are so vulnerable. with patients and empathy you look these people in the eye. the first thing you do you calm them down. the first thing you do is how many people have you spoken to question mark you can tell by the look in their face that they are almost embarrassed to ask you questions. they do not want to feel stupid. that is why they trust you. you dispel their fears. you put them at ease. you walk them through the process. it is tedious. to add to the difficulty, we did not help you in the front end. my boss, my friend, barack obama is an incredibly patient man. i suggested after going through

the first couple of weeks i would nominate him for sainthood as he kept his patients. i got off to a slow start. it is basically fixed. in the last quarter of 2013, you helped 2 million people in the face of the confusion, you helped them enroll. doors,lk through your they reached out for you. you made a difference. you answered questions, walk them through the enrollment process. more than 5 million people have signed up for the drive and health plan. [applause] are not event we counting gained access to health care by signing up for medicaid.

[applause] imagine if every governor did the right thing and signed up for medicaid. [applause] i am convinced, as a practitioner of the art of they will not be able to sustain the heat. [applause] here's the deal. none of this would have happened without you. the fact is, community health centers are the resource for so many people out there. placeve been the only millions of folks have been able to go for basic care. in the process, you have eased many concerns about the affordable care act. you have over, language

barriers. you have been so successful because people trust you. -- of all the places in the world to go, doctors, nurses, hospitals, you guys, who will say this is a good thing, let me help you, this is how it works. they count on you. they know what you have done in the past. that is why you are our most valuable resource. is alwaysstration valued. we have always valued, never doubted the services you provided. the president put me in charge of the recovery act. that was almost a trillion dollar piece of legislation that pulled us off the boring -- brink. we invested $2 billion $2 billion towards capital

financing and operating costs for community health centers centers.-- health in the face of the most god-awful recession in the history of the united states. it cost millions of people to lose their job. they lost their health insurance. we knew at the time of the incredible uncertainty and we knew they would come to the one place they could always count on. you. that is why we invested another $11 billion in community health centers. you know what that means. [applause] you know what that means on the ground. more dedicated staff like physicians and nurses. renovations you needed.

so that folks could receive the services that you provide. these investments and health centers -- you have added 35,000 new full-time workers. you have served 4 million more people in 2012 then you did in 2009. it will continue to increase. it is incredible. that is why we believe in you. onewere with us on the day because you believed that health in politicsve been a long time. i was vilified in my home state learning by the other team -- i saidthought health care was a right. that was an amazing notion. think about how far we have come.

from the beginning of my career it,the first two thirds of there were still a group of people out there, another party said health care is a privilege, it is not a right. my opponent and the president's opponent talked about these people -- they expect this help. what an outrageous notion. think about it. it was the centerpiece of the debate. the most incredible thing about the health care bill -- this is the first time in american history we have legislatively ended the debate. health care is a right, not a privilege. [applause] you know as well as any group of people the peace of mind that that could be restored for millions of people knowing that

they have coverage. because of the affordable care act, 105 million americans have gained coverage for at least one free preventative service such as blood pressure screening, colonoscopies. 129 million people with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied health care because of this act. more than 3 million young adults are able to stay on their health care -- parent's health care until the age of 26. it is no longer permissible to have insurance companies cut off services because you have reached your limit. the most vulnerable point in the life of any family and to be told sorry, your insurance has

run out. can noce companies longer charge women higher premiums. pregnancy is no longer a pre-existing condition. think about it. you are among the most trusted advocates of the affordable care act because your mission has healthcreasing access to care and giving folks a fair shot and a fair shake. you understand the change in progress comes from the community up. people trust you. that is why i want you, so we can finish the job. we need you. that is why we invested around 200 million to help train and

higher around 11 million staff to help bridge language and cultural challenges. you deliver. [applause] you know that already. you see it every day. we only have about 10 days left in the enrollment. insurance is about peace of mind. it gives you a chance to live your life with more security. everyone of you mom and dads out there should be pointing out something to kids out there who think they are invincible. conferences, in

all communities, i spoke to a group of young advocates, i don't know how many thousands there were. i said remind your friends that even though they think they are invincible, they owe it to their parents to give them peace of mind. bit of a guilt trip, but it is real. that your mother is going to bed worried, you over. i mean it. you owe her. it is true, think about it. the second thing, this is all about choice and opportunity. you how many people i have known through my who as a public official

have told me they stuck with a dead-end job that does not pay well, they have stayed in a community they did not want to live in for one reason -- they had health care coverage. guess what? they are free. they can look for a better job, move to another community, look at how many people you know who stayed where they were in the job they did not like and were underpaid because they were scared to death that if they moved, they had a pre-existing condition, or other circumstances, they would be in trouble. folks the freedom to follow their dreams regardless of where they live or what they do because now they will be covered no matter where they go. [applause] as i go around the country, the thing i find the most -- i hear is i cannot afford it.

i can't afford it. to julie from young people -- particularly from young people. it is tough for them. they realize, i can get health insurance for less than it costs me to keep my cell phone. think of how many very poor people come in and talk to you worried that they were not going to be will to afford what they needed and that they would not get any help. makingy of four can be $95,000 year to get help, they are blown away. they have no idea. the most interesting thing for me is that the ultimate way this is going to work on the road is i am talking to your neighbor, finding out, you have this

insurance and that is all it cost you. the cost is something you can break down the barrier when you're talking to people. it is affordable. it can be affordable. if the state takes advantage of the opportunity to expand medicare, and changes everything. that you talk to receive a tax credit. many of them could gain coverage if the remaining holdout states take advantage of the opportunity to expand. madee states that have not up their mind, we should be pushing as hard as we can without relenting. deadline for signing up for private health plans is march 31.

