fact you disagree with the law or service, maybe the government can million change and should not change your beliefs, but it does not give you the exemption traditionally to have to comebly the law or provide services that you contracted for if that is your job. these are difficult issue. what we are seen in a lot of places is a bit of expansion that prey on the fact there are legitimate religious differences

here and tries to make the difference trump what people are provided. you know, christian scientists, it is more clear-cut example, don't believe in revying medical care in most situations. that is their belief. but that doesn't mean that if a christian scientists signs up to be the head of hr the company or a nurse in a more ridiculous example they should say aam a murs. the religious beliefs say i cannot help you, right inthe things get missy. there is a good reason under the first amendment to try to leave a good amount of space for people to have their he beliefs and not be cohearsed by public moneys or anything else. yeah. the bottom lynn here again, not that bill to the proposals that we have seen in the state is protect the first amendment of religious freedom. if people sign up to do a job. one that involves caring for others. they will are to apply yob form standards and if that is hot the right job to them which may be true, i wouldn't be good and right for every job based on my

political beliefs and institutional beliefs. then they have to finned a job that doesn't put them into that direct conflict. >> we want to haq the kansas stit university students for joining us this morning aboard the c-span bus and a special thanks as well to michael jackman at state for prepping the students this morning, cox communication for sponsors tonight's bus visit. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> president obama's heading to cambridge tomorrow. democratic leaders brief members of the media yesterday. they have another briefing scheduled for 4:00 this afternoon. minority leader nancy pelosi, whip steny hoyer and othered expected to be there to answer questions. again, live coverage here on c-span starting at 4:00 p.m.

eastern. and it hasn't been all work at the conference. this is an instagram from last night with nancy pelosi and steny hoyer dancing to music provided by maryland governor mar tip tin o'malley -- martin o'malley. join us tonight for remarks from supreme court justices. they recently appeared at a new york bar association event called ginsburg's greatest hits. which they reviewed justice ginsburg's career and discuss various women's rights issue. here's a brief look. >> so in my 3 1/2 years on the court, serving with justice ginsburg, i've come to admire her really more and more each day. as a judge, a colleague and a friend. they say that life on the court can be a little cloistered. and i didn't realize until recently that to folks on the outside, justice ginsburg is much more than that. to many of them, she is a

hip-hop icon. [laughter] i'm going to disappear for my first prop. [laughter] the notorious r.b.g. [applause] they sell these, truly. [laughter] she is the subject of an opera, a comic book, a tumbler, and a blog called the ruth baiter ginsburg blog. i'm going to disappear now for my second prop. [laughter] she is a bobble head. [laughter] >> and that's a part of a discussion on the life and career of ruth bader ginsburg. hat tonight at 8:00 on c-span. >> i think it's more important to justice itself.

i know that's a strange thing for one to say. ut i believe that. >> friday, c-span radio continues its series of oral history interviews with former supreme court justices. this week from 1969, associate justice tom clark at 4:00 eastern. in washington, d.c., at 90.1 f.m., online at c-span.org. and nationwide on x.m. satellite radio channel 120. >> i think every first lady brings their unique perspective to this job. if you didn't, you couldn't live through it. i think to the extent that this feels natural to me at any level, and i would never have thought that living in the white house and being first lady would feel natural, it's because i try to make it me.

i try to bring a little bit of michelle obama into this but at the same time respecting and valuing the tradition that is america's. >> watch our program on first lady michelle obama at our website, c-span.org/firstladies or see it saturday on c-span at 7:00 p.m. eastern. and live monday, we conclude our series with a special two-hour program looking at all the first ladies. from martha washington to michelle obama. >> yesterday the co-chairs of the president's commission on election administration testified on capitol hill for the first time since releasing its recommendations on improving u.s. elections. the report includes a six-month study by the commission on the problems playinging voters like waiting -- plaguing voters like waiting in long lines. a maximum waiting time to vote for 30 minutes, and addressing school security concerns.

this is just over an hour. >> the rules committee will call to order. our hearing today is on the presidential commission on election administration. the report and recommendations on best practices in election administration. at the core of our national identity as americans is a pride that we live in a democracy and of course have the right to vote. the beautiful thing to me this on november nights in new york, cold november nights, citizens, tired, coming home from work, want to get home and put dinner on the table for the kids, just get home because they've had a hard day at work, put their feet up on the table and -- on the coffee table and watch their tv show but in quiet dignity they line up, go into into thepolling place, do their duty and the next morning we all abide by the decision. it's an amazing thing that doesn't happen in most countries still to this day and hasn't happened in any country for as long as it has happened in ours. it's a beautiful thing.

in the 225-year journey since the first presidential election, many things have changed. more people are eligible to vote. s i look around the room here, only half of us would have been allowed to vote when the republic was founded. if your ancestors weren't property owners -- >> i am a property owner. >> it was unintended. more people are eligible to vote. african-americans, 18 to 20-year-olds. today's expanded elect rat is much more re-- elect rathe is much more reflective of our nation as a whole. as recent examples have shown, there are still problems with our lechesmark of which can be addressed by improve thelling way we administer.

election administration is a difficult, often thankless task. before i go further, i'd like to thank our election officials for all the election day that was gone right over the years. it's not an easy job because it's so important to our democracy, we have to aspire to perfection. in reality, most americans don't even think about running of an election until something goes wrong. we all remember florida in 2000, minnesota's 2008, where rounts put our election process under a microscope. as recently as 2012, many polling places around the country had unacceptably long lines. this wasn't the first election with the problem but we'd like it to be the last. in his victory speech, president obama referenced the long lines declaring, quote, we need to fix that, unquote. that's hard to do because elections are run at the state and local level. ith the patchwork system sometimes creating challenges, former supreme court justice

louie bran dies famously called the states, quote, laboratories of democracy. they sometimes provide us with examples of innovation that can be shared throughout the country. soon after the last election, the president acted and created a bipartisan commission to study election administration and best practices for improving voting in america. the president insisted this not be a partisan exercise. the commission was supposed to seek out the best ideas for making voting easier and better no matter where they came from. that's what the commission did. the presidential election -- commission on election administration was made up of 10 members, included current and former election officials, executives from successful customer service oriented businesses and two chairs, both well known, one republican, one a democrat, but each with a long, storied history in this area. and so, mr. bauer and mr. ginsburg, you've been on opposing sides in political campaigns, in the courtroom, you both have top-notch credentials as advocates an

