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 borne by the private sector, individuals or

the government. so i look forward to this and thank you very much. >> we're just glad that you could join us, senator johnson and me. thanks so much for coming for your comments. when -- along when senator begich was speaking i was reminded of all people senator mick enzi from wyoming, as my colleagues know, i oftentimes cite him, he may be later here today. he has his 80/20 rule that is one of his guiding principles in terms of how to get things done and the 80/20 rule is basically, we agree on 80% of the stuff. here in congress. we disagree maybe on 20%. let's just focus on the 80% that we agree on. and we'll set the other 20% aside until another day. and today i think we're going to focus on the 80% that we can agree on. and to help try to path for just the congress but for our country. the one of the people who's not here yet will probably be here in a little bit is senator from arkansas mark pryor. they have a saying in arkansas, whenever you see a friend, and

mark pryor said this to me about a million times, they'll say, hey, man, and your name is heymann. and i was just hoping mark would get here so he could introduce you. and say hey man. david heyman we're happy to see you assistant secretary for the department of homeland security. mr. heymann has the office for implementing policies, planning programs and strategies. caitlin durkovich, assistant secretary for infrastructure protection at the department of homeland security, and this role she leads the departments aefforts to strengthen the public/private partnerships and coordinate programs to protect the nation's critical infrastructure, assess and mitigate risk, build resilience, and strengthen incident response, and recoveries. nice to see you again, welcome. and last but not least mark gaffigan. and mark is the managing director of the u.s. government

accountability office's natural resources environmental team. the natural resources environmental team is responsible for gao's assessments of federal efforts to manage our nation's land and water resources, protect the environment, ensure food safety, manage agricultural programs, ensure a reliable and environmentally sound energy policy, meet our nation's science challenges, and address the u.s., and international nuclear security and cleanup. that's a lot. that's a lot to do for one person. each of you have about five minutes, five minutes to read your opening statement. if you run a little bit over that that's okay. go way over that we'll have to rein you in. your written statement will be included in the record, and with that we're going to recognize mr. hayman, also known as hey, man. welcome. >> thank you. the quick aside, senator pryor has said that to me for now over 30 years. as i serve d as his vice president when he was a student

government leader in my high school. his political career has skyrocketed because of my service to him. thank you chairman carper -- >> this story just kieps getting better. >> thank you chairman carper, senator johnson and distinguished members of the committee. my best wishes to senator coburn and his family. it's my pleasure to be here this morning to discuss the impact of extreme weather and what the department of homeland security is doing to improve the preparedness and resilience of our communities, and nation. this represents one of the most significant areas where we can all agree, i think, investment today will help us save billions in the future. over the past decade, an unprecedented number of weather related disasters, hurricanes, floods, droughts, wildfires, crop freezes and winter storms have hit the united states. leaving devastated communities and billions of dollars of damage in their wake. in 2011, we experienced 14 natural catastrophes exceeding a billion dollars in cost each.

that's a record number. we had a record 98 presidentially declared disasters. in 2012 we faced hurricane sandy. the largest atlantic hurricane on record and the second costliest to the nation, damaging or destroying more than 300,000 homes in new york, 72,000 in new jersey, and costing billions in damage. according to the world's largest risk insurer, weather related catastrophes over the past three decades have hit north america much harder than the rest of the world. total economic losses in the united states totalled approximately $1.15 trillion over the last 30 years. without a concerted effort, national resilience effort, the trend is likely to continue. the department of homeland security is responsible for providing the coordinated comprehensive federal response in the event of a terrorist attack, natural disaster, or other large-scale emergency while working with state and federal local tribal territorial

and private sector partners so that we can ensure swift and effective recovery. offer the past several years we have made a significant shift in our thinking and in our practice of preparing for mitigating against and responding to disasters. and i can summarize that in one word. resilience. resilience is the ability to anticipate, prepare for, and adapt to changing conditions, stand and respond to and rapidly recover from disruptions. in may of 2009 president obama took a significant step towards fasscilitating and institutionalizing national resilience when he merged the homeland security council and national security council into a single structure. and created a resilience directorate with the national security council. this directorate managing resilience policy and operates alongside the counterterrorism director. this action established resilience as a homeland security pillar and priority, which was called out for the first time in the president's national security strategy. dhs affirmed this prioritization

in his qhsr, quadrennial homeland security view in 2010, promoting insurance of resilience to disasters as one of the department's core missions, and responsibilities. but the question is, how do you create and foster resilience. establishing the concept of resilience is an essential first step but it is only one piece of pro-actively preparing for potential disasters and readily responding to a situation as it occurs. across the department, from fema, to mppd to science and technology, we work with a wide array of government, private and nonprofit faith-based organizations to build and foster resilience. not as a concept, but as an applied reality. fema is leading implementation of the national preparedness system. my colleague here today will discuss our critical infrastructure, security and resilience programs, and in my office, the office of policy, we coordinate resilience

initiatives and policy across the department and are working to create the framework that fosters resilience and gives a coherent baseline. i'd like to share one example of some of the important work that we've been doing. we're creating a program called resilience star based on the energy star concept which you probably are familiar with for appliances in your own home. in this case, it will help ensure that homes will be built to voluntarily standard, stronger standards that will incur far less damage by disasters, protecting lives, livelihoods and helping communities respond to and recover to disasters, much more quickly. ultimately, dhs aims to extend the resilience star program beyond homes and facilities and into critical infrastructure. helping to recapitalize the built environment across america in the long-term. one home, one building, one bridge at a time. our investments in resilience will pay significant dividends for the country. it is efficient and it is cost effective.

homeland security is simply not about government action rather it is also about collective strength of the entire country. it's a shared responsibility requires the participation of individuals, communities, the private sector, as well as state, local and the federal government to be truly effective. the department's ready.gov website serves as a resource for citizens and businesses and communities, so that they can stay informed and take appropriate prepared measures. this is as i said a shared responsibility. it requires that we all work together to marshal all the resources to withstand whatever threats and hazards we may face. it is truly the actions of each of us that in the end will ensure the safety and security for all of us. i look forward to your questions. thank you. >> chairman, thank you very, very much. mrs. durkovich, please proceed. >> thank you, chairman carper, senator johnson, and distinguished members of the committee. i, too, extend my thoughts and prayers to senator coburn and his family. it is a pleasure to appear before you today to discuss the

department's efforts to enhance the resilience of the nation's critical infrastructure to extreme weather. our daily life, economic vitality and national security depend on critical infrastructure. infrastructure provides essential services and functions, but it is easily taken for granted. often, it is only when an incident occurs in service is disrupted that attention is drawn to the importance of the infrastructure itself. threats to our critical infrastructure are wide ranging. including aging and failing components, cyber threats, acts of terrorism, and climate change and extreme weather. the consequences of these threats to the public and private sectors can be seen in the events over the last decade. hurricanes katrina and sandy, the tornadoes in the midwest, wildfires, and flooding across the western states, the california drought, the extreme cold in the northwest, all demonstrate how weather can disrupt the availability of lifeline functions in other critical services. just as terrorist attacks

threaten our communities, extreme weather disrupts the security of our nation. extreme weather strains our resources, diverts attention from counterterrorism efforts, serves as a threat multiplier that aggravates stressors both at home and abroad, and destabilizes the lifeline sectors on which we rely. higher temperatures and more intense storms can cause inefficient infrastructure operations and damage and disruptions that can result in cascading effects across our communities. hurricane sandy is a vivid example of the potentially devastating impacts extreme weather can have on critical infrastructure, and demonstrates how interdependencies between infrastructure systems can magnify impacts and delay restoration. additionally, the increasing role of cyber and communication networks creates new vulnerabilities and opportunities for disruption. two years ago, high temperatures and high demand tripped a transformer and transmission line in yuma, arizona, starting a chain of events that shut down

the san inevery nuclear power plant, disabilitying automaticing switching assistance leading to a large-scale power outage across the entire san diego distribution system. strides have been made to address vulnerabilities that lead to such outages but additional progress is needed to protect our interrelated systems. ed nation must take a long-term perspective in account for evolving threats and hazards including those caused by extreme weather that are linked to changes in climate. especially with regards to building resilience for critical infrastructure. built infrastructure has a ten-year design build phase in a life span of 50 years or more. and is expected to operate under stressor conditions that sometimes we can't even imagine. as a result, it is a prudent investment to incorporate resilient into asset and system design, promote mitigation and built infrastructure and to empower owners and operators with decision making tools rather than to rebuild or redesign infrastructure after incidents occur.