there are a few exceptions. the point of the matter is that we only have 11 -- 10 days left. the bigger the number we bank, the more certain of the ability to turn his back, no matter what happens in congress and where this moves. in next enrollment day is november. this final point i would like to make is remember why you're doing this in the first lace. these last 10 days, push as hard as you can. is what makes a gigantic difference. security, itsocial the single- it is biggest social initiative the country has taken since medicaid. everybody to be able to have affordable health

care. that --lose by saying with the grace of god and the goodwill of neighbors, as my grandfather would say, we're going to come out of march 31 with a significant pool of people already signed up with the pressure being put on governors who have not allow their states to take advantage of the medicaid coverage, that we are going to roll into november, a situation that many more people understand. many more are afraid that they cannot afford it and we will see this thing continue to roll. you are the ones that feel that progress. you pushsaying is that as hard as you can the last 10 days. moreigher the numbers, the certainty that this will last forever. this is one of those experiences

that sounds corny. you're going to be talking about it with your grandkids and great brain kid. you are part of putting in place something that 20 years from now everyone is going to wonder what is the big deal? doesn't everybody in every country do this? , note conclude with saying only do we need you, not only have you done an incredible job, but we owe you more than we can possibly pay you. you very much. [applause]

>> i hope this is the last time it will be necessary to take the time of the house to discuss the subject of the iran --. the me echo the sentiments expressed by mr. hamilton and thank him for the privilege of having served with him on the committee. it has been a difficult task. i think the committee has produced the product that the house can be out of. we are in the process of closing out our responsibilities. i would confirm what the gentleman from indiana indicated in conversations today with the senior officials of the white house, we have a commitment that as of january 31, they will have completed their declassification of those materials that the committee has voted to release. that if the my word

white house fails to meet that i would join in with mr. hamilton and coming back to the floor at the appropriate time to seek a further extension in the a lot -- the life of iran --. theolleagues on the side of aisle, the important thing is that as of the adoption of this resolution, the investigation is potentially complete, the committee will continue in march 31.ntil as of march 1, the documents will be transferred to the archives and after that date, it will be up to the members of the select committee on it ran -- on iran. i think it is a good package. i think it deserves the support of the house. it satisfies the concerns that many of us have expressed in

recent days. i am delighted we were able to work out this accommodation. i would ask the chairman to yield and join with me with respect to explaining what is intended in that paragraph and that deals with the committee's closing out of affairs. provides onen exception to the provision that the committee will have no further investigative power. exception allows the select committee to receive materials in response to requests made prior to the date of the adoption of this resolution. with the gentleman explain what precisely is covered by this exception? >> at -- as i have previously discussed, there are two pending requests for information of which i am aware. i am not aware of any other requests.

>> a house energy and commerce subcommittee looked at sports safety and brain injuries in football, hockey and other sports. here is how university of nebraska explained it. american football is inherently violent sport. that is one of the reasons we love it. the forces encountered in football can be huge. considering hit between a running back and a linebacker at full speed. we can show that the force each player exerts on the other exceeds three quarters of a ton. that is why football is called a contact sport.

two players who collide at full speed, helmet to helmet are experiencing the same force of their head that one of them would feel if he had a 16 pound bowling ball drop on his helmet from a height of eight feet. concussionsledge of is in its infancy. forces to the head and neck cause concussions. they're getting bigger. since 1920, the average weight of pro-alignment has increased to just over 300 pounds. these players have gotten about 10% faster. combining factors of speed and mass to calculate kinetic energy, we find that the amount of energy dumped into the pit at the line of scrimmage on any given play has almost doubled since 1920. an exact opposition to this trend is that players are shedding their protective gear.

neat has that used to be centimeters thick bear a marketable resemblance to teacup doilies. modern football helmets choose them for how cool they look. another problem is the poor state of our medical knowledge. trauma willof head not agree on the details of what concussions are what causes them. this means the diagnosis and treatment of concussions has a long way to go. as our understanding of these issues improve, we may find that injury rate due to the increasing energy of the game and the wholesale shedding of equipment have increased faster than we thought. >> also at the hearing, officials testified about some of the safety steps they have taken.

you can see that hearing today at 12:15 eastern and again tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. vladimir putin signed bills making crimea art of russia. that completes the annexation from ukraine. he also says there is no need for russia to further reality -- retaliate against u.s. sanctions. move was in response to additional u.s. sanctions that president obama announced yesterday. george washington university is hosting a discussion on the implications of crimea. panelists include -- include professors. that is live at -- on c-span. nato's secretary-general called it the greatest threat to european security since the cold war.

>> we live in a different world than we did less than a month ago. russia's military aggression in ukraine is in breach of its international commitment and it is a violation of ukraine's sovereignty and 10 and -- and integrity. integrity. the annexation of crimea through a so-called referendum held at gunpoint is illegal and illegitimate. and it undermines all efforts to find a peaceful political

solution. this is a wake-up call for the euro-atlantic community, for nato, and for all those committed to a europe whole, free, and at peace. we know that we cannot take our security for granted. we have seen other crises in europe in the past decades. the western balkans in the 1990s, georgia in 2008, but this is the gravest threat to european security and stability since the end of the cold war. first because of its scale with one of the largest movements of troops for many decades. second, because of the stakes, the freedom of 45 million people

and their right to make their own choice. and third, because this crisis is right on nato's border. but ukraine cannot be viewed in isolation, and this crisis is not just about ukraine. we see what could be called 21st century revisionism. attempts to turn back the clock to draw new dividing lines on our map, to monopolize markets, or simply rip up the international rule book and to use force to solve problems

rather than the international mechanisms that we have spent decades to build. we have thought that such behavior had been confined to history. but it's back, and it's dangerous because it violates international norms of accepted behavior. it exports instability. it reuses the potential to cooperate and build trust, and ultimately it undermines our security. not just nato's or ukraine's security, but also russia's. if the rules don't apply, if