champions of your respect i parties. you're uniquely qualified to identify areas where we should move forward. i'd like to thank you for serving on the commission and finding places where we can move beyond partisanship and focus on the nuts and bolts of making running elections easier and better for voters and administrators alike. your commission's report in my judgment is an outstanding piece of work, a valuable road map for improving election administration in this country. while the commission's charge did not include recommendations for federal legislation, the report makes it clear there are areas of existing law and its enforcement must be improved and our committee will study your report and testimony today carefully. i hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in using this report to help improve our election system and strengthen our democracy. so we thank you for your work, we look forward to hearing your testimony and with that, let me turn it over to senator roberts.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. i look forward to hearing the presentation of our witnesses. i want to thank you for your service. they are to be commended for giving their time on this project, lending their, -- their experience and their expertise which is considerable. i know there are a number of other well-qualified commissioners who are not with us today but i thank them as well for their efforts. the committee was charged with making best practice recommendations rather than legislative recommendations and that's what the report has done. it recognizes that elections are carried out at the state and local level and that's where we must focus our attention. for elections to function properly, we need all parties -- the election officials, pollworkers and the voters themselves, to do their part. his requires proper planning and effective administration. i hope the wok of the commission and its recommendations will help

advance the effective administration of our elections and improve the voter experience. i look forward to the testimony of our witnesses. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank, senator roberts. i welcome opening statements by the other members of the panel. >> thank you very much, senator schumer. i want to, again, as a member of the judiciary committee, i have looked at issues from that perspective, i want to thank our witnesses today for their good work and while you did mention minnesota with the recount, ok, and the fact that as we all remember, someone did vote for someone named lizard person in that particular election when we painfully looked at every single ballot in the state, our state has a proud tradition of high voter turnout. we were the -- we're always consistently in the top few states of voter turnout and a lot of that has to do with having same day registration. i studied this and looked. of the top six states for voter turnout, they're not necessarily democrat or republican states, iowa is

usually one of the top ones, maine is one of the top states, but they tend to have something in common, most of them have same-day registration. i know that isn't necessarily part of what you looked at in terms of legislation but i think that it would go a long way and i have a bill with senator tester to look at rolling that out on a national level. thank you, mr. chairman. [inaudible]>> minnesota has one of the best election systems and really tries to do it fairly and in a nonpartisan way, as does maine, actually. senator king. >> i don't have a statement, mr. chairman, except to, since minnesota and maine have been brought up, jesse ventura and i always thought it was states with independent yoverpbors who had high voter turnout. [laughter] >> i will point out, senator king did not wear a feather boa at his inaugural party. >> well, you don't know that. [laughter] no, i have -- >> this is proving to be much

more interesting than i ever imagined. >> i will reserve my comments and look forward to hearing from the witnesses. >> we want to thank our witnesses, first mr. bob bauer. in addition to serving as co-chair of the presidential commission we're here to discuss, he's a partner in the law firm of perkins-couey. he is general counsel to the democratic national committee. in the 2008 and 2012 election cycles was general counsel to obama for president. so as you can see, his credentials on the democratic side are strong. equally strong is mr. ben ginsburg. in addition to serving as co-chair of the commission, he is a partner in the patent boggs law firm. in 2012 and 2008 he served as national down -- counsel to the romney for presidents campaign but he's a a profound effect in our electoral system in 1992 and 1994. you changed america. not in the way i would like but

it was amazing what you did. and with that let me turn it over to mr. bauer. we'd ask our witnesses to limit their statements to five minutes and additional statements, without objection, additional remarks, without objection, will be read into he record. >> senator schumer, senator roberts, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity testifying today with my co-chair. we discussed in advance how we would organize it so i'm going to open with some general considerations identified in the report that we asked our readers to keep in mind as we laid out our recommendations and the best practices we identified. and then i'm going to illustrate the approach we took by talking about the signature issue, the issue most associated with the commission and that is the problem of long lines at the polls. there are a number of other issues that ben will cover that we addressed in six major

recommendations along with as i said, highlighted best practices. but let me say first that the commission was structured and its membership was selected on the theory that election administration is a topic of public administration and needs to be treated as such and that the voters ought to be considered very much as we would consider any other recipients of services provided, that is to say, elsewhere in their lives, americans think a good bit about customer service and how customer service is rendered to them in their roles as consumers and other walks of life and our view was and the president's intention was the commission consider the voter as entitled to that level of customer service, providing the service in the voting process that we all believe as the drivers of our democracy the voters deserve. so this theme of public administration was essential to our work.

one illustration of the importance to the commission and the approach the commission took in this thought-about public administration and this emphasis on public administration is our reliance on data. our view was we ought to look at election administration as thoroughly as possible through the lens as the best possible information, social science and research that was available. and we were very fortunate that some of the witnesses who came before the commission were able to fashion fresh data for purposes of their testimony that the commission could rely upon and that included an extraordinary survey of several thousand state and local election administrators conducted by the state's political scientists and survey research experts and we gleaned very significant information about some of the issues we addressed from that survey. overall throughout the report, the effort was to look very closely at the evidence, how the electoral system was performing.

and in that connection, one of the recommendations that we make is that we need in this country much more collection and analysis of data to enable us to pinpoint the strength and weaknesses in the performance of our electoral process. beyond that, there was a few others and i will go through them, considerations that we discussed at the outset of our report. does one size fit all? we have many different jurisdictions. some believe that you cannot generalize all reforms across jurisdictional lines and to some extent that is true, there are enough common features across the united states that one size in many respects can fit all in many of these recommendations and the recommendations we have made, we have made on the basis that they truly fit all. issue of resources. election administration costs money. and too often we heard from administrators that budget priorities are such, the fiscal pressures on the states and

local jurisdictions are such that too often the needs of election administrators, the fiscal needs, are shuffled to the bottom of the deck. we don't make specific recommendations, that was not our charge, but it was important to note that we cannot have elections without money. thirdly, the technology challenge, and i leave it to ben to discuss in greater details but one warning bell that we rang here was the impending crisis in voting technology. enforcement of existing law. it's very important that even though we don't make legislative recommendations, for us to call attention to problems in compliance with existing federal statutes that were enacted to protect certain voters, minority, disabled voters and voters among our overseas and military opulation. some of these statutes had significant effect, but there

are some gaps in compliance, compliance with the americans with disability act, compliance with the voting rights act and the provisions that protect language minorities and performance of public assistance agencies under the national voter registration act in supporting the registration process. so those are fundamental points that we make. and let me say a point about lines. there are many factors that feed into lines. we tried to analyze what those factors might be. they raise a whole host of issues that each can be i individually addressed and the problem with lines can be substantially resolved. and we also, and this is something we call attention to, publicizing online tools on our web site and to be hosted on the voting technology web site that administrators can use immediately and improve upon to allocate resources within the polling place and plan for long