to achieve infrastructure resilience owners and operators must be able to minimize the disruption to essential services provided to our communities. regardless of the hazard or threat. and when a disruption occurs, ensure essential services and functions are brought back to full operations as quickly as possible. one year ago today, president obama issued presidential policy directive 21. critical infrastructure security and resilience an executive order 13636 improving critical infrastructure cyber security. ppd 21 directed dhs to develop an update to the national infrastructure protection plan, or the nip which was released in 2013. the nip 2012 envisions a nation in which physical and cyber critical infrastructure remains secure and resilient. essential services and products continue to be delivered in the face of incidents, and communities and businesses adaptd to changing conditions and rapidly recover from poe tepgs disruptions. the office of infrastructure protection is leveraging our

core capabilities, such as information sharing, capacity development, vulnerability assessments, and situational awareness to support owners and operators' efforts to strengthen resilience to extreme weather. as part of the hurricane sandy rebuilding task force, ip and other federal partners work to develop the infrastructure resilience guidelines which are sound investment principles to guide federal infrastructure investment as we modernize and adapt infrastructure. simple things, such as consistent application of comprehensive science-based data, and a regional cross jurisdictional focus or selecting projects. additionally, i co-chair the new infrastructure resilience work group with the department of energy under the white house council on climate preparedness and resilience. through this working group, we are coordinating interagency efforts on climate preparedness and resilience for the nation's infrastructure. the working group is studying infrastructure's most vulnerable to climate impacts throughout the united states, and identifying risk based mitigation in adaptions -- adoption strategies.

this will inform and aid the critical infrastructure community with planning and decision making regarding climate preparedness and resilience. ip also works with state and local partners through the regional resiliency assessment program to examine a particular industry, region or municipality's dependence on key lifeline sectors and to mitigate the hazards that could disrupt these complex ecosystems. this year we are partnering with the state of maine to produce the first climate change adaptation plan for the portland metropolitan area. in closing, by increasing the resilience of our critical infrastructure in our communities we are better prepared as a nation to the myriad of threats and hazards we face. leveraging the partnership framework we have established over the past ten years, ip will continue to work with owners and operators of critical infrastructure to understand the impact of extreme weather, and to take steps to enhance resilience. thank you very much, and i look forward to answering your questions. mrs. durkovich, thank you so much for your time.

stick around we'll have some questions. mr. gaffigan, very nice to see you. please proceed. >> senator carper good to see you again, senator johnson. thank you for inviting me here. let me also extend the best wishes to senator coburn and his family. i had the fortune to attend one of senator coburn's first hearings when he was on the hill and we told us afterwards he was going to do some oversight and i think he's followed through on that. so i'm very sorry he's not able to join us today. zbleez announced he's going to step down at the end of the year, and while he has some health he said that has nothing to do with those just a personal decision he and his family have made. but i have said to him, well, you're still on the payroll for another, you know, 10 1/2 months, so i know you wanted to finish strong. and we're going to make sure that you do. and he's determined to. so plenty more oversight to come. >> yeah. great. i want to make three points. first there's a lot at stake. we've all talked about some of the numbers, in your opening

statement, there are significant costs from extreme weather. but not only to the federal government, but also to the state, local, tribal governments, businesses, farmers, individuals, in short, everyone. second, there is uncertainty about the specific risks we might face from extreme weather, and how we can adapt to those changes, and manage those risks. complicating this uncertainty is that the risks faced and the appropriate adaptation is going to be particular to the situations and the locations of those facings risk. to borrow from the phrase all politics is local. all adaptation is local. third thing, given the challenge going forward for everyone facing these risks, the challenge is to strive for the best, most updated information available to help inform specific preparation, resilience, adaptation, so that the investment and preparation and resilience is most effective. and as we've explained, funds

are tight. so let me illustrate what's at stake and sort of challenges in four areas that are particular to the federal government. first, the federal government has a great deal at stake, as an insurer of property and crops. in 2012 the flood insurance program had property coverage of over $1.2 trillion, while crop insurance covered $120 billion in crops. that's a four-fold increase in the crop insurance program since 2003. however the flood insurance program has a debt $24 billion, as you pointed out. and the nation's crop insurance annual costs have more than doubled from $3.4 billion in 2001 to $7.6 billion in 2012. back in march of 2007, gao did a study and found that both of these programs' exposure to weather related losses had grown substantially and that fema and usda had done little to develop the information necessary to understand what those risks were. they've since developed a

report, now those reports, usda released their report in 2009. the flood insurance program released their report in 2013. they recognize the potential risks, they recognize the uncertainty, but it's still unclear what actions these programs are going to take. in the future. and that will have a lot to say for the financial solvency of these programs going forward. but also in 2012 congress passed the bigger water flood insurance reform act which among many things required the use of information on coastal erosion areas, future change in sea levels, and intensity of hurricanes to update its flood maps. implementation of this will be key in making changes to that program. second, the federal government is a significant provider of disaster aid. the number of federal disaster declarations increased from 65 in 2004 to a peak of 98 in 2011, and has been mentioned fema's provided over $80 billion during those years. after superstorm sandy, congress provided about $60 billion in

budget authority for disaster assistance. the federal government could do a couple things. it could start by fully budgeting for these costs to address the fiscal exposure that is largely outside of the budget process, and fema could also develop an updated formula. the formula hasn't been updated since 1986, to determine the capacity of jurisdictions to respond to those disasters. third the federal government is the owner and operator of significant infrastructure, dod alone has over half a million buildings, facilities, throughout the world, including some in vulnerable coastal areas. in addition, the federal government manages about 30% of the nation's lands. forests, wildlife, these natural resources face threats from extreme weather. dod has recognized the risks to its facilities and to trying to assess the potential impacts and consider what adaptation may be necessary at facilities in many different environments. regarding federal lands, federal resource agencies are also

trying to incorporate climate related information at the local level to decide what to do best. fourth, the federal government is both an investment partner in public infrastructure, and a potential provider of technical assistance. the federal government invests billions annually in public infrastructure projects. for example cbo estimates that total public spending on transportation and water infrastructure is about $300 billion annually with about 25% of that coming from the federal government. and the rest from state and local governments. our work has found incorporating considerations about climate into the planning of this infrastructure that may be in place for 50 to 100 years can help avoid the need for assistance in the future, if the infrastructure -- so the infrastructure can withstand extreme weather. however, responsibility for planning and priorityizing these projects is primarily at the state and local level. and they may not have the information or expertise they need to incorporate climate considerations into their site-specific local projects.

thus the federal government is in a position to be a provider of technical assistance, helping state and local officials identify and use the best available information that is specific to their circumstances, while also enhancing access to experts who can help translate that information down at the local level. that concludes my opening statement. i welcome your questions, thank you. >> thanks so much, mark. and for the work that -- anybody here on your team? anybody from the audience from gao? >> gentleman right behind me, yes. and there's plenty more back in the building. >> on behalf of dr. coburn and myself how much we value the work that you do, and appreciate the opportunity to partner with you. >> thank you, sir. >> i want to first talk a little bit more, talk a little bit more about the flood insurance program. dr. johnson -- well senator johnson and i both -- dr. coburn -- voted against the flood insurance corrections bill that passed the senate not very

long ago just earlier this month. late last month. and i go back in time to 1990 i was a house member on the banking committee and believe it or not i think with a guy named tom ridge, who was the raking republican on the subcommittee that i chaired then and one of our focuses of the national flood insurance program because we were concerned that the program was under water and all these years later, well, it still. and the kind of changes we're seeing in weather it's getting to be more under water. and we adopted some changes to the legislation, in the last year or two, the -- and the costs as they come to bear on people who live in areas that are prone to flooding, are in some cases very steep, there's concerns about the flood mapping and so forth, that people were not in areas where they used to have flooding, now they do. and so the question is, what do we do, if anything, in response to those conditions, those changing conditions? and to try to be humane but also