agreements are not honored, certainly russia also stands to suffer the consequences. russia was among those who committed in 1994 to respect ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty. russia pledged not to threaten or use force against ukraine. by turning its back on that agreement, russia has called into question its credibility and reliability as an international actor. and its steps to annex crimea are a clear violation of the

united nations charter. russia must honor its international commitments, cease all military activities against ukraine, and seek a peaceful political solution. including through direct dialogue with the government of ukraine, because on its current course, russia is choosing increased international isolation. there are no quick and easy ways to stand up to global bullies because our democracies debate, deliberate, and consider the options before taking decisions. because we value transparency

and seek legitimacy for our choices. and because we see force as the last, not the first, resort. the only way to address such challenges is for europe and north america to stand together. this is what we have done from the start of this crisis. nato's clear position has been to condemn russia's military actions in ukraine to stand firmly in support of the government in kiev and to make clear that president putin's decisions to escalate the situation have consequences. as a first step, we have suspended joint planning for a maritime mission for the destruction of syria's chemical

weapons. this would have been the first joint operation of the nato-russia council. we also decided that no staff level, civilian or military, meetings will take place with russia for now. and we have put the entire range of nato-russia corporation you should review. nato foreign ministers will take decisions when they meet in brussels early next month. at the same time, we have kept the door open for political dialogue in the nato russia council to give russia an opportunity to engage. we have also taken measures to strengthen nato's readiness. they include more assets for our baltic air policing mission,

surveillant nights over poland and romania and heightened awareness. allies have taken further steps to impose diplomatic and economic consequences. these are not our preferred choice. they are inevitable and appropriate consequences of russia's choices. no one wants to turn away from our cooperation with russia, but no one can ignore that russia has violated the very principles upon which that cooperation is built. so business as usual is not an option.

ladies and gentlemen, in times like this, when the security of the euro-atlantic area is challenged, the north atlantic alliance has not wavered, and it will not waver. for 65 years, we have been clear in our commitment to one another as at llies and the global security system to which nato is rooted. our transatlantic foundation is our strength, and it has given us the ability to consult, cooperate, and cope with any crisis. this does not mean that nato is the only solution to every crisis in the euro-atlantic region, but i do believe it is

part of every solution because the alliance provides three elements that are crucial for facing modern security challenges and that are vital for europe's and america's defense. these are political legitimacy, tried and tested structures, and military strength. now, first, political legitimacy. the combined and voluntary will of 28 of the world's strongest sovereign democracies is an extremely powerful source of political legitimacy. something that unilateral action

or coalitions of the willing simply cannot enjoy. this carries over into our missions and operations. it attracts partners whose political support and military contributions add to our broader international legitimacy. our mission in afghanistan is a clear example. it has included 50 countries. all 28 allies and 22 partner nations. that's one-fourth of all the world's countries. the biggest and most effective coalition in recent history. a coalition that only nato could have gathered and commanded. and that leads me to my second

point. nato provides tried and tested political and military structures. we have a unique permanent forum for political consultation where north americans and europeans meet every day to debate and decide how to ensure our collective security. just two weeks ago we met at poland's request to consult within the framework of the washington treaty. this allowed us to immediately address the security concerns of one of our members and to reaffirm our solidarity. our political and military structures also provide us with a permanent crisis response system so we can react quickly and effectively to any concern

with political measures, with military measures, or an appropriate mix of the two. we also have the permanent nato military command structure. so when we decide to take any military action, we have the right framework with the right skills and the right people already in place. we have headquarters that can be deployed quickly to command operations and missions. we have reaction forces on standby. and we can bring the necessary military contributions together quickly from nato allies as well

as from over 40 partner nations on five continents. time and again when an ally has felt its security under threat, we have come together and quickly provided the necessary support. after 9/11 when we deployed surveillance planes here to the united states, during the syria crisis when we deployed missile defense systems to turkey, and today when our surveillance aircraft are monitoring our borders in eastern europe. now, imagine that nato did not exist. every time a crisis broke out, a political and military framework would have to be built from scratch. political consensus would have

to be forged. partners found, military plans developed, and capabilities designed, delivered, and deploy. this would be costly. in terms of effectiveness, in terms of money, and in terms of time. indeed, once the necessary elements for a response were in place, it could be too late to stem the crisis. so, our standing structures save time. they save effort. and they save taxpayers' money. they bring other advantages, too. they allow us to harmonize military requirements across the alliance. they support the equipping, training, and exercising of our

troops. and they have helped us to build the most capable and connected military forces in history. and this is my third point. nato's unique military strength, it is a force multiplier. and it allows every ally, even its most powerful one, to pack a bigger punch. let me point out a few of the ways that american security has benefited from nato's collective strength. again, afghanistan is a good example. in 2010, as american forces searched, european allies searched, and partners searched,

too. over the past ten years, for every two u.s. soldiers who have served in afghanistan, one european soldier has always served with them. some 400,000 european soldiers have rotated through afghanistan to help make sure it would never again be a launching pad for international terrorism. in libya, three years ago, european allies, canada, and nato partners played a crucial role in enforcing an arms embargo, maintaining a no-fly zone, and protecting the people from attacks by their own leader. today in kosovo, over 30 european and nato partner

countries are keeping the peace. and off the coast of somalia, ships from four allied navies, spain, turkey, italy, and the netherlands, are sailing with u.s. ships. patrolling against pirates, and keeping vital sea lanes safe. european nations are helping to ease america's security burden in other ways, too. for example, the european union is running its own counterpiracy operation. and several european nations have stepped up to respond to the growing instability in africa. in particular, in mali and central africa. so, nato makes a unique contribution to our security because only nato brings together the world's most

capable democracies in a permanent integrated political and military structure. and only nato delivers the political legitimacy and military strength that no one nation or ad hoc coalition can deliver on its own. it comes down to a simple truth. shared security is better than solitary insecurity. and it's cheaper, too. it's why nato is a great defender of america, a great deal for america. and it's why nato matters to america.