lines and address them. this is a report but also a project and our work begins now to work with you, the congress, state legislative leaders, community leaders, election administrators around the country to see their effective mplementation. thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you, mr. chairman for having us here today. it's been a pleasure to work with bob on this. it is fair to say we are both proud of the work of our commission. we were charged with making recommendations to the state and local officials who actually put on our elections to remove barriers to dualy qualified citizens being able to cast their votes easily. elections in voting is an area where there can be conflicts between republicans and democrats but a subject where republicans and democrats can agree on the basic principle and on commonsense solutions to

make the voting experience better. bob and i were fortunate to work with eight other commissioners in a talented research director from whom we learned a tremendous amount. we were reached to reach bipartisan and unanimous agreement on best practices. we found that the basic principles on which republicans and democrats agree is that every legally registered voter has the right to be able to cast his or her ballot easily and without impediments. as to the details of voting, bob and i had history. we have been on the opposite side of many partisan battles over the years and will be again as we go to the path of the elections. among those battles have been a lot of recounts. all those recounts were instructed to this exercise, because they provide an unparalleled view of how the system works. we'll both tell you there are problems with our system of voting. the commission presented a

unique opportunity for us to address some of those topics to both republicans and democrats. and which we need to do something about. that is not a partisan issue. it is trying to get right something that very much needs to be gotten right. in fact, it's so important to get it right, that it deserves doing even if it doesn't satisfy everything to one party or another, believes need to be fought in this area. as for fixing these problems, the commission recognized elections are administered by approximately 8,000 different jurisdictions largely using volunteers who don't receive much training. as a result, achieving uniformity in our elections has proven challenging. let me turn to a few big picture issues that jurisdictions face. the state of our voting equipment and technology is an impending crisis. the machines being used in virtually every jurisdiction purchased 10 years ago with

funds after the florida recount will no longer be functional within the next 10 years. voting equipment has not kept up with technological advances in our daily lives. the current equipment is expensive and unsatisfactory to virtually every elections official with whom the commission spoke. that is due to a federal certification process that is broken and must be reformed. this is a subject to which few are paying attention and will not end well on its current path. one of the issues we heard about consistently was having adequate physical facilities for polling places. in most communities, those facilities were schools. but officials in an increasing number of jurisdictions cite safety concerns as a reason for not making schools available for voting. adequate facilities to vote and safety for our children cannot be competing interests. the commission called attention to the problem and to recommend

security concerns be addressed by making election day an in-service day for students and teachers. bob already talked about long lines. let me touch on some of the other subjects that the commission specific recommendations and best practices to the state and local officials. early voting was one. our commission charge was to make it easier for eligible voters to vote. a majority of states with both democratic and republican state officials leading the way now have early voting and told us that early voting is here to stay and increasingly demanded by voters. the details of the number of days and hours will vary by state, county and locality and the decisions are best made there. whether to help ensure that only dually qualified voters vote were to facilitate more people to vote easily, the commission found agreement and support across the political

spectrum for more accurate voter lists. we make two recommendations in that regard. one is the adoption and use of more online registration to support the voter.gov website has examples that can do that. and secondly we recommend that all states join two existing two programs, the interstate voter cross check or kansas project and election registration and information center. both allow states to share data in ways that will make their lists more accurate on their own initiative. the report touches on a number of subjects that are summarized in my testimony. military and overseas voting, disabled policies and law that require accessible polling, a group that is growing larger with the baby boom generation, recommendations that entail state and local voting officials meeting with members of the disabled community and

those with language proficiency issues to work out solutions for local polling areas. and data and testing. there should be testing of our machines after each election to see how well they performed and share information among jurisdictions. and there should be more uniform collection of data, because as our political scientist friends led by our research director at stanford university told us, more data leads to better solutions. with that, thank you again for having us and i know bob and i would be happy to answer questions. >> thank you both for your report and excellent testimony. i'll start off. the report recommends that states adopt online voting registration, reform that improves accuracy and saves money. 19 states have done it, so that means 31 have not.

why -- what is the barrier to the other states doing it and is there anything we can do to overcome those barriers? >> we are not seeing barrier so much. sometimes it takes a while for the discussion to take place within the state and ultimately decisions to be reached in favor of online registration. we are optimistic that is one of the developments. a key introduction of technology into the electoral process that is going to move across the country. and one of our goals in keeping with the project is to go out and as we have been invited to do and make the case wherever we can and whenever that case can be made, whether by federal legislative leaders, state

legislative leaders, voting rights groups, community leaders, that case does need to be made. i think it will wind up being an effective case. >> is there an upfront cost? >> there is an upfront cost. >> how much is it? significant? >> it is not significant and over time, it's clear from studies that been done that that cost is more than recovered. it is a net savings. >> we have a lot of instances in our government where an upfront cost is recouped but because of budgets, people don't want to make the expenditures in year one and year two. that is not a barrier in your eyes? >> no. >> second, the report states that electronic poll books have the potential to solve election-day issues that election officials want this technology. can you discuss how electronic poll books make a difference and what is delaying the >> it is much easier to

describe how it makes a difference than to describe why it's been a problem. the information that can be put on an electronic poll book takes care of a lot of the antiquated paper that's in a polling place. you can call up much more information, including signature verification and photo i.d.'s and can cut down on the traditional line problems that have plagued some jurisdictions on election day. so, they are a low-cost, simple solution to putting a lot of paper in one place where poll workers can access it easily. >> their implementation? >> this goes into what we have fallen into with technology. -- into the morass we have fallen into with technology. part of the problem is that the certification program for new ballot systems is kind of broken and new systems are having a

great deal of difficulty coming online. because the certification process now takes so long and is virtually impossible to get through, some of these solutions are meddlesome for industry to put them in place. >> next, delaware is highlighted in your report as a national leader in implementing the national voter registration act. delaware seems to seamlessly transfer from motor vehicles to the election rolls. can you explain why it is better than what most other states do and again, why aren't more states doing it? >> delaware, in particular, because of our concern about the inconsistent performance of departments of motor vehicles across the country in implementing their responsibility under the motor-voter act, this is a significant issue.