to realize that it's a lot of money at stake here. and this is -- we've got to -- i think doing nothing is not an option. i -- so the house -- the senate's passed a bill it's over in the house and we're not sure what if anything the house is going to do but i my guess is that there will be an opportunity here to find a principled compromise. that actually makes progress toward reducing this unfunded liability, and is not cruel or heartless with respect to people whose homes, businesses, are at risk. the i know how closely you've been following what the senate has done in the state of play but if any of you, mr. gaffigan, if any of you have any advice for us as to how to proceed and what might be some of the elements of the principle compromise i'd welcome hearing those, and my guess is that we're going to have the opportunity later this year to work more closely with you, to

say, and with the administration, the administration, president's not crazy about this bill, but the senate has passed as you know, there's an opportunity for, for the administration to weigh in and be part of the solution. any thoughts you have with us on that? >> just very quickly and again the flood insurance is not necessarily in my portfolio. i have a lot of things, but not that one. but i will say that, you know, i think it's a tradeoff between the affordability of the program and the individuals who have to pay the premiums. i mean at the end of the day, someone has got to pay for this and it's a question of the balance between the taxpayer, and the individual businesses, homeowners, those who own the flood insurance. i think some of the things talked about in building in consideration of what the risks are going forward. trying to build in some resiliency going forward in that program would help minimize the risk so that we're not we're not having to pay the higher premiums, because we don't anticipate the higher risk down the road. i think that's where the area of compromise is probably best sought. >> okay.

mrs. durkovich, mr. heyman anything you want to make sure on that before we go to another question? if you have something you want to say, go ahead. i don't think your mike is on. >> sorry. fema has actually been working with both house and senate on this, this is obviously a concern that we hear about, and i know that there are possibly going to be amendments down the road. right now our authority is only to complete a study on affordability. we have no authority-no authority to address the affordability of flood insurance. but we are happy to work with you to help try to think this through. >> all right, thanks. i'm going to come back to mark gaffigan, this deals with prioritizing risks, and i think in your testimony you may have mentioned three or four areas where the government could limit its fiscal exposure when it comes to climate change, and to extreme weather events. and within those three or four areas, which stands out to you

for the maybe the biggest fiscal concern? >> -- >> let me just add to that as kind of a p.s.? are there high risk areas that cannot be addressed by the executive -- maybe higher priority for my colleagues and me here in the congress? >> well you mentioned the flood insurance program. that is one in terms of fiscal risk and i think it's hard to pick one that's more significant than the others and i just touched upon four areas. there are a lot of other potential impacts that the federal government. we think the disaster assistance program, the aid program, $60 billion for one storm is the amount that congress authorized for superstorm sandy. that stands out. right now, as an owner of infrastructure, the agencies are trying to assess what's at risk. dod has some serious concerns, they have at least 30 major facilities that are in coastal areas vulnerable to flood. they have to have dry docks

making sure those do not expose so i think it's hard to pick a most important out of all those. >> all right. a question for mr. heyman or ms. durkovich or both but and mr. gaffigan's testimony he mentioned as i recall that infrastructure decision makers haven't necessarily incorporated potential climate change impacts in planning for roads, in planning for bridges, in planning for waste management systems, because they face challenges identifying and obtaining available climate change information best suited for locations and for their projects. could one or both of you take a minute or two and just talk a little bit about how your agency is addressing this concern, in particular, we'd like to hear how your agency is coordinating with other agencies to make sure that local planners have the best data possible, especially related to superstorm sandy,

rebuilding efforts. >> thank you very much for that question. in our unique role within the office of infrastructure protection, we both have the ability to convene and coordinate with owners and operators, but with other members of the federal interagency. let me speak to the latter point first. and two topics related to that. first is i was in front of you a few months ago talking about federal fasscility security and happen to chair a group called the interagency security committee that works with 53 different departments and agencies to set standards related to federal building safety and security. climate change is an issue that this interagency security committee is addressing, and is working to incorporate it into its design basis threat

scenarios, which are over three dozen scenarios that federal buildings think about when incorporating protective and mitigation measures to again ensure that the safety and security of those facilities. so this is a group of physical security officers who are looking at how we address climate change when it comes to the over 300,000 federal facilities that are in the area. we are dependent, though, as a federal interagency on other lifeline sectors. and in -- in the office of infrastructure protection, we have the ability to convene our 16 sectors and partners both on the government side, but also in the private sector side to talk about what they are doing to raise awareness, to look at best practices, to identify best practices, practices to understand where the gaps are and to look at the

comparative advantage that the federal government has and to think through what are some of the capabilities that we can bring to bear to help this effort. and then just to speak briefly to the work that we're doing with the infrastructure resilience working group. this is, again, a unique opportunity to look across the federal interagency and look at the programs that are available to state and local communities, to the owner/operator community and to, again, understand what's working, where the gaps are, where we need to remove those barriers so that we can enable planning, that we can bring consistent, comprehensive data to our partners so they can begin to incorporate it into our planning. a lot going on on this front that i think we can continue to harness. >> i yield to senator johnson. do you want to add anything to that? >> sure. thank you. as part of the national preparedness plan, we work very closely with states and

communities to assess their -- help them assess their -- the threats and hazards and risks that they face. this is called the thyra, threat, hazard identification risk assessment. every state is required to do this. fema has a policy of making the best available data available so that is to say whatever is -- so the top line scientific data that's available, fema tries to facilitate to the best of their ability. two years ago there were only 15 states that had climate action plans. today there's 36 that have climate action plans. they're incorporating the best data and their risk assessment to develop an action plan to better prepare their communities. >> thanks. thanks so much. senator johnson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm a big fan of a fellow named

bjorn lombard. he issues his report, i think it was called the copenhagen project. i believe he's talked about climate change. he's talked about where we should spend our dollars. my first set of questions go toward prioritization. how do we do that? are we doing it effectively? can we be killing two birds with one stone? i'll start with you, ms. durkovich. you talked about cyber security, which brings to mind power grids, which brings to mind the attack at the metcalf transmission station in i believe san jose, california. there are a number of things that could affect our infrastructure. you know, obviously natural disasters, weather disasters as well as, you know, manmade terrorist attacks as well. are we trying to combine these and take a look at that from the

standpoint of prioritization of trying to mitigate problems? >> our role within the office of infrastructure protection is to help owners and operators understand the range of threats and hazards they face and as they look across their enterprise to manage risk, to provide them with information, with tools, with best practices so they can be both efficient and effective in application of how they go about managing this. part of the reason that we have moved to a more all hazards focus within the department of homeland security and across the homeland security enterprise is that we find as you work to adapt preventive measures and mitigatetive measures to a range of threats and hazards, they are

applicable not only to just one particular hazard but to many hazards. and so we worked very closely with the owner and operator community to think through this. let me touch briefly, for example, on the substation issue. so as we think about security but also incorporate climate change and extreme weather into that conversation, as owners and operators are looking to invest in upgrades and to modernize that infrastructure, as they make improvements related to security, we can also have conversations with them about whether these assets and these facilities are in flood prone areas, are in areas that are suggesti susceptible to sea rise so as they start to make the multi-million dollar investments, we're thinking about them in parallel and integrative fashion and ensuring that the money that is invested in these enhancements and these

mitigation measures is used effectively. but, again, our role is really to help them understand the range of threats and risks and to consider measures and options that allow an efficient and effective application of resources. >> mr. heyman, in terms of prioritization, are there lists being prepared? i mean, we talk about it, we talk about prioritization, but is there any product that's actually ever produced? >> there is. so the -- if you -- the national preparedness system has about five parts to it. one is to identify the risks that are available. two is to get a sense of where the gaps are looking at communities based upon what capabilities are required for preparedness, then to do the resources assessment and ultimately resourcing followed by training and exercising and you do that cycle again. at the end of that exercise

there is a list of capabilities that are prioritized for communities for states. those states then apply for grants to fema based upon those -- that gap analysis, and that becomes the basis for the next year's preparedness planning and evaluation and so that's a regular cycle that's done. we had the national preparedness report is an annual report and it was last released, it was last year. let me just talk a little bit about prioritization as a concept because i think that everyone has said that mitigation is critically important, and i think that's right. there was a study done a few years ago by the multi-hazard mitigation council which said $1 worth of mitigation up front led you back to $4 back in terms of