that said, i am the first to stress that europe must do more. i take every opportunity to point out that there should be a fairer sharing of the costs and the responsibilities. both between north america and europe and within europe. and developments in ukraine are a stark reminder that security in europe cannot be taken for granted. and that neither europe nor america can come up with the solution alone. that's why i will continue to remind european nations that they need to step up politically

and millitarily to hold the line on defense cuts, to increase their defense spending, and to work together to fill key capability gaps, including missile defense, cyber defense, and joint intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance. later this year, in wales in the united kingdom, we will hold our next nato summit. we need to take tough positions in view of the long-term strategic impact of russia's aggression on our own security. our commitment to the security of allies is unbreakable. we will bring our isef mission

to a close and prepare our future partnership with afghanistan. we will ensure we have the right capabilities we need to address the modern threats we face, like cyber attacks and missile proliferation. and we will strengthen our partnerships with like-minded countries in our neighborhood and around the world. our wales summit will move us along a path we have paved together to ensure our alliance is even better suited to meet the collective security requirements of every allied nation. including your own. and fit to face any challenge the future may hold. ladies and gentlemen, as recent events have shown, we continue

to face critical security challenges, and new challenges are emerging all the time. an environment where countries decide they can redraw the geopolitical map, use the cyber domain to cause harm, or attack innocent people because of political and ideological disagreement. we must stand united in the face of all those challenges which make our world more dangerous and unpredictable. our common history shows us the way. in june, we will commemorate the 17th anniversary of the d day landings. i remember my own visit to normandy together with my

family. seeing the beaches, where so many allied troops, european and american, gave their lives for freedom. walking past the rows of whitehead stones that mark those soldiers' graves. those brave soldiers who stormed the normandy beaches knew then what we must not forget now, that sharing security today means preserving freedom, democracy, and prosperity for tomorrow. that's the spirit in which nato was founded. and that's why nato matters for the united states and for all the allies today and in decades to come. thank you. [ applause ]

okay, are the mics working? sorry about the technical interruption. secretary-general, thank you so much for those very spirited and important remarks. it's very much, as we open up to the audience, a spirit of anniversary. as you were speaking about d day, it wasn't just the normandy

beach landings, it was also the russians be part of that alliance on the eastern front. and it's also all of the anniversaries of the siege of stalingrad and other issues. our world war ii history was a time that we shared. unfortunately, it's also about the 160th anniversary of another series of crisis in the crimea. i started to remember that the crimean war actually broke out around 1854, so again, 160 years ago. that was also over a miscalculation, misunderstanding about russia's interest then and what was the ottoman empire and the role of slavs and the orthodox christians that end up with another series of events that's led to not just recriminations, but unfortunately military action on and around that same peninsula with lots of strange people on different sides. the balaclava, which we've seen in crimea on those various outposts.

so as mr. putin reminded in his speech the other day, history, depending on where you want to pick it up, is never very far away. but today you've also said some very important things about the future, as well as about the present. i think there's going to be a lot of questions about the things that you've said. we have many members of the diplomatic corps in washington, d.c. the think tanks, which we are very glad to see. students from other universities close by. many other academic analysts and members of the press corps. so i'd like to hold it open now to the floor. i'll try to take, if it's okay with you, a couple of questions at a time. we've got exactly half an hour. so again, if people could keep those short and we'll start with this gentleman here at the front, if you could wait until a microphone comes to you. please identify yourself and then the lady behind you. >> i'm michael gordon, "new york times." sir, the united states has sent a dozen f-16s and several

hundred service personnel to poland as a reassurance mission. but if nato is trying to send a message of resolve, shouldn't the reassurance mission be a nato-led effort involving multiple countries on land, sea, and air, in poland, the baltic states and the black sea. and also, ukraine has been seeking support for its military. shouldn't nato consider providing intelligence support, logistical support, and advisers to help strengthen the ukrainian military and deter possible russian militaryvention. this is the greatest crisis since the cold wars and something more required than suspending a joint maritime operation and stopping staff level meetings. >> thanks. if the microphone could go to the lady just behind you with the glasses. >> thank you. laura jakes with associated press. this is a good segue from michael's question. you mentioned ongoing nato missions in kosovo off the somali coast and of course in

afghanistan. as nato now focuses on european security as a result rf russof s aggressions, how will that affect strategy in other missions, particularly afghanistan? thank you. >> thank you. secretary-general? >> to start with the latter, we have the capacity -- does it work? yeah, now it works. we have the capacity to deal with several missions and operations at one at the same time. and i don't think events will not have any impact on our engagement in afghanistan. we follow the plans as already outlined, which means completion of the isef combat operation by the end of this year, and provided we get a signature on

the security agreements, deployment of a nato led training mission from the first of january 2015, and there will be no change in those plans. on nato engagement in the crisis, yes, if we take the baltic air policing, the united states took a quick step to augment their contribution to a baltic air collision, which is highly appreciated. the good news is that this initiative will now be followed by other nato allies. a couple of days ago, the uk announced that they will contribute to augmenting or enhancing air policing over the

baltic states and other announcements will follow, so you're right, it should be and it is and it will be a nato mission. the same goes for the deployment of awax planes over romania and poland. these are part of a nato operation. but having said that, it's normal practice that individual allies can take immediate steps and then it's followed by a more broad nato mission. and i envisage further steps to reassure allies to strengthen

deterrents and a collective defense in light of what we have seen. and then on ukraine, which is the second part of your question. we have intensive meetings in the ukraine commission. i have met the ukrainian prime minister. the ukrainian foreign minister. they have forwarded a number of requests. we are now looking into those requests, and i would expect foreign ministers to take decisions on enhanced partnerships, increased assistance to ukraine when foreign ministers meet on the first and second of april. i agree that we should step up our assistance to ukraine and i'm sure it will happen.