one of our commissioners has really called attention to this as a major, major shortfall in compliance with federal law and we are calling attention to the fact, that a, there is no reason why these d.m.v.'s performance cannot be improved and models like delaware to which states can look really illustrate how it can be done and what a difference it makes. there really needs to be major consistent attention to the fact that this is a serious, serious problem in the operation of current federal statutes, that is to say compliance with those statutes. >> my time has expired. senator roberts. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to talk about the long line problem. and we often hear about long lines are the result of some kind of a real plan of some sort

that certain areas are being targeted and the lines are a result of a deliberate effort to disenfranchise certain groups. my question is, did you find any evidence of that? second, are these lines resulting from management problems or deliberate schemes to disenfranchise people? >> what we saw is that almost exclusively -- >> turn the microphone towards you. >> that this was a management issue, that there are any number of solutions that we put forward in the report to deal with the specific problems of long lines. we held extensive hearings with the jurisdictions in the jurisdictions where long lines had occurred and we found that there are -- the problems are all identifiable and solvable and no plots of conspiracies

that caused the lines. we spent time in florida and what we found in the polling places where there were long lines in those counties, that occurred in less than 1% of the polling places in that particular county. that would suggest resource allocation issue and way to look at management techniques and facilities to be able to improve that. and one of the things that bob mentioned in his testimony was the providing of online tools for precinct officials to be able to gauge the flow over the course of the day and allocate the equipment they have within a county. >> [inaudible] >> testing, one, two, three.

[indiscernible] your report argues in favor of expanding early voting. do you think the states who have not adopted that -- [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [indiscernible] >> several issues come up with regards to the campaign and the voters who voted 45 days early have no chance to factor that in with regards to the election day period.

>> senator, there are two points i would make about the early voting and the issue you raised about whether or not it cuts off the opportunity for citizens. the first is that without speaking out to be the amount of early voting a state may provide, those actively resist the notion that they all need to be funneled through on one day from 7:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. the traditional election day model has not only broken down from the standpoint of administrators, but less feasible and runs up against the grain of voter expectation, that they should be cramped into this one day to vote and creates a whole host of problems.

the second point i would make, senator, is that the studies show that the voters who vote early who are the voters who are the most settled on their choice. they have made up their minds, whether you call them the most partisan or ideologically committed but one way or the other, they are most likely to be least moved over the remaining days of the season. on balance, when you weigh what voters expect and what they ought to be offered against the risks that they will be denied the opportunity for information they need for deliberation, our commission concluded that early voting in some form or another wins out. >> i believe this is an area where the individual states has a feel for how much early voting their voters want and we did hear across the political spectrum from officials of both

parties who say that voters in many jurisdictions really appreciate, expect to be able to have some options at the time that they cast their vote. and in terms of resources, it can be more efficient for jurisdictions to have early voting and not have to jam everything on to election day. that's not always true. but i think this is one of those areas where we aimed the report at state and local officials and they are the ones who end up deciding. >> i thank you. there is an article by norm ornstein and back in 2004, but i think it is very relevant. early voting necessary, but toxic in large doses. the article details the dangers inherent in early voting and the points he makes are at least

worth considering. i commend it to the attention of all of my colleagues. i have some other questions. but my time has expired. maybe we can get back on another round or i could submit them for the record. >> i agree to continue to chair the hearing. no problem with the second round. senator klobuchar is next and we have an executive session to nominate two people to the election assistance commission, and we will do that off the floor at about noon when we have a series of votes. with that, let me call on senator klobuchar and thank senator king for agreeing to chair. >> i want to thank you for that consumer model that you have developed here that people shouldn't be waiting in line and you can look at it in that simple fashion, but i wanted to

ask what senator roberts was asking of you, when you look at these things, you said there were management issues and i could see it in our states where mistakes are made. but i think some fft efforts -- some of the efforts that are going on right now in some of the states, you have come out for early voting, north carolina and florida have enacted laws that would cut back on early voting and north carolina stopped same-day registration. what i'm concerned about is the effect to disenfranchise voters whether done at the individual precinct level or not. these are laws that are being enacted with stringent requirements. do you think some of that is going on? and number two, just to get the stuff done that you want to get done and have the political will to do it in these states and

congress when we see the kinds of things that are going when so many states are back-tracking from this idea that we should allow more people to vote? >> two quick responses to your comment. we were surprised -- not surprised, but we were struck, i'll put it this way, by the testimony around the country, democratic and republican, in jurisdictions that might be more red than blue or more blue than red, that when the lights were off and the doors were closed or in hearings where the agenda was well-defined, a wish to see election administration, in fact, be first-rate public administration for the benefit of the board voters. and that is what we heard. we had the opportunity for anybody who wanted to be heard to be heard. we might have had the opportunity for very many

voices. it was the opportunity for people to voice their wish that we had an election system we could be proud of. outside of many of the issues we discussed, there are controversial enactments that the parties are quite divided about. and i assure you if ben and i went off into a room, we would brawling about those issues. it's painful, but we are holding out as long as we can. but that's not the whole story. and the second point i would make and this is the critical point that if we strengthen some of the key administrative sort of features of our electoral infrastructure, if we have an understanding that we are going to strive for the 30-minute wait time maximum that we articulate in the report and address some of the issues that lead to long lines, we are going to risk the vulnerability of the system to

partisan mischief. senator roberts said could you have plots to create long lines? there is more vulnerability of the system if the system is weak and will break down. if it's strong, less likely it will break down. those would be two of the responses i would offer you. >> i think this area is fraught with partisan feelings. i think that is unfortunate. i think you could not equate cutting back hours in early voting with trying to disenfranchise people. in north carolina and florida, as an example, no one has suggested ended early voting. what people have suggested is that there are administrative concerns about having unlimited early voting. that is a fair debate to have. and does not entail voter disenfranchisement and we get into detours on this issue all too often.

in all the studies we saw, early voting does not increase turnout. that is an unproven assertion that having more hours increases turnout. >> is same-day registration a different matter? >> it is a different matter. a little bit harder to say that the states you mentioned as having early voting do have a history of increased participation. so i think the laboratory of the states to see if same-day registration works or not is not yet been taken on and i think in some of the states where there is although turnout, same-day -- is low turnout, same-day registration would create all sorts of problems for the administrators that might, in fact, devolve into problems like longer lines. it is an untested area.