return on your investment and similarly, the louisiana state university hurricane center evaluated what kind of benefit mitigation would have done in katrina and they came back with a figure of $8 billion would have been saved. how do we do that? one way of doing that, because the federal government doesn't own and operate -- it doesn't own the residential housing or businesses out there is to try to incentivize and encourage raising standards as it pertains to the built environment, and the program i mentioned, which we're piloting in the residential environment this year, provides a basis for trying to look at how we can do that on a broader scale across the infrastructure so that people are motivated and incentivized either through self-preservation because their house will be the one standing

or through other incentives, mortgage reductions or perhaps premium reductions in insurance. so we're looking at that and i think it's something this nation should take a serious look at. >> you're using the word i wanted to get to next, which is incentivize. where are those incentives best? where does it best come from? where do they best come from, private insurance market where you have basically a million different decisions being made or from some centralized entity like the federal government trying to do a one-size-fits-all approach? >> there's a number of different actors in this world. you know, when you go to buy a house, there are the builders. they're going to build it to code plus standards. how do you get them engaged in that? as we're going ahead with the pilot, what we're seeing is a lot of builders are interested in this because they see a

market advantage and so there as a benefit to being labeled, for example, resilient star. there are the insurance industry who is interested in this because it saves them a whole lot of money on the back end with possible claims for damage if you're looking at the life cycle of a house every 40 years and residential owners may see a benefit -- let me just stop. wouldn't the insurance industry have a vested interest to develop these standards and if they develop themselves in the private sector wouldn't it be more effective than a government-run solution? >> so insurers have looked at this. in fact, we are partnering with the insurance industry to develop this pilot project.

i think for various reasons, because there's so many fractions insurance markets, a number of different state players, i think one of the benefits the federal government can bring is a national perspective which is not something any individual insurance company can do. >> can i just ask one more question? because i have a great deal of concern. if the federal government is the 800 pound gorilla and everybody in the private sector is looking to the federal government to bail them out, is that a real disincentive to do the resilien resiliency, do the mitigation efforts? if we have a big fwlolood, a bi hurricane, the fed will come in there and cover our losses and then some. to what extent are we witnessing that throughout the country? >> you're not unfortunately witnessing that in many places. you have communities that are devastated, people have packed up their bags and left. you're losing your tax base and your ability to attract individuals to come to your

community and the federal government can't help when people move their feet. this is one of the issues where local governments, urban communities will probably take a good look at it. there are resilient communities, people may want to be there because in the long run they're safe, more secure and frankly the funds you would have to repay can be paid to other priorities and public safety and education. >> that's the point, isn't it, we need to raise the price for individuals that are building in very risky environments? correct? we don't want to incentive advise people to build in areas that are going to flood. >> that's why it's important to have the best available data, so people are cognizant of the area they're building, moving to. fema has tried to get that as a

basis for getting data out and when we work with communities to do their threat and hazard identification risk assessment, that's all -- with your eyes wide open looking at what the risks are and asking if there's a way we can partner together to reduce those risks. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i wish we had time for another round of questions. i just learned that a series of votes starts at 11:30. i want to make sure we have ample time to hear from our second panel. i just want to follow up on what senator johnson was saying. we've had some demonstrations on star programs, energy star that we're aware of, and let's just make sure that we use those as laboratories of democracy. we can lobby work that may be just as important as some that were attempted and didn't work out. like senator johnson, how do we

get people to use the belhavior that we're modeling. they talk about the role of government and the role of private sector. and he used to use the analogy and say the role of government is to steer the boat. t the role of everybody else is to row the boat. there's a good role for both and hopefully we can find the good balance. i just want to say to each of you, thanks for the work you do. thanks for the folks who work with you and to say especially with flood insurance we'll work with you to try to find a useful compromise. my father would say if you looked at it from above, you would look at it and use some common sense. hopefully we'll do that. so with that, you're excused and we thank you for joining us and

we look forward to some questions. there will be follow-up questions. we hope you'll respond to those in a prompt way. thank you so much. thank you.

collin o'mara, all the way from i want to say san jose, california. did you used to live in san jose? we stole him. we stole him from san jose at

the tender age of i think 29 or 30 to come all the way to the national association of environmental control. if i had half the energy of this guy, i would be president and vice president. he's an amazing guy. very proud of the work that you do. thank you for joining us today. our second witness is from a bigger state than ours, new hampshire, and kelly ayotte can't with be us. dr. paul, is it kirshen? dr. kirshen, research professor at the university of new hampshire. what is your mascot there? >> wildcats. >> wildcats, yes. we've had some rough football saturdays against the wildcats and the blue hens. we're all the happy to welcome you here. i understand your research focuses on engineering and management as well as climate change, vulnerability assessment, adaptation, planning. it's a mouth full but we're

happy you could join us. thanks so much for coming. lindene patton, my mother was a patton, chief climate product officer for zurich international group. in this role ms. patton, i'm told, is responsible for policy and risk management related to climate change. remember my staff said you might have a member of your family here or two? is that true? would you put down your mic? introduce your family. they'll stand up. >> my daughters, amelia and zoe. >> amelia, would you raise your hand? >> hi, amelia. zoey, would you raise your hand? who's in the middle? >> a friend of hers, sharon. >> all right, sharon. nice to come. >> and our aupere, gosha. >> you've heard me say with the first group, about five minutes or so if you will and then we'll ask some questions.

delighted you're here and happy to be here along with senator jackson. colin, will you please proceed. >> thank you, senator johnson. our thoughts go out to senator coburn. thank you for holding this hearing today. your timing is good and it's an important topic to delaware. senator carp spent a lot of time in helicopters. in delaware we spent a lot of time evaluating it. i'd like to talk about delaware's approach and i would like to offer common sense solutions that should be part of the conversation going forward about shifting the focus to preparedness and resilience and a little less on the money on the back end. in delaware our approach has been fairly simple. start with the science and economics, and make sure you have good science and economics and know your vulnerabilities and know the tradeoffs. it's easy in a political environment to move towards the things that has the most

attention but not the most economic imperative. we've looked at flood plains, sea level rise and i have a report that i'll introduce with the chairman's consent. we've looked at 75 different infrastructures and the vulnerability and then we took the data and made infrastructure impacts. we have that data drive our decision making in having the policy and it has the type of list that senator johnson is asking about, to make sure that the money is going in places that will make the sense. we had tony pratt who's behind me who is our administrator of shoreline and coastal protection, and looking at the bay regions and looking at the economics and who gets the benefit? most of the benefit is the private owners and not the broader population which suggests that the private owner should play rather than the broader community. we'd like to see the economic contribution to the coast and if i can out the economic benefits

of having those protections. having that knowledge is important because it allows us to invest strategically. healthy dunes, healthy wetlands, the coast. they turn out very well after the storms. we see time and time again communities that aren't as prepared don't do nearly as well. we're taking a lot of steps to build resiliency into going forward. modernizing stormwater. we want to stop the bleeding and make sure new development is resilient. now that we have this kind of data that we're not exacerbating the problems and costs. because of all of this the governor was invited to be on the president's climate task force with a focus on the natural structure and resources projects that we're doing across the state whether it's in wilmington or elsewhere, we are piloting projects that we

believe are good. one, resiliency needs to be built into every single federal investment. we don't need a new bureaucracy. we are spending billions every year. if we build resiliency into the projects, then we're okay. you don't want to throw good money after bad. the second is we need to invest more in protection. we're spending $5 billion in the army corps line. that's 50 years worth of investments compared to what they normally get for their protection line. it's about 100, 100 million. we're spending 5 million a year. it's become easier to pay for it after the fact as opposed to investing in it. we need to break the disaster,

rebuild, it's so easy to rebuild to the old infrastructure standards. you can get money quickly as opposed to rebuilding to a new resiliency standard. there isn't a lot of conversation about this. great recommendations coming out of georgetown, but we need to make sure rebuild to a higher standard. we also need to prioritize comprehensive projects. right now as we talked about with the border contacts, you can have the army corps that's taking a bunch of sediment out of the water way, but it's cheaper to put it in a landfill than it is the beach next door. the army corps will choose the lowest cost option. they won't put it on the beach, they'll move it somewhere else. we need to combine those.