>> thanks. i'm trying to collect questions. i see hands coming up. the gentleman here at the aisle. if people keep their hands up, i'm trying to keep track, please. thank you. >> you have explained very effectively the logic of suspending cooperation under the nato-russia council. how would you respond to two counterarguments to that? the first being that that cooperation is as much a nato interest as it is a russian interest. and the second, perhaps more important counterargument, that perhaps it is precisely a moment of conflict and disagreement that institutionalized contact between the two sides most valuable. >> and the gentleman here at the aisle? just one second. next time around. thank you. >> this year marks -- and first of all, congratulations on your hillary clinton award this

morning. fiona mentioned a few anniversaries, but this marks the 100th anniversary of world war i. you welcomed a delegation from bosnia i think a couple of days ago and macedonia's prime minister recently. what kind of message will the upcoming summit send on enlargement? will there be a breakthrough on the macedonia-greece dispute in europe opinion and perhaps a visit to the region, if enlargement is not deliverable at the uk summit, will you visit all the four country sths because i think we learned the mistakes of bucharest with georgia and ukraine. luckily nothing of that sort has happened on macedonia. but hopefully nothing does happen. so thank you. >> thank you. first, on the nato russia-council. actually, i think we struck the right balance in what we have done so far. because you're right.

during a crisis, it is important to keep open a channel for dialogue. so that's why we have suspended practical cooperation with russia, while we have kept the nato-russia council as such open for dialogue. and actually, we have had a meeting already at ambassadors' level within the nato-russia council. i can tell you, it was not a pleasant meeting with 28 allies conveying a very clear message to the russian ambassador. but i think it was a useful meeting. so that underlines your point, that during a crisis, we need to keep open these channels consequences. i mean, when i study the

founding documents that create the framework for our partnership with russia, i can see russia, of all the fundamental principles. among those principles, we have stated that we will not use force against each other or any other. obviously they did. in 2010, at the nato-russia summit in lisbon, we declared that it's our mission to develop a true sta terategic partnershi between russia and nato. i'm a strong believer in that. basically, i think we share interests. but when i witness the current russian behavior, i ask myself, should russia be considered a partner or an adversary? i have to ask that question.

and many allies ask that question. so that's why we can't continue business as usual. but i think we struck the right balance in the way we dealt with this. and, and we have done it in such a manner that it opens a possibility to step up sanctions, so to speak, if the situation warrants that. now, on our open door policy and perspectives of enlargement, we have four partners that have declared aspirations to become future nato members. georgia, montenegro, the former yugoslav plug of macedonia.

this is merit-based. countries must fulfill certain criteria before they can join our alliance. we have agreed on a procedure so that decisions on how we will address the open door policy will not be made now, but later in the run-up to the summit. we will update individual assessment of each of the four aspirant countries before foreign ministers meet by the end of june, and then forevers will take decisions by the end of june. so it would be premature to present any assessment as to how we will deal with each of the four aspirant countries. what is clear is that the process is merit-based and each individual aspirant country will be judged upon its own merits.

but i think they all realize that they still have work to do, but having said that, i'm clear ly -- my position is very clear. i think the progress they have made should be appropriately reflected at the summit. it wouldn't be sufficient just to reiterate what we have said previously on our open door policy. and of course, what we have seen from the russian side may also have an impact on the final decisions on how we will address the open door policy and not to be misunderstood, i think it's essential that we provide

aspirant countries with a clear euroatlantic perspective. >> thank you. i have a question here, the gentleman with the pink red tie. and this gentleman over here, afterwar afterwards. sir. >> mr. rasmussen, does the situation bring a new sense of urgency for nato to accelerate with the enlargement protests, the situation in ukraine, send a letter to secretary of state kerry urging him to support membership, especially for macedonia and for montenegro at your summit of nato. thank you. >> thank you. and this gentleman against the wall here.

we need a microphone for purposes of recording. >> mr. rasmussen, you just mentioned that the first joint operation with the russians to evacuate chemical weapons from syria will be aborted, will be stopped. could you be a bit more specific about this? and is it a good idea to do this, would be my second question. and brief third question, don't you think now crimea is finally, well, part of russia, so to say? don't you think the situation now will quiet down and should nato react well, also in those terms, that you see that the russians are toning down their rhetoric and situation will become a bit more peaceful. but that's probably wishful thinking. what's your take on this? >> thank you. >> first, on enlargement. you ask me in concrete terms

whether ongoing events would accelerate enlargement. let me stress once again any enlargement process is merit-based. there's no shortcut to membership of nato. applicant countries must fulfill certain criteria. and that's -- i mean, for all four aspirant countries, the fact is that they do not yet fulfill all necessary criteria. now, you ask specifically about the former yugoslav republic of macedonia. already in 2008, we decided at the nato summit in bucharest that we are ready to extend an

invitation to accept a negotiation. once a mutually satisfied answer has been found, that decision still stands. so once the name issue has been solved, we are ready to start negotiations. unfortunately, we have not seen any, any progress since 2008, which i strongly regret. and, i mean, for each country, there is specific issues and we deal with them individually. montenegro, for instance, is a positive story. they have made a lot of progress, carried through a lot of reforms, but still there is a need for further reforms of their security sector, strengthened efforts against

organized crime and corruption. bosnia -- we have granted them a condition-based membership plan. it will be activated as soon as the bosnians carry through some very modest reforms related to defense property. i won't go into details. but jeff mentioned that since we did that in 2010, we haven't seen any progress. i met yesterday with a member of the president of bosni bosnia-hertzegovena. but they have not been able to reach an agreement on this very, very modest requirement. we have seen a lot of progress.