>> for eight years i enforced our election laws and looked back through every single count of double voting and some of them were father and son with -- 90% of them were father and son with the same name and saw so little fraud in a county with over two million people. and every so often, there was someone who was mad and voted twice or a felon vote who was on probation and voted. i'm glad about what you are doing. i don't see as the major problem as much as it is it has become hard for people to vote or they don't want to stand in these lines because they hear about the lines and don't want to go out and vote. i appreciate what you are doing. one more question about your recommendations. on the schools.

i wanted to know about what they identified what security issues. have there been incidents at schools? we have a lot of voting at schools in minnesota and central place where people feel comfortable to go and how do we fix it? >> i think this area was one of the greatest areas of surprise to us when we heard from so many local officials that it was a problem. the concern is that since the incidents at schools with shootings and violence, that having strangers walking around in the schools and on the campuses was a source of concern. and that's the reason that some states, some localities are cutting back the use of schools. it's a tremendous problem. because in the majority of jurisdictions, schools provide the best facilities for voting. there is ample space, accessible, all the things you want in a polling place. so the conflict between the interest and safety to children and voters is a conflict that should not be allowed to exist.

>> you suggest about having volunteers or something? >> to have a school holiday on election day so it would be a training day for teachers. >> you are not changing the school calendar, because they would take the in-service day -- >> and have a voting day as well. that makes sense. >> i'm sure my kids would vote for an extra day off. >> it's an in-service day. senator schumer mentioned laboratories of democracy and the states are laboratories of democracy and we don't do a good job of sharing information. because what you have done here is that function of collecting data and information across the states and sharing best practices.

this is principally a state and local issue. i will in echoing senator roberts, we had a situation in a maine election where we had very early voting. it was a month or more before the election, the dynamics of the election changed in the last several weeks and we actually had people going into their town offices trying to retrieve their early vote to change it because of developments in the election. so i do think there is a legitimate issue about how far in advance, because elections do tend to sometimes come into focus in the last several weeks and we actually had that experience. i knew people that went to their town office and said how can i get my vote back, i want to change it. and they couldn't. and it was a very distinct situation. the long lines issue, how widespread is it? is it a national problem or is it extremely localized?

you mentioned in one district, it was 1% of the precincts or something like that. are we searching for a federal solution to what is really a very isolated local problem that needs to be dealt with by local officials? mr. bauer, you want to tackle that? >> he isn't recommending a federal solution but recommending a series reforms by state and local governments can keep the wait lines down and comply with the 30-minute standard that we have articulated. secondly, it is a problem -- obviously, it is going to be scattered throughout the country. long lines, some have some real problems with long lines. but the best data indicates that in the united states, five million americans waited more

than an hour to vote and another five million between a half an hour to an hour and 10 million americans is significant number of people and other jurisdictions who haven't had that experience could be significantly at risk if there are not if they are not -- if there are not anticipatory adjustments to the electoral process to address problems, like for example, weak voter rolls or inadequate voting machinery and then you would have lines where you didn't have them before. >> is this a truly national problem or is this something that is very localized? >> i think in our experience, it was pretty localized. any time you have 10 million people voting for long periods of time, that would suggest you

need a solution to that because it shouldn't happen. we had 130 million voters roughly in the last election and that is a significant number, but it is localized. and what we saw is there is not one reason that there are long lines. in fact in different jurisdictions there are different places. you know some jurisdictions will have 100 polling places and put 10 in each precinct and not take into account a rush to registration in a couple of precincts so you have machines in one place standing idle and a line at another. place where people are voting is too small and creates a line. there are a number of commonsense solutions to the problem that we heard about from both our friends in the private sector and from election administrators and bob discussed them in his testimony. and we lay out solutions that can be used on the local level to solve the individual problems that will occur.

>> i'm particularly concerned about something that you mentioned, phrase was impending crisis in election technology and you went on to mention about federal certification. could you expand on that, what the issue is and what we can do about it? >> yes, there are a couple of points to be made and i suspect bob will want to add some as well. the current certification system is using standards that were developed in 2005 and 2007 to approve new technology. well, that was before anybody had an ipad or tablet or many of the devices we use today. because the standards have never been updated largely because of the election assistance commission. the whole thing that a machine

manufacturer has to go through to get new equipment passed so it can be used by the different states has become extremely time consuming and extremely expensive. >> so it's a federal certification process? >> it currently is, yes. but there are two jurisdictions, los angeles county and travis county, austin, texas, that have decided that they are going to build their own systems because things aren't working on the federal level. before the process of certification became federalized, it was handled by the state election directors, and that seems to have been a process that worked better and in fact, may be a solution going forward. so it's not necessarily a federal solution that's needed to the problem, but something certainly needs to be done. >> is it possible that the

federal solution is to undo the prior federal solution? >> perhaps. it would not be the first time. >> mr. bauer, your thoughts. >> i agree, we did not choose to be prescriptive, we didn't say it needs to be addressed a particular way, but we did point out -- and this by the way, is not intended as an adverse reaction to the commission. our report is replete with references to the top flight work they have done developing best practices and december imnaturing them to the jurisdictions. but here, knowing there is going to be continued conflict about its role, there is a structural blockage that needs to be addressed and we can't wait for someday we might hope for when partisan fevers will subside and the commission will experience a new dawn in this particular area. the problem that ben has identified is too urgent and

some answer has to be found. >> senator roberts, second round. >> it occurs to me coming back at this point that as usual, you have focused on the very questions that i was going to ask and our witnesses with their expert knowledge have already answered them. so the question is, do i simply repeat the questions you have asked and have them do it over again or simply ask permission to put this article by norm ornstein, early voting necessary but toxic in large doses. not going to read it to you but commend it to the attention of everybody. i think it is still very viable today. and i thank the witnesses and

everybody concerned with this and since my questions are a duplication of the questions already asked, i yield back. and i thank you, sir. >> senator klobuchar. >> i have a few more questions about some actual individual recommendations you had. first i thought that was interesting was the internet feed idea. i come from a state where we put a camera on rising waters on the river and everyone in the community tunes in to see what is happening so they can see it or we use this all the time for weather. people are constantly checking today, right, when the storm is coming in tonight and the simple idea that people could with simple technology check to see what is happening with voting lines in their precincts. would you be turning a camera on the people or just giving reports?

>> i think what we had envisioned is that the administrators would be continuously assessing wait times and posting reports that citizens could result if they sort of plan out, when it would be most relevant for them and efficient for them to vote. and as you pointed out, this is fairly straightforward. it is one of the ways in which we believe we have to be continuously thinking about the introduction of technology to support the voting process. >> put election administrator saying no wait time -- >> half an hour, 45 minutes, correct. >> then you have another one on poll working and training and discussed the importance of that and professional workers operating in the polling places and training standards for poll workers. how would this work? >> again, it's something that really can be talked about by

the state but implemented by either the state or local jurisdictions. poll workers are the point of contact for most voters. so having well trained poll workers is extremely important to the smooth functioning of the system and just the way voters feel about voting. it comes down to training. and whether that is a top priority or not with local administrators to be able to recruit poll workers. one of the laments we heard is how difficult it is to recruit poll workers, to find enough to be in the polling places. so we have some suggestions about using college students and even high school students, apparently high school students are more reliable in showing up than college students. go figure. and to encourage businesses to allow their employees to be able to help out as poll workers on election day and then have sufficient training.