we could be saving tens of billions of dollars a year. we need to have the nfip regulations which haven't been updated since 1989. we've focused on the money side. the cost of the insurance becomes cheaper if the standards are higher. we need to prioritize the natural infrastructure. they work exceptionally well. they shouldn't be the exception or the pilot project enmore. they need to be the default. we need to reward communities that are prepared. right now delaware is paying a lot of development money and we don't receive a lot after the disasters. it's completely crazy. we need to make sure that there are incentives and priority given to states that have made their own investments and are doing the hard work to hold themselves accountable and not

relying on the federal government as senator johnson said. very two last points. we need to ensure that public expenditures can receive public benefit and really prioritizing things for a broader benefit to all people and we need a much greater community on hazardous sites. we have super fund sites. when those wash out, it's massive. we've been focusing on these more. there's not nearly as much attention. fema will help you acquire a parcel. if it's contaminated, fema won't touch it for liability. these are things we can change. the senator is looking at these because i think our experience in delaware shows if you do prepare an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. >> thank you so much. you got a lot in in 6:50, didn't

he? >> i apologize for going over. i always talk quick. >> that's all right. i was watching the body language of the co-panelists. dr. kirshen is nodding his head up and down. we'll find out now. dr. kirshen, thanks so much. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman, senator johnson, for giving me the opportunity to talk before this committee. i do agree very enthusiastically with everything that senator o'mara is proposing. we have long-term economic consequences on a northern city being impacted by first of all extreme amounts of precipitation and secretary of all coastal flooding from large coastal storm surges. here i'm going to talk about the long-term costs of not being prepared for these present and future events and compare them

to the benefits being prepared. because of the changing climate, the climate change impacts have always been part of my analyses. also want to point out that the case studies to new england are relevant to the rest of the united states and the world. the first study i wanted to talk about is the impact on the eastern coast of massachusetts, stretching from north of boston through almost cape cod. it's an area of large cities like boston but also suburbs. when you look at the total damages of surge flooding from storms to residential, commercial, industrial buildings over the next 100 years serving moderate scenarios -- if i were looking at the damages and look at where it would be reduced, evaporation would be taking place. adaptation is measured by

damages avoided and measure the costs by cost of adaptation. we found better cost ratios. what that means, for example, benefit-cost ratio is six to one. every dollar invested in adaptation reduces long-term damages six times. these are, again, showing the true benefits of preparing for these present and future events. the second case study was the hansen seabrook falls area of new hampshire. coastal area of new hampshire with many second homes. typically on the barrier beaches. here we look at the cost of protecting privately owned buildings, in other words, homes and commercial facilities, and also key public assets, sewage treatment facilities, schools, from present and future coastal storms by developing adaptation plans protected 20-50 under low

and high rise scenarios of approximately one to two feet. we found very large benefit cost ratio ratios ranging from 11 to 16 for public assets. the stormwater in the winter hill section ofsommerville, massachusetts. this is located north of cambridge and boston on the mystic river. this is served by a combined sewer system. presently the storm system -- the sewer system only has the capacity to handle all the wastewater and a small amount of the stormwater whmpt a larger storm occurs, only one inch of rainfall, some of the extra combined sewage is treated at the regional wastewater treatment plant but most of the combined waste is combined to the mystic river and is floating

in the streets as raw, untreated sewage. this will be increased by 10 to 30% higher rainfall in 2030. so again we did a benefit-costa analysis, the cost of adaptation to handle more waist with the benefits avoided by adaptation. we found benefit cost ratios 4-1. showing the advantages of dealing with these problems now rather than later. so to summarize. so i've talked about my recent research to the cost of damages. the costs are underestimated. i did not include such items as human death and injury, damage to the ecosystems, incorrect costs such as lost employment and community displacement and disruption. but even with those costs not

included and looking -- we found that we were looking at many scenarios of climate change and sea level rise, a dacht tags paid off in terms of damage avoided. no adaptation, no action, in all cases was the worst thing to do. to keep benefit cost ratios high would indicate that these actions are useful even if we didn't have climate change, so-called no regret actions. so i want to say a couple more comments. first of all, one of the first steps we can take to control these threats from climate change, control our emission of greenhouse gases. that will make a big difference whether we have a three feet rise or six feet or 10% increase in extreme rainfall or 30%, but because we cannot reverse climate change, we cannot stop climate change. it will continue for centuries. we have to adapt, be prepared

and like everyone else here, i really support we ought to take planning now to start dealing with these threats, otherwise we're going to be suffering large, human, social and environmental consequences. thank you for your time. >> thank you for coming all the way from new hampshire to be with us today. tell those wildcats we said hello. ms. patton, your whole statement will be made part of the record. please proceed. >> thank you very much. >> make sure your mic's on. >> i think so. chairman carper, ranking member johnson. i'm lindene patton. chief financial officer for zurich. we provide coverage for customers in the 170 countries. we've been serving customers in the united states since 1912. we have over 8,000 employees nationwide. i would like to thank you for holding this timely hearing and i am pleased to share with the committee an insurance

industry's perspective and the economic importance of investing today and improving resilience. zurich observes that the u.s. is increasingly reliant on disaster recovery funds and it's under invested in resilience. disasters have increased to over 1,000 per annum. it's risen to $400 per household. that is more than a four fold increase over the past 30 years. in other words, the resilience gap is large and growing. how large? in cummings projected that unfunded response costs for weather-related disasters would grow to more than 1 trillion u.s. dollars and might be as much as 5 point poip 7 trillion u.s. dollars.

taxpayers are bearing the burden of this. without decisive risk reduction actions, economically unsustainable, accruing unbudgeted disaster costs can be expected to continue on an upward trajectory. insurance provides risk assessment, risk management and price stabilization. a study by the bank of national resilience says they're less likely to suffer from macro economic disasters. one of the many crystal differences is that disaster recovery funds typically are delivered more slowly than insurance payments resulting in slower recovery and even longer term negative economic impacts but assuring resilience to

negative weather events requires being there before, during and after the weather event. should resilience be prioritized? absolutely. it provides greater protection to the public in the face of increasing extreme weather events, reduces human suffering and creates jobs and builds more resilience to housing and infrastructure. cure zurich understands that and acts accordingly. we are very proud of our efforts. hear are but a few examples. zurich has had the world economic forum, the business couldn't knew the at this institute, the institute for building and home safety. over the years we have worked with progressive customers like marriott and verizon to demonstrate by design and

implement stations that are cost beneficial. zurich has committed to buy 1 million u.s. green bonds to focus on resilience at a scale that really matters. what action might the government take in the short term, medium term and long term to close this resilience gap? develop a national priority plan for resilience investment. promote increased government and private bonds. he educate the society and promote and enforce stronger building codes. two actions might include use the language over this to improve as a template. federal governments invest annually in water, pork, highway, transit and af reation

infrastructure. they might include commercial applications and most briefing byve to a nancy pelosi. >> those who are still here with us, i am very honored to the herewith some of my women colleagues who have taken the lead on when american -- women succeed, america succeeds. rosa delauro is a leader on the issue, as well as the enthusiast it all.er of donna edwards, that chair of the democratic women's working group, will make a presentation. the steeringr of and policy committee, from the state of illinois.

a new member of congress who has championed this issue with the administration and in her own state of ohio. you will be hearing some singing. michelle from new mexico, a freshman member, will be in our film. and judy from california, of the asia-pacific caucus of the house and a strong advocate for when women succeed, america succeeds. with that, i thank you for being here. at lunch we presented what we will present to you to our members. it was not only advocacy for what we are doing, it was a case study on how on an issue of this popularity we are using traditional press, as rosa will personout, our 16,000 theconference as well as

social media. with that, shall we play it again? [video clip] valentines day is almost here. >> this valentine's day is going to be treated special, and must be treated equal. what a girl said, wants, what a girl needs, is equal pay for equal work. ♪ for valentine prostate, flowers are all great, but they only last for a day. ist women really need equal pay for equal work. -- valentine's day [indiscernible] that living means

inequality. ♪ >> i saw a bunch of women holding chocolate hearts. we do not want chocolate. we want equal pay. >> it is time to do away with workplace policies that belong in a "mad men" episode. let's come together, congress and the white house, to give every woman the opportunity she deserves goes i believe when women succeed, america succeeds. ♪