they have conducted successful parliamentary and presidential elections. they have reformed their defense sector, but still have things to do within their security sector, and also when it comes to their judiciary. so just to stress that certain conditions must be fulfilled, and there's no shortcut and ongoing events will not change that. but, of course, we all keep in mind strategic implications of the events in crimea and ukraine, and faced with a more assertive russian attitude, it is of utmost importance that we in the euro-atlantic organizations provide partners with a realistic and credible

euro-atlantic alternative to the russian pressure. that's my clear position. as you know, the american vessel cabaret will carry out the task to destroy certain chemicals. those chemicals have not been -- i mean, they have not left syria yet, so that's one problem. but we have prepared everything to provide effective protection during that process. suggested it could be -- the first ever. but now we have suspended it. you ask me, is it a good idea? let me stress, it will not affect the destruction of chemicals.

that destruction will still take place. the ship will be appropriately protected. but without russian participation. that's all. >> there was a final point -- >> oh, the wishful thinking. [ laughter ] i think it is wishful thinking in a way. because my major concern is that this won't stop. crimea is one example, but i see crimea as an element in a greater pattern. in more long term, the russian or at least putin strategy, so of course our major concern now is whether he will go beyond

crimea, whether russia will intervene in the eastern parts -- >> he said he won't. >> yes. [ laughter ] and? so, we are vigilant. we have seen a pattern -- i mean, if you have a look at the whole region, you see protracted frozen conflicts. now maybe in reforment, still. i would add to this also -- and if you look at all of this, you will see an overall russian strategy. it shows their long-term strategic interest to keep

instability in that region. that can be used, among other things, to prevent countries in that region to seek euro-atlantic integration. that's my major concern. >> thank you. i fear because we've only got five minutes left that it may be difficult to get to all the questions. there's a cluster of three people over here, starting with the gentleman with the glasses, the lady behind him, and the other gentleman -- the gentleman with the glasses closest to the window first, the lady behind you, and then back to you. i was trying to keep the three of you together. >> i am a second year undergraduate at george washington university. my question today is in regards to nato's nuclear declaratory policy and the prospects for reducing reliance on nuclear weapons in nato's grander security policy. as obviously from the united states' perspective, as long as the u.s. tactical weapons remain deployed in europe, all of nato has a stake in their security. so how does the debate over nato

nuclear policy and non-strategic nuclear weapons deployed both by nato and russia also fit in to september's agenda? >> thanks very much. if you'll just pass the microphone to the lady behind you. thank you. >> hi. rachel oswald, national journal. my question kind of follows that. there was a recent congressional report that found that the pentagon's time schedule for achieving certain missile defense capabilities in romania and poland against medium missiles could be too optimistic. what are your thoughts on that conclusion? >> thanks. and the gentleman who originally had the microphone. >> as the united states and the european union are negotiating the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, the so-called economic nato, don't you think that it's essential that we have a transatlantic conversation when it comes to security, to a greater extent that the eu has delivered in

december, and then secondly, with the departure of the last u.s. tank in april from europe and the end of the isef mission in afghanistan, don't you think that it's essential that nato re-examines its role in the 21st century? don't you think that the alliance maybe needs to reinvent itself as it did after the end of the cold war? thank you very much. >> thank you. >> yep. interesting questions. first, on our nuclear policy. we adopted a new strategic concept in 2010 and also in that strategic concept addressed the nuclear question. we declared that we subscribe to

the long-term vision of a world without nuclear weapons. actually, that's not breaking news, because most of the countries in the world subscribe to that vision already in 1970, when they signed the non-proliferation treaty. so we all committed to that long-term vision of a world without nuclear weapons. we also declared that we will work hard to create the conditions for fulfilling that vision. but, having said that, we added that as long as nuclear weapons exist, nato will remain a nuclear alliance. now, we have also declared that we are ready to engage in negotiations on a reduction of the number of nuclear weapons.

including tactical nuclear weapons. but we have added that it should take place in a balanced manner. and the fact is, that since the end of the cold war, nato countries have reduced the arsenal of nuclear weapons drastically. i emphasize drastically. while we have not seen a similar reduction on the russian side. so there you see a huge stockpile of russian nuclear weapons and clearly an imbalance. so we shouldn't be naive. so while we will work towards a reduction in the number of nuclear weapons, we also need more transparency. and we need to reduce in a balanced manner. so that's our clear position. now, of course, i cannot exclude

that the events we have witnessed in crimea will also have an impact on the thinking about arms control, including nuclear policies. on missile defense. according to all information i have got, there won't be any change of the timetable as regards to the development of the nato missile defense system, including the establishment of facilities in romania and poland. and the timeline is that we intend to provide full coverage by 2018, and so far, i haven't seen any indications of changes

in that plan. finally, on the transatlantic relationship, i agree that the transatlantic trade and investment partnership should actually be seen as what we might call the economic nato. the interesting thing is that it has been foreseen already in the nato treaty article 2, that we should strengthen economic cooperation within or among allies. and actually, i see the t tip as an implementation of that article. now, following that, i also agree that we need more european contributions to our common security.