>> your report talked about the importance of access to information and languages other than english, including ballots in other languages, outreach to non-english media outlets, there would be some efforts. we made efforts in minnesota with asian and pacific islander groups and why is access important to these groups so important? >> we want to say that the broader theme that the commission struck and i think it's well within its charge is improving the voter experience for language minority voters to go to the polls and find there is nobody there to help them who can speak their language, not consistent with offering the same experience to all of our voters that all of our voters deserve. and there is support that by federal law, this congress has tendered to these voters and the

statutes that provide for this protection are not drawn compliance. in a variety of ways in the localities recruiting poll workers with language capability and then on the more -- on the next scale, next point up the scale, devoting their efforts to comply with protecting language minorities. it is absolutely critical to have respect for the voter. >> one of the things you talk about in here is people serving overseas in our military and having online registration materials would be so helpful to them. i think it makes a lot of sense. do you want to explain that? >> we found inconsistencies among the states in the sort of usefulness of their web sites for people serving in the military, especially people serving in the military overseas or living overseas.

and so there are some states that seem to have more robust sites than others. websites is the easiest way to communicate if you are overseas or in the military, much more so than postal service or even a direct delivery system. and so, we would encourage at least the provision of registration materials on state web sites to be enhanced in the states. >> ok. thank you very much. >> i want to follow up again on the question of certification, because you have both identified there is a kind of coming-at-us wave of replacement machines with new technology and if the certification system is broken, that could be a real problem in six to 10 years. is the problem the structure and lack of functionality of the e.a.c. or the idea of federal certification itself?

i see those two separate issues. if the e.a.c. tomorrow became fully functional, would this open the process and we would take care of this in an expeditious manner or should we consider saying this is a state and local responsibility, why do we need federal certification? mr. ginsberg, your thoughts. >> it's an area where federal certification makes sense where the states desire it. there needs to be a central body to be able to judge machines and give the states some comfort in the quality of machines. >> like u.l., underwriters laboratories for appliances. >> perhaps something like that. the state election directors forming a group was the model before the e.a.c.

i would agree that the e.a.c. and its functionality is a complete separate question wrapped up in a lot of other different regs. >> but it's a question that's important because if it doesn't get fixed, then we don't get the certification, correct? >> yes. so, it should be fixed. personally, i'm partial to the state election directors' solution for it. i think that could happen much more expeditiously with a greater need. there would be a federal rule in -- role in terms of the expertise and in terms of the expertise that would need to be brought to it. but that's not necessarily through the current certification process. >> mr. bauer, your thoughts on my question. >> i think you posed the question correctly and it is possible to confuse the issues. we would not have arrived at this conclusion i don't think and made this recommendation if the e.a.c. in this particular area hadn't been in some what in

a state of paralysis and this never developed and the e.a.c. was correctly functioning could it discharge its role? the answer is yes. that may not prove to be the case. we can't wait for a solution that may not be available to us in the political atmosphere and other alternatives have to be developed. >> would it take legislation for those alternatives, the certification is just behind the dam, right? it can't happen. what do we do? this is a problem that is going to come at us in the next two to four years. >> i think that is part of the discussion that needs to take place right now which is what steps should be taken and how could they develop those alternatives. we indicated only in broad brush strokes what the alternatives might be but we didn't grapple

with the details in this report. -- >> mr. ginsberg suggested the state directors created a certifying agency would be acceptable alternative. would that be acceptable to you or is this a federal responsibility? >> i would be prepared to consider all the alternatives. i wouldn't want any position that we take -- one of the concerns we have had, be a damning conclusion about the e.a.c. and that's not my intention. but any alternative that is an effective one is one i would consider. >> even if the e.a.c. is functional, does this need to be a federal responsibility, i guess is the question i'm asking? >> i don't know i would define it as a federal responsibility by necessity but i'm not prepared to say there is an alternative. i'm not prepared at this point because i'm not sure i've

studied it close enough or reached a conclusion in my mind which of the alternatives, the one ben suggested, potentially another, with more federal involvement might be the most effective. what we need to do is focus on what would be the most effective and i don't have a conclusion. >> we have to do something. the alarm bells are ringing. >> if i might, senator. the way the system works is that different states have different standards. almost inevitably they say the machines that are used in their state need to have been certified by, right now, the existing structure. it's not that there's federal legislation or a federal role that particularly blesses a particular machine when it gets done. there's still state legislation that refers back to a central testing facility for the machines to be sure that they are worthy of use. that can or cannot be a federal function, that group that is judging the quality of the

machines. >> or if i may, senator, it could be a function that is not federally supported. -- not federally directed but federally supported. >> well, thank you both for your thoughts on this. and if you have additional thoughts on this important issue, please file them with the committee. any other questions? on behalf of the committee, i would like to thank both of you for your important system and -- your important testimony and particularly for your work on this commission. it is important -- it's important to the people of america and important to our process and who we are as a country and i really appreciate the work that you've done on this and thank you very much. and this will conclude today's hearing. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] in the hearing record will remain open for five days -- >> the hearing record will remain open for five days. we don't have a quorum.

we can't proceed to a vote on the nominations. we will recess subject to the call of the chair. i think it will be off the floor during vote today. thank you.

>> house democrats are meeting on the eastern shore of maryland for the second day. it is the same place where republicans held their recent caucus meeting. president obama is planning to travel to cambridge to join them tomorrow. later today, democratic leaders, including nancy pelosi, are expected to brief reporters. we will have live coverage on c-span. ruthus for remarks on bader ginsburg and elena kagan. ginsburg'sed justice career and discussed various women's rights cases. here is a brief look. >> in my years on the court serving with justice ginsburg, i have come to admire her more and more each day as a judge, colleague, and friend. they say that life on the court can be a little cloistered.