>> [indiscernible] what all women need is a valentine's day is -- [indiscernible] >> because we know when women succeeds, america succeeds. i approved this message. happy valentine's day. ♪ >> as i mentioned, commerce roman the lara is our -- delau is our intellectual leader on this issue, and we will hear from her in a moment. first we will hear from donna edwards, the head of the valentine's date campaign for women. >> thank you. too, because what

women really need for valentine's date, we can afford to buy our own valentines if we get equal pay. we need child care, affordable leave.re, and paid we launched this campaign, what women need, for valentine's date. you can find at womensucce ed.gov. here,all of our members men and women, tweeted on the minimum wage. that, february 13, marks day when tipped workers perceive $2.13 per hour. .aise the minimum wage increase that tip minimum wage and we can't buy our own chocolate and cards. hash tag, isthat

trending right now because america believes we need child care, equal pay, and paid leave and raise the wage. thank you very much, and look at all of our members. jumpedbers have really on this, men and women. we have held more than 60 events in districts across the country, and there are more. a,ebrating the i t commemorating the idea that we can stand together for what women really need. members,ay not just on but our allies, to, what women need for downtime costs day, women succeed because america secedes. >> thank you. can you believe that minimum wage restaurant workers take $2.13 an hour? 2/13 atebruary 13,

2:13, we had a tweet storm. aret is trending now, so we very excited about that. and all part of these three pillars of pay, sick leave, and of childcare, inspired and led by congresswoman rosa delauro. >> thank you, great to see you all today, hardy souls. over a number of months, a year, year and a half, from a parable withand cover stations people all across -- and conversations across the country, the issue of the economic challenges that face women is staggering. the fact is women are in the workforce in great numbers. they are half the work force. 2/3 of the breadwinners. they have come into the labor jobs that pay less and

occupations that pay less. there is also discrimination regarding pay equity. $.70 on the dollar, $.77 on the dollar. are --women -- seriouslyically economically challenged, and they still have the primary responsibility in their homes for all the household duties, including childcare and also taking care of elderly parents. as a result of that data and those conversations, what we put together was the economic agenda for women and families, paste on three pillars. one is pay equity. the second is paid leave, family, and medical leave paid for. and childcare. that,e been talking about

and as my colleague pointed out, all over the country, with regard to that issue. one of the things we did in january, january 29, which was the fifth anniversary of the signing of the lilly ledbetter pay act we did a teleconference where we had 16,000 riches of its. 16,000 folks from across the country. and the leader spoke, congressman edwards, and myself, but what was more poignant about hall where the stories from the women who were looking at leaving their children and going to work and being sick, or taking their children to school sick, or the inability to take family and medical leave because they do not have the money to do it or not be able to afford childcare

and who had been the victim of discrimination with regard to pay. it was an incredible success, relating to their stories, and then there are questions to us about the agenda because this is not based on something that is ephemeral. piecesthis agenda are of legislation sponsored by a for rioting of members, over the years, not just in the last two or three months, paycheck fairness, 12, 13 years, and among wage. mr. miller has been working out a very long time, and that -- but these are not ephemeral. it is real legislation which addresses that issue of economic insecurity for women and their families. this is another reincarnation of it today, with what women really want, and that is pay equity, increased wages, economic

opportunity, and educational opportunity. why? because they are struggling financially, and wanted at her life for their families because when women succeed, america succeeds. over 60% of people making minimum wage are women, and pay equity has its own toll. the average is that women make $.77 on a dollar that her mail counterpart -- maile counterpar. work free that women for the first three months of the wind. it has an impact on the pension. the sick leave piece of that has an impact on elder care. the co-chair of our seniors'task force has worked on this issue. her focus was seniors. income discrimination follows

women throughout their entire lives. private if there were a pension, that that pension is going to be reduced, and when she gets her social security check it is going to be less. and so equal pay, as we found with lilly ledbetter, and it was denied her, meant that right now ,ily is living on a shoestring because for 17 years she did not know that her male counterparts doing the same job. it is equal pay for equal work -- duh? the month and it is time for us to finally get there. it is really 50 years since the first passage of the equal pay act, and yet we are still struggling. when we say that women on average make $.77 to the dollar, women of color do far worse.

so we need -- diamonds they be a girl's best friend, they say, and chocolates are fine and going out to dinner is fine, but what women really need is an economic agenda as we outlined that works for them. thank you. >> my colleague from california will speak about what she's going to do next. we welcome her from the asia-pacific group in the house. sayn los angeles, when i the words, i met with wild applause. that is what i decided i just womeno have my own when succeed america succeeds in event. i am having it on march 10, and is going to be coming. we are going to hear from women.

we are going to hear their stories. we are going to hear from women who are earning less than minimum wage and are working cannot makeet still ends meet, and in fact still live under the poverty level. we are going to hear from women who are working at the same job and yet earn less than a man earns. and we are going to be focusing our attentions, especially on women of color who experience these inequalities to a greater degree. and we are going to have a jobs -- so we can offer real help to these women so that they can get the assistance they need. there are already huge anticipations on this event, and we have had this whole flurry of events across the nation. i know there's going to be huge come.pation for what will

and i am very looking forward to spreading this word. >> we just have folks go up to the microphone and introduce themselves. we are excited about the role that each of our colleagues has played in this. joyce has just energized our caucus because of her and uzi as him and what she sees in the ohio as a freshman member, certainly a strong voice in the congress. >> thank you, leader. from ohio, the seventh largest state in this nation, i cannot think of a debtor way to -- a better way of having a year of action. thanks to our leader for the idea, for the intellectual research and the outreach, we too are going to in ohio post an event in early -- host an event in early spring. our goal is not to bring

hundreds, but thousands of women so they can witness what we know and be able to say when women succeed america succeed. i am so excited about this opportunity to mock because when you talk about equal pay for equal work, it reminds me of my grandmother and my mother and how hard they worked. and being a grandmother, i am also doing this for my granddaughter, because it'll make a difference, not only in our lives, but for the future. you know why? succeed,hen women america succeeds. thank you. [applause] [applause] >> she started us off with a song, and i do not know if we can coax her into seeing some more. nonetheless she certainly sent 10 and the pace for our wonder -- and set the pace for our wonderful film. you will see an enthusiastic member from mexico. >> thank you very much, madam

leader. i answered that age-old question, whether you should sing or lip-synch. i should have been lip-synching. it is a great song, and i think it helps really perpetuate. we hope this important mission. i come from new mexico where for a long time we have been a minority to chart the him and as you have heard and i will repeat that women of color make even less than 77 cents on a dollar. as a proud mother of two grown dollars, i watch them struggle thisis environment, in with the women with a number of graduate degrees, think about the amount fairly thatget paid it's into the economy. we are talking about an

opportunity agenda for the entire country. supporting women in a way that we should have been all along so we have this kind of economic opportunity and a reasonable and fair and productive agenda is something i very proud to promote and very excited about our valentine's day message. thank you very much. >> thank you. as we talked yesterday, we talked about an economy that works for all americans. and all americans include all women in america. this is one very important agenda.of our we are very proud of it. it is something that is catching fire across the country. i also presented today to the members, and they hear about it every week if not everyday, but a case study as to how we are going to advance our agenda.