but actually, i think the european council meeting in december was a remarkable step forward. among other things, because the european council focused on european investments and certain capabilities, among them drones, joint intelligence surveillance reconnaissance, but in specific terms drones. also, air refueling, which was one of the lessons learned from our leap year operation. they also mentioned cyber and satellite communication. so for the fir tist time, the european council has committed to increasing european investments in much-needed military capabilities. i consider that a very welcome step forward. but having said that, let me reiterate what i said in my

introduction today. the ukraine crisis and what we have seen in crimea has been a wake-up call, and it must be followed by increased european investments in defense, if we are to ensure a credible deterrent and collect a defense in the future. and finally, on nato's role. well, daily i witness statements that reflect nato's success. every day right now during this crisis, i see expressions of gratitude among eastern allies. gratitude that they are actually members of our alliance. i don't think they see a strong need for redefining the role of

nato. they became members of nato, to ensure effective defense and protection. they've got it. they're grateful for that. as we draw down our operation in afghanistan, we open new opportunities to actually address emerging security challenges in a much more efficient manner, in modern abilities, enhanced cyber defense, development at nato missile defense. so no need to reinvent or redefine the role of nato. our core task remains the same, namely to provide effective defense of our populations and

our territories, and actually the most effective defense is a strong and determined deterrent. that has been the essence of nato since it was established in 1949 and it will remain the core task. >> well, secretary-general, that seems a fitting end to the time, which has unfortunately run out. we really appreciate you spending this past hour with us. we understand, of course, that we have to move off very quickly. so again, if everyone could stay in their seats until the secretary-general has left. thank you very much, sir, at this very difficult time for spending an hour with us. thank you for answering the questions. a round of applause for the secretary-general. thank you. [ applause ] >> vladimir putin signed legislation, completing the

annexation from ukraine. he called it "remarkable event" before he's on the bills in the law at the kremlin this morning. residents overwhelmingly broke off or back breaking off from ukraine and joining russia. ukraine and the west have rejected that vote held two weeks after russian troops had taken over crimea. we going to show you a portion of the un security council meeting this week with the russian ambassador and the u.s. response.

the u.n. charter and numerous fundamental intern national legal documents, mainly the right to self-determination. and also turned to russia to the request to welcome crimea into the russian federation. russia as a sovereign state agrees to the crimean people's request. the relevant treaty has been signed between the russian federation and the crimea republic. referendum aree quite clear, more than 82% of voters participated in the voting and more than 96 of them chose in favor of reification with russia. this figure is the expression of free will of the people on crimea. for minutes, i'm going to move from my text. i was stunned how they tried to

discredit the referendum using the arguments of western propaganda that those who did not want to vote -- well, they were at home with police in tow. is an old know this tried and tested tradition in elections. because they're ill, cannot come to the voting booth, then visited at home took afforded an opportunity to vote. i will stick to the topic. yesterday depression -- yesterday, it was spelled out. in a televised appearance, which i trust all are familiar with. i'm going to focus on a few aspects. today, out of 2.2 million inhabitants of the crimea peninsula, close to 1.5 million are russian. 350,000 are ukrainian. for most of whom rush is their mother tongue.

in a significant part is shown by the referendum also say it is russia. regardless of what someone might call for in this referendum. historic injustice has been rated, which resulted from the arbitrary actions of the leader of the ussr the time. in violation, and transferred crimea to the ukrainian soviet socialist republic, which was part of the same state then. he did this without informing the population of crimea and without their consent. always years, many committed up this community activist raise this issue. that the will and

freely expressed choice of the crimean people has been fulfilled. of course, we have taken note of and action of a number of our western partners who simply cannot rid themselves of the imperial colonial habits of attempting to impose their rates on other peoples and countries. and now they are nervous. -- to political and reckless killing of ukraine has led to such results that the people of crimea have spoken and made their choices, as have the people of russia. this choice must be accepted and respected. madam president, turning now to the alarming situation in ukraine and international positions afforded to it to it to overcome its crisis. the pseudo-friends of ukraine need to understand the cause of the crisis lies not with russia but with the responsible actions -- the attempt to drive ukraine

like other states in the eastern partnership, to make an artificial choice which we in the u.n. russia to a large extent provoked the deep-seated internal political crisis, leading to the constitutional changes in kiev. western capitals, it would seem, continue to feel no shame at this. backing people who are not ready to listen or heed the views of the whole of the cranium people and fully dominated by radical, nationalist organizations of the right sector and the greatest anti-semitic and xenophobe, according to the parliament, the freedom party. it is within the eu is planning in the near future putting a political association. in this respect, we are puzzled by the one-sided assessment of the situation in the field of human rights in ukraine. where -- we are especially that not athe fact

word was said about the evidence that showed provocateurs fired both on the order and on the opposition forces to pave a path to the use of force for seizing authority and power. claim thereimply has been no kidnapping of individuals, that there been no attacks on journalists and human rights defenders and that people have been locked up for political reasons. one cannot claim the national radicals similar to the taliban in afghanistan are determined to destroy historical sites. but there are no incidents which frees up blood of anti-russian -- within anti-russian undercurrent which are being perceivedthose who power in kiev. according to journalist, the extremist have been receiving

that the foreign correspondents have been andented from visiting they're even trying to scramble the retransmission of satellite tv. two dozen members of parliament are representatives of the party of freedom pushed their way to the cabinet and in front of cameras, beat up and took away -- one doesn't know where -- the director general of the national television station of ukraine. first national tv station. who is in authority in kiev? and the violence against ukrainians and russia's overall. of course, all of this bears the nationalist --

instead of this, there is talks regarding concerns of the situation in the field of human rights and crimea. together, as a result of the efforts of the people and the self-defense forces, law and order has been maintained or together the crimean authorities have guaranteed the rights of all minorities. in this respect, would like to draw your attention to the fact that in accordance with the treaty between the russian federation and the republic of crimea regarding secession to the root russian federation republic of crimea, there will be three equal state when which is -- ukrainian, russian, and one.rimean tatar and no provocations will hold them in doing this, similar to what happened a few days ago where in the style of maidan with the sniper fire from an unfinished building across the