i didn't realize until recently that the folks on the outside -- to folks on the inside, justice ginsburg is much more than that. too many of them, she is a hip-hop icon. [laughter] i'm going to disappear for my first prop. the notorious rbg. [applause] they sell these, truly. [laughter] she is the subject of an opera, a comic book, a tumblr, and a ginscalled the "ruth bader blog. -- blog." i will disappear now for my second crop. prop. she is a bobblehead. >> and again, the discussion on

the life and career of ruth bader ginsburg starting tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. of justice iance think is more important than justice itself. i believe that. only a very small number comparatively of people ever enter into a courtroom, much less have any entanglement with the law. >> friday, c-span radio continues its series of world with formerrviews supreme court justices. associate justice tom clark at 4:00 p.m. eastern. >> the context here is that lee enjoys a reputation in the modern day as someone who

counseled acceptance and submission and resignation to the situation. and that has always struck me as -- it is a sort of series that doesn't add up. we know that he was the most prestigious man in the south. we know the south didn't simply submit to the political will of the north. it began very quickly to contest of northern understanding the plans for reconstruction. to contest them through legal and violent means. what i found is that in the eyes of confederates, lee was not a symbol of submission. he was a symbol of a kind of unbowed cried and -- unbowed pride and measured defiance. >> rethinking grant and lee at appomattox. "american history

tv." >> two homeland security officials agree that more states need to have cried it -- to have climate adaptations and mitigation plans as more extreme weather events become the norm. their testimony wednesday examining states'preparedness for extreme weather -- examining fores' preparedness extreme weather. we will show you as much of this as we can. >> great to see our witnesses. great to be here with senator johnson. we will call the hearing to order. senator johnson, and we'll call this hearing to order. i appreciate the effort of all of you to get here today. i'm glad we're having the hearing today, and not tomorrow. if we were having it tomorrow we might not be having a hearing. today's hearing, as you know, is

focused on the costs of not being prepared for extreme weather events, and exploring the ways that our federal government can increase resiliency in our communities, and just to underbehind this, and save money. save money in the long haul. we have deficits coming down, they're still too much. down from $1.4 trillion, i think, four years ago, this year expected to be down to about $550 billion. only $550 billion. that's still way too much and we have to continue to look in every nook and cranny and figure out how do we save more money. that's the focus of today's hearing. but, i will try to take about five minutes for my opening statement and yield to senator johnson. i'm delighted that he's here, and then we'll recognize our first panel of witnesses. each witness will have about five minutes to offer your statement to our committee. following your statements we're going to have a question and answer period. then a second panel of witnesses will come forward, and we look forward to hearing from you, as well.

but, unfortunately, extreme weather appears to be the new norm. and events like superstorm sandy, which came to my shores and our shores in the mid-atlantic a year or so ago, seen recent wildfires in other parts of the country, dangerous tornadoes, destroyed droughts, it may well be the -- just the tip of the iceberg of what's to come. and even today the east coast is preparing for yet another snowstorm, while the west coast is experiencing a historic drought, and increased fire danger with no end in sight. i have a friend of mine who is from australia, and he tells me that they had the hottest weather in their history. so go figure. it's just sort of a crazy world that we live in right now. for years i've been working with a number of my colleagues, our colleagues, to address the root causes and unfolding effects of what i believe is one of the biggest challenges of our generation, that's climate change. according to the u.s. global change research program extreme weather events have increased in frequency over the last 50 years

or so and they're expected to become even more common, more intense, and more costly. but let me just make a point and underline this if i could. today's hearing is not intended to hash out climate science. that's not what we're trying to do. instead it's about trying to find common ground, as our country debates how to address our changing climate and the extreme weather i believe it's likely causing our witnesses will deliver to us a clear message, and that is put simply, the increase in frequency and intensity of those extreme weather events are costing our country a boatload of money. not just a cost that's measured in lives that are impacted but in economic and financial costs as well. for example the damage from a storm still fresh in many of our minds, superstorm sandy, which impacted again my own state of delaware and many of our neighbors is estimated to have cost our economy $75 billion. think about that, $75 billion in financial damages and that's enough to run a number of departments of our federal government and have money left over. that's just one storm.

we're also hearing reports about the devastating effects of california's severe drought and how it's impacting the wildfire season in that state and the cost to the west. not only are wildfires growing in frequency and severity but we're now seeing severe fires and wildfire conditions in winter and spring, well beyond the traditional wildfire seasons of summer and early fall. these fires are enormously expensive to fight, and recover from, and they pose serious threats to lives and property, damaging homes and businesses alike. according to a 2013 report by insurance company the nearly 40 wildfires last year in the united states cost our economy over a billion dollars. these economic damages can deliver devastating blow to many local communities, to states, as well as to our own federal government. fema, federal emergency management agency alone has obligated i'm told over $80 billion in federal assistance for disasters declared in fiscal years 2004, through 2011. $80 billion. however, the cost to the federal

government is not just limited to disaster relief. as an insurer, of both property and crops, the government faces additional significant fiscal exposure. for example, since the creation of national flood insurance program in 1968, through december 2013, fema's debt from insurance payments to that program have totalled approximately $24 billion. and even before superstorm sandy total debt from payments to the national flood insurance program was almost $18 billion. the cost of these weather events keep going up at a time when we're trying to bring our government spending down. that is one of the reasons why, for the first time, our gao, the government accountability office, last year listed climate change as one of the biggest fiscal risks facing our country in its high risk list report. just to remind us all, every two years, beginning of everything congress, gao gives us a list. senator johnson heard me to say

that before, we use that as our to-do list in this committee to figure out ways to save money and get better results for less money. we're thankful for that to-do list. in response to this historic announcement house oversight and government reform committee chairman darrell issa and this is a quote from darrell, the comptroller general has made it very clear that we've not prepared properly, that the federal government has a financial risk that we have not properly mitigated, said i think it's a wake-up call to us all. i couldn't agree more. gao's report is a call to action for both congress and the administration, warning us that our country must start thinking now about how to better prepare and adapt to a new climate reality. today our witness from kwchlt ao will further detail these financial risks to our communities, to our taxpayers and hopefully offer some commonsense solutions that my colleagues and i can work with the administration to see implemented. fortunately, this administration along with a number of state and local governments are starting to focus their efforts on

preparing for the very real threats posed by extreme weather events and climate change. last fall president obama issued an executive order on climate preparedness, that incentivizes investments in more robust roads and buildings that may be more expensive but can hold up to more intense storms. i commend the president's approach, and believe it is very timely as rebuilding efforts continue from superstorm sandy and other recent natural disasters. i look forward to hearing more about the president's efforts, efforts by states like delaware and a bunch of other states to do a better job protecting our communities, and our taxpayer dollars from these challenges. as we continue to debate how to reduce our deficits i believe we can't afford to ignore the impacts these weather events are having on federal spending, a little extra planning combined with prudent, targeted investments can go a long way in saving both lives and taxpayer dollars. i believe this is a perfect example of that very wise maximum -- i used to hear from

my grandmother all the time, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. thanks again to our witnesses for being here. we're eager to hear your testimony with that i'm going to turn over not to our ranking member senator mccain, but our ranking member acting ranking member senator johnson from wisconsin for any thoughts ron that you'd like to toss in. glad that you're here. >> thank you, mr. chairman. of course i'm mindful the reason i'm sitting in this chair is because dr. coburn is not here. he's in our thoughts and prayers. want to thank you, want to thank our witnesses, and looking forward to the testimony. when it comes to this issue, the questions i'm going to be looking to have answered is, first and foremost, since i've been here, been looking into this issue, we're really declaring federal disaster declarations much more frequent basis now. is that because we really have, you know, a higher instance of the types of disasters that require that? or are we just too quick to declare those disasters?