he started this morning with a person from new york talking about when he had his event him and he had a headline on the local section of the paper first page about his women's event and it all four stations played one as a preview, and covering it, and then it went on to the social media. respectful of the role you play, we want you to be the ones to see it first at the members just now. you are the ones to see it first, and then rosa talked about how we talked about this -- 16,000, 17,000 people breathing on the phone. if you can think of 16,000 people in that teleconference, and that will be standard for us. anna has found in the beta of ways -- donna has found innovative ways to reach out,

and then we go to the social media. this will be our message today. 2:13 wee proud that at acknowledged it, and the anticipation, we all gathered as we announced be ready for the tweet storm at 2:13. chocolates are nice, but equal pay better. we are going to share some chocolates with you, and they have things on the net say paid you get it, pay, you get it. childcare. to all ofntine's day you. we will give you chocolates. you give us equal pay. any questions? excuse me? >> how would you advance the

equal pay? >> that is what we are talking about here. sentiment -- public sentiment is everything, and we will be talking that when we come in with the leadership. george miller and tom harkin have legislation in place already for this legislation. over 70% of the american people support the raising of the minimum wage. we think it is an important economy that works for everyone, and we will talk more about it when the leadership comes in. >> paycheck fairness has been passed twice in the house. >> [indiscernible] saying --st it has been an issue for a long time? >> it's time has come. paycheck fairness passed under the leadership of speaker pelosi twice. the house, and including 14 of our republican colleagues.

we had the first go round in the senate, lost by two votes. >> [indiscernible] thoseill not tell you who two were. in any case, we lost the second time in the senate because of a filibuster. i also understand it has been in the press that our colleagues on the senate side are raising the issue again, and we are ready. democrats, and i am trying to get the publicans on the legislation. 200 democrats have signed on for a check fairness. it is an idea whose time is long overdue. >> i was going to say that if there is recent polling of the women's economic agenda, whether child care, paid leave, or equal pay, among women and there is so much to schedule about republicans and democrats, who is going to get the women's

vote, among women across every single demographic group, single economic line, across every andle age, these issues -- political party, republican, independents, and democrats -- these have great resonance across the spectrum of women. when you ask what women need and want, they need it across the board, and these three pillars speak to that. i challenge our colleagues to do, women across america want of americans want the rays the minimum wage, it is time to bring those issues to the fore, at the united states house of representatives, they have the capacity to do it, and we will mobilize across the country so that in every single district people will hear what we hear, and that is when women succeed 60's.a

-- succeeds. >> [indiscernible] and want to say this, taking each part, the minimum wage, miller-parking. introduced pay equity. become law,er did the first bill to be signed by president obama. paid leave is one of the most popular initiatives. paid sick days. it is stunning, across the board, as donna edwards said, in every category you can name support for paid sick leave. i will close by saying this -- we had the power of religion of hearing from -- we had the privilege of hearing from a person before her, and the speech was about the fact that childcare legislation was on

president nixon's desk -- you know how many years that was -- and he vetoed the bill. we talked about having a reunion of all the people, bipartisan at the time, people who were still around and many of them are not in congress, but people who are still around who were part of that legislation. what happened then, it can happen again. george miller has the legislation which is a partisan for early childhood learning. the president has and it initiative, universal pre-k. rosa has fought very hard for a starter, deeper head funding and the rest. people know that this has to happen. it is so important to america's families, and because when women succeed america succeeds. said,king up on what she republican women favor the

numbers are much higher among democratic women. women a cup or than half of the electorate. why is this level of women who are translating into it a credit majority in the house, or democratic governors, where is the disconnect between that level of support and the republicans appeared to be on the verge of perhaps keeping the house and taking over the senate? >> i do not subscribe to that. as i said yesterday, this is about policy, about people. p will leave that third politics for another day. if we could win on these issues with legislative success, that would be our victory. that would be our victory. but i do think that people are watching to see where people come down on the simplicity of this. this is not every issue you can name. this is prioritized. women in the work place, the balance between home and work, and it is the most challenging

families haveking to deal with. so we will see what it translate into. we would rather see you translate into legislative success. that would be our first priority because that would improve policy and improve the lives of the american people. seele will be watching to who votes what way, but all we want is a vote. we think we have the votes in the congress. all we want is a vote on these issues. again, we are not setting out to set up a political confrontation. we are setting out to have a legislative success. thank you, all, very much, and 's and ally your m7m they stand for-- equal pay, child care, paid sick leave, it is written right on their. thank you. >> thank you.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> our live coverage of the democrats'ratz -- retreat continues. , thell hear from the house credit leadership in a few minutes.

i >> have we treated you ok?

it did not look like it. >> [indiscernible] >> yea. and the goodies? >> [indiscernible] ready?are we chairman of the democratic caucus, joined by the leadership team and. great sessions. tonight we will hear from dr. kim, the chairman of the world bank, and tomorrow we have the

president of the united states, and we have to stay tuned because since the vice president was not able to arrive today for we lunch keynote address, are waiting to hear if there might be opportunity for the vice president as well. i think generally speaking our members are not just thrilled that we have this opportunity to really drill deep into these issues that are so important to americans, but that we are going to the heart of the issues that americans care about. how you build an economy that works for all americans? that is the question we are asking. how do you build those ladders of opportunity? how do you guarantee economic security? that is what this is about, what we have been discussing, and we have that wonderful speakers who helped us to hone in on how to do that best, and we have dynamic speakers to go, including the president of the united states. and we are ready.

we said that previously. i think we are fired up from everything we keep hearing from folks. and we know as you just heard from so many of our colleagues who have been working so hard on this idea that if we help women succeed in america that all of america will succeed. so we want to get to work on that. and we have agreed as democrats in the house that the house of representatives is not doing its work. that while some people consider this the do-nothing congress, we are ready to get to work. we have decided that since the president a year and a half ago -- to stay more than a year in his state of the union in 2013 -- said we should increase the minimum wage for all americans, and this house did nothing, and a couple of weeks ago we heard the president again reiterate that we should increase the minimum wage, and we have yet to hear from our republican colleagues that they want to do something. given that yesterday the

president took action to help all of those employees who work for federal contractors get a raise so they will now be able to earn in dollars $.10 an hour, we believe we should join in the president and join that all americans who say it is time for americans to get a raise. we are going to go back in a week to congress and we are prepared to submit a discharge petition to begin the process of collecting the votes it will take in the house to pass the bill a month increase the 0.10 for all to $1 americans. we think that is not only the right thing, it is about time to do it. with that we are prepared to take any questions as the democrats in the house of representatives are ready to lead and willing to have her republicans joined us with that. i want to ask our assistant leader, mr. clyburn, to make some comment, because he has

been one of the champions working hard on this issue. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would simply say that all the talk about building an economy that works for all must be laid upon a solid foundation. and there is no more solid of a thanation that can be told a minimum wage to be increased. i think that all of us are aware where would we be today, indexed the if we minimum wage last time it was raised. and index is, so we we do not revisited from time and time again. inyou heard from the women our caucus, 60% of the

beneficiaries of a minimum wage increase would be women, of which one out of every four households will be women with children. we believe that this is the way to go, and i am looking forward to us coming act from this work period and starting to work on building a foundation upon which we can have an economy that works for all. with that, i yield back. >> there are a number of democratic priorities in which you can seek to file the discharge petition. can you talk about why the minimum wage was the one you decided to go fowith first? this weekend, these few days, has been on the economy, building an economy that works for all americans. we think this is a fundamental pillar. we see immigration as an

economic issue. growing the deficit economy, and that is not excluded to be a discharge. but right now we are starting with a minimum wage. it is part of the women's economic agenda, when women succeed america succeeds, and we have the legislation, the miller-harkin go, so that is why we are going forward with that. >> you all know that if you were collect onying to that first tuesday you come by, you have all the signatures you need by wednesday. minimum wage will be a much harder fight. there is some immigration advocates who have heard about this in the last 48 hours and said just do it. but you are now going to open yourselves up to criticism that accuse, as republicans playing politics with the issue by not trying to move on it more quickly. would you like to rephrase that question?

[laughter] >> when you know you have up to 50 republican to would sign that -- >> on the house side, democrats have made it clear where we stand on immigration. hr 15 does not leave with you a notion of principles. it is not some vague wording of what we might consider doing. legislative language which we believe once the cbo finishes scoring probably will save even more money than the senate bill did when it passed by a part partisan -- bipartisan jury. we are ready to go. the minimum wage is the only issue we wish to tackle, but we are hoping our republican column ways -- colleagues, by the way in the majority, will decide there is a lot of time for us to get things done. we are ready. he believed the minimum wage makes very clear we want to build a comic that works for all of americans. immigration, unemployment

insurance -- many others we could tackle. but right now when we return, we are prepared to submit the discharge petition for the minimum wage. your hypothesis is there are up to 50 republicans who would sign that immediately. can you report -- >> [indiscernible] chance in a get a relatively near future. we believe the minimum wage, we have been talking about the economy, we have been talking about the economy working for everyone. we believe the minimum wage -- and i want to make a comment. frankie, if from 1968 on they had a cola adjustment it would be for above $15, i think. i will be corrected on that. it was $10.57 in 1968. it is now seven dollars 25 in 7.25 in 2013 dollars.

very eroded from 1968. they will get that chance. we believe the minimum wage is absolutely critical to lift people so that they can't be full participants in this economy. we have heard economist after economist after i must tell us this is a demand-driven economy. if it is a demand-driven economy, you have to have demand. raising the minimum wage will increase demand, raise the growth level in our country, create jobs, and the good for everyone, which is the central theme of this conference. but they will get their chance. 200o you expect all democrats to sign the discharge petition? are you confident you will get at least 18 republicans? how many republicans do you expect to get? >> we are never confident we will get 18 republicans on a

discharge petition. 40 we apparently have 30 or that are known over here. perhaps things have changed. i will tell you this -- our expectation is if they want to make sure that working people have an incentive to work, they will pay them to do so a waste that does not leave them in poverty. the overwhelming majority, so i do not want to commit anybody, but we presume it will be close to everybody. have been listening to some of our republican colleagues around the country who have been asking questions that you are proposing with respect to the minimum wage. while some have said no, any of them had said they are open to it. we will give them an opportunity now to put their signature where their statements have been, or at least tell their constituents and look them in the face and say whether they are for or

against. that is the benefit of a discharge petition. you talk about 50 members on the rubble can side with talked about possibly supporting the immigration reform bill. talk is one thing. doing something is another. it will have a chance between now and november to let their constituents know whether they are serious on this series immigration or -- serious immigration reform. proposal,imum wage that they are open to it. let's find out how open they are. >> what issue do you see as the brick wall to taking back the house of representatives for democrats in 2014? are do not accept there brick walls. we just punched through those

brick walls. you should ask many of the republican members who have decided to retire, including mr. hastings, that there is no place for above combine -- republican majority. let's talk about pathways bit middle-class economic security is a defining issue today. how you create broad and rising prosperity is a defining issue today. solutions and they want the right priorities. if there is a republican who will not sign this discharge petition because they argued the economy cannot afford an increase in the minimum wage, people are going to want to know why that same republican interviews to vote for a minimum subsidy for the oil companies a $40 billion every 10 years? they will want to know why republicans support subsidies to

corporations to outsource jobs or why there is a minimum tax credit for certain businesses to buy corporate. debts this is about contrast and about priorities. and the minimum wage is one of the illuminating contrasts we have and will be a defining issue over the next nine months. now inhing that -- terms of getting back the majority? >> it tells the rest of us that he loses sleep over this, the undisclosed special interest money that is poured into the system. and this is not just about unease we have about winning the election. this is about undermining our democracy. that is why this morning we had a meeting with john sarpy and bashed john sarbanes was taking the lead. overtthe constitution

urn citizens united. empowerment. big money does more to support the photos -- suppress the vote undisclosed money that causes confusion and and people throw up their hands and say i do not get it, and that is a victory for the special interests in our country. we are very proud of the response we've gotten from our grassroots people. we are very proud of their recruitment of the very excellent candidates under the leadership of steve israel, whether recruiting or raising the issues. we feel we are in a good place. not just us, that our democracy has a lot of sleep to lose over what the special interest money is doing to undermine what our founders fought for, sacrificed

their lives, their liberty, their sacred honor, a democracy, a government of the many, not the government of the money. >> a brief comment. i think the worry about brick walls is on the other side of the aisle. the reason i say that is because we talk about ladders of opportunity. that is a ladder to the majority 60% of because 70%, 65%, the american people agrees with us on almost everyone if not every one of the issues -- every one of the issues we're discussing. the other side you see brick walls, because there is a ball to the retention of the majority. we have seen apparently two chairmen have decided to retire. my presumption is they do not believe they will keep the majority. [laughter] >> one last question? >> the administration announced another delay of the employer

mandate on obamacare or the affordable care act. do you think that opens up wiggle room for democrats to vote to delay the employee mandate that the employees are but, andired to if so, why not? >> no, it is a completely different thing. the president has -- how can we only into theot enforcement of the law him up at the improvement of the lives of the american people and the implementation is what he is addressing in terms of the mandate that is central to what the law is. and the law is very sound policy. to go to back to our founders once again, they sacrificed it all for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. this will, the affordable care act, is about a healthier life,

the liberty to pursue your happiness. that is solid policy and the mandate is central to that. defer to mr.o crowley in case he has anything to say on any of these subjects. >> i thought my shirts said it all. [laughter] >> it does. >> hello. >> he is getting ready for saint patrick's day. >> early enough. i would make a point going back to your question about the path forward, as mr. israel said, there have been more republicans announcing their retirement. we have more opportunity to take their seats from them than they can take the seats from the democrats who are retiring. i think it is 21 -- 13-3 in competitive districts.

11-3. standt sense, i think we well in terms of the election. that election is months and months away still. a lot can happen between now and then. after we raise the minimum wage. >> we will make you a senior -- >> thank you all very much. >> one more thing, the following -- as weleagues set this up had the frame of building an economy that works for all americans. the theme of our conference under the leadership of mr. ba thea has been strengthening ladders of opportunity. we see as a first wrong of that latter raising the minimum wage. we see another round of passing comprehensive immigration reform. we want to do so appropriately in the presence of so many

stakeholders in that issue, so that will be coming soon. today we are announcing that first rung, the minimum wage. part of our full agenda and very, very central to our women succeed america succeeds. happy valentine's day. thank you. that wraps at the democratic leadership reefing from their retreat in maryland. it continues tomorrow. canceledident-who had his appearance today because of snow on the east coast will speak tomorrow right before president obama's remarks. scheduled at 10:30 eastern, live on c-span. today hengs announced will not seek reelection in 2014. in a statement, he wrote last friday i celebrated my 73rd

birthday, and i have the ability serving washington, it is time for people to the new people to represent them in the house. gs announcing his retirement. havegular watchers may noticed something unusual in wednesday's vote to end debate on the debt ceiling bill in the senate. some of the transparency issues that it has since raised -- what happened on wednesday? >> what happened on wednesday during the vote was that madeally the decision was and we are just now learning from a spokesman from majority leader harry reid is at the request of senate republicans to make thethe clerk usual announcements of the post

positions as the vote is ongoing. and to the microphones were in turned off, so if you were anywhere other than in the senate chamber itself, either as a reporter or a senator or a staffer, you were left to really guess as to what was going on in terms of the way the vote count was during that extended. of voting.period the clerk, after going to the roll the first time, would announce which senators voted in the affirmative among which senators voted in the negative, and that would do a rolling announcement as other senators come and go from the chamber and cast their votes. none of that happened yesterday.

this has raised all sorts of questions -- among the capitol hill press corps. >> you and the number of other reporters were questioning this, and several other reporters, andrew taylor of the associated press, leading the charge, why the microphones were off. you reported the democratic leader, the spokesman, saying that republicans requested that the microphones be kept off, correct? >> that is correct. what we're just now receiving, and i received not that long ago, and this is a quotation at thereid spokesman, senate republican requests, the clerk do not call the names during the vote to make it easier for republican leaders convince their members to switch their votes. that is what was sort of suspected by a lot of people who were monitoring this. there were a number of

republican senators who sort of acted the vote and dragged on for a while. it was clear to people in the chamber that there were one or two votes -- that they were vote and so it was clear that there was some sort of arm-twisting going on to try to get a couple of extra votes to get this over that hurdle. really wasn't clear that was going to happen until, in fact, what happened is that senator john korn and hominy cornyn,an whip from -- the republican whip from texas fell short of the cloture motion to cut off debate. >> let's talk about the politics for just a moment for those that were not following the debt ceiling debate in the senate. what was at stake in that procedural vote?