i'm afraid that if we have an overreliance on the federal government help, is that restraining the mitigation? the new word i'm hearing resilience in terms of, you know, how we prepare -- are we being pennywise and pound foolish by not spending the money up front to mitigate, and again, is it overreliance on federal help when these disasters hit, everybody's expecting the federal government to come in and pay for things, as opposed to actually mitigating these risks ahead of time. and so from my standpoint coming from the private sector i certainly understand that a private insurance market really is very -- provides very strong discipline in terms of mitigating risk. you know, whether it's fire risk in a plant, basically insurers come in there, if you put in sprinkler heads every six feet apart versus every 24 feet apart, you're going to have -- you're going to be able to mitigate that risk and lower your insurance price.

so i really haven't experienced that. the private sector insurance market is very good discipline to those risk mitigation efforts. and it goes -- those are the kind of questions i'm asking in terms of how can we, certainly utilize the federal government in the most efficient way because, you know, like you said, mr. chairman, we don't have the money to do all these things. so look forward to the testimony. >> thanks so much. joined by our fellow from little state, alaska, little state with a big population. a couple of great senators. mark would you like to say a word or two? >> you bet, small population but a state with a big punch but i would say in homer, alaska, i think last week we had green grass. so, you know, it is -- things are definitely changing. first, mr. chairman, if i could just -- i'd like to read a statement for the record, and if that's okay, and i apologize, i won't be able to stay but i want to make sure this is fairly important issue, especially when you talk about extreme weather

events and how to prepare for them. but first let me say, mr. chairman i want to thank you, and i appreciate you holding this hearing to examine what i consider the true cost of not being prepared for impacts in extreme weather. we're about to feel it. as i drove in today i drove across salt. because they're waiting for snow to fall, to melt it. in alaska that would be unheard of. but that's, you know, the way it works. now the weather conditions also change, i'm sure we'll have power outages and many other things. you know, we understand very extreme conditions in alaska, and normal winter day in barrow or fairbanks will get to below zero many times. and in some cases, that would be extreme down in the lower 48, but not in alaska. alaska truly is on the front lines in the terms of changing climate, the effects of extreme weather, and existing challenges facing our communities and funding, including retreating sea ice, rapidly eroding

shorelines, thawing permafrost, ocean acidification, this reality puts many communities at risk throughout our state. the army corps of engineers and the gao have both released reports identifying last ka villages imminently threatened by erosion. many of these villages have experienced incredible, extreme weather. 30-plus villages at risk of literally falling into the ocean or disappearing totally. flooding wiped out a village in alaska called galina. totally in what's amazing about it we read about a lot of issues in lower 48. we had a whole village wiped out by flooding. and no place to evacuate, the closest place was 270 miles away. all had to be done by air in order to move these people out quickly and now they're trying to rebuild in a very short time, and the winter set in and it was also very difficult. and i know when people talk about climate change, they get nervous, is it the, you know they want to debate the science on it. i'm telling you climate change is occurring.

my state is the example of it. of what the impacts are. and it is extreme. and we are seeing the impacts economically, and from all levels. our state has the longest coastline in the united states, while in both incredible beauty but also its economic value, also requests and has enormous vulnerabilities in the sense of the impacts it has alaska's unique position as an arctic state presents a variety of advantages to leverage the challenges to overcome this extreme issue. you know, i have to tell you, alaska is clearly on the front line with dealing with the issue of climate change. we have our own task force set up. we have been active in it. we have focused on what we can do to mitigate the issues in these extreme changes in weather patterns that are impacting us on a day-to-day basis in alaska. let me say that, you know, as the president's climate action plan moves forward, and the state and local and tribal leaders task force on climate

change preparedness begins to develop a recommendation i'm confident investing and mitigation is the right decision. we always spend the time, mr. chairman, always after the fact. picking up the pieces, and the costs are huge. you know, we had a hearing in alaska through subcommittee that i chair here with fema, and the corps, talking about what we can do before these situations. but when we know they're going to happen, we have 30-some villages on the list. we know they're going to fall into the ocean. we can do something now or we can wait until something bad happens, and we're going to call fema. and fema's going to be writing some checks. that's the worst approach in the sense of dealing with this issue. we can do this in a much better way. i know, mr. chairman, you invited individual mike williams sr. who is an iditarod musher but also an incredible native leader who was going to be on the panel today but i know he could not attend and if i could just ask for the committee to insert his comments and his testimony into the record, if that's okay.

>> without objection. >> let me just end and just say, mr. chairman, as the chair of the subcommittee on emergency management that deals with disaster relief, emergency preparedness, first responders, mitigation, and this committee, we've had several hearings on these issues and sat here with an insurance folks that talk about how they're adjusting their risk analysis, how they're making sure that they're now seeing more severe weather patterns and they're not here to, you know, they weren't here to debate the science, but they were here to debate was, risk is greater. patterns are changing. the more compacted, and they're much more severe, so therefore the risk analysis goes in to play, and therefore rates go up. i know this as an owner of commercial property. i know my rates haven't been flat the last ten years because they're analyzing the risk. and i get that. but there is a risk that everyone is paying today for the lack of action in regards to mitigating these situations. so i think, and i want to again

say to the chairman, thank you for holding this hearing. it's a hard issue to grapple with, because there are political views on climate change. but that's not the issue. the issue is, it is happening. we can argue over it all we want. but, in my state, we see it every single day. we have disaster after disaster. we have huge costs that are associated with it. and even though we're far away, 5,000 miles away, small villages, we literally there are buildings and houses are falling into the ocean. this is not a hypothetical situation or theory. it's real. so i really appreciate the work you're doing here. and i hope the committee continues to talk about this. i know, and i agree, that we can't bear all the costs. that's just reality. but how we manage it from everything from our building codes all the way up to what we do here on the federal level is critical to understand how we're going to manage this so we don't have these costs