ukrainian literary base, two were killed. -- theas an attack attack was referred to by russian forces, which they referred to today permit simply did not take lice. this is clearly a plan provocation. they medially seized upon this by calling on the ukrainian military forces president -- present in ukraine against their fellow countrymen. with general ready interest on the basis of the broad, internal ukrainian dialogue with the participation of all blue to go -- clinical reasons, set up a multilateral rather, couldsis, be promoted by our proposal on

the setting up of and assistance group for ukraine. we await a response. we continue to aim to discuss her puzzles aimed at fulfilling the agreement on september 21 with an objective of restoring order, launching conference of reform -- conference of reform, and putting an end to the provocations of the radical forces against the russian and which population, and our fellow countrymen in the southeast and other parts of ukraine. >> i think the representative of the russian federation for that statement and now give the floor to the representative of the united states.

>> thank you, madam president, and thank you deputy secretary-general and assistant secretary-general for your briefing. the representative of the russian federation began his intervention extolling the so-called referendum as embodying democratic procedures and having been conducted without outside interference. russia is known for its literary greatness. and what you just heard from the russian ambassador showed more imagination than tolstoy or check off. it seems toecided rewrite its borders, but he cannot rewrite the facts. the united states rejects russia's military intervention and then grab in crimea. these actions, again, violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of ukraine from international law, the expressed will of most members of this council, and the letter and

spirit of the united nations charter. obamays ago, president and other world leaders put in place sanctions in response to russia's latent -- blatant disregard for global opinion and the legal rights of ukraine. we are prepared to take additional steps of russian aggression or russian provocations continue. in this chamber when the crisis began, the russian federation described its intervention into crimea as a human rights protection mission. they claim the recent change of government in ukraine constituted such a danger to ethnic russians in crimea the military action was justified. assistant secretary-general's briefing was again illustrates this crisis was never about protecting the rights of ethnic russians, and was always about one countries ambition to redraw its own borders. indeed if there was ever a time to be concerned about human rights in crimea, it is now. credible reports indicate cases

of for have been directed by russian allies against ethnic ukrainians. community -- israeli fearful of again falling victim to deportation. the crimean first of the minister has recently announced s will bean tartar evicted from some of their land, which he claimed is needed for infrastructure projects. the body of a crimean was discovered sunday. yet last been seen on march 3. his body reportedly shows signs of torture. russian troops are reportedly storming apartment buildings, housing ukraine in troops, border guards, veterans, and their families, threatening them

and demanding their immediate departure. in addition, we are sinners the concerned about activist, civil society leaders, media restrictions, and journalists in crimea. accordingly, the united states supports the rapid employment of international observers and all parts of ukraine and we believe it is instructive that the government of ukraine has repeatedly welcomed the deployment and the russian federation has not. today in vienna again, russia was alone country to block an osce monitoring mission. there russia was dramatically outnumbered. it was the lone dissenting voice out of 57 countries. 56, it seems, had a different view. russian officials say they understand the urgency, but they vote with their feet. relying on their military forces and refusing to allow the deployment of those who could help defuse the crisis and prevent further violence. after hearing my russian colleagues assault on the assistant secretary-general's

report minutes ago, i see the logic of russian obstruction. objective information is inconvenient to the russian tale. we call on all parties to support these observer missions, including their access to crimea. we want to thank members of this council for taking a strong stance on russia's intervention in ukraine and for making clear that russia stands alone in its failed, the logical, and mendacious attempt to justify actions that cannot be justified. five days ago when his counsel accurately described the crimean separatist referendum as invalid, only a single hand rose in opposition. when this council declared that the referendum cannot form the basis for any alteration of the status of crimea, only a single hand rose in opposition. now the referendum has taken place i'm a that the national and international legal status of crimea has not changed. canief cannot still --

still property, but that does not confer the right of ownership on the thief. in closing, madam president, let me emphasize again what russia has done is wrong as a matter of law, wrong as a matter of history, wrong as a matter of policy, and dangerous. what happened in crimea cannot be recognized as valid. denyingstand together recognition and imposing consequences for this illegal act. in doing so, we must also be very clear that what happened in crimea cannot be repeated in other parts of ukraine. thank you. president vladimir putin signed legislation today making crimea part of russia, completing the annexation from ukraine. he also says there's no need for russia to further retaliate against u.s. actions after banding nine u.s. officials and lawmakers are mentoring russia. the move was retaliation for additional u.s. sanctions that

president obama announced yesterday. one of those lawmakers banned from russia's indiana senator who treated his response today, kind of a top 10 list, the top three things that president putin pause been what allow him to do -- next on c-span, house energy and commerce subcommittee look at spore safety and brain injuries in football, hockey, and other sports all stop nfl and nhl officials talk about the safety steps they have taken. we'll also hear injury stories from a professional soccer player and a high school student, and medical professionals explain the science behind brain injuries. the hearing is about three hours. after the hearing, we would like your reaction.

we will take your phone calls. >> all right. i want to thank everybody for being here. we're now with the full committee ranking member, the gentleman from california joins us. we now have the ability to start our hearing. i will introduce you after my statement and before you start your testimonies. i will open with my opening statement will stop good morning, jan. good morning. welcome to this morning's hearing. today it is my hope to learn what steps are being taken to make sports participation safer for all athletes. every day, parents make choices about whether or not to let their son or let their daughter play soccer or what kind of mouthpiece to buy their son for his first day of football. unfortunately, it seems like every day we hear about how

participation in certain sports can be dangerous. it is easy to understand how what parents see in the news inevitably affects youth participation in sports. case in point, earlier this year, president obama said publicly that if he had a son, he would not let him play pro football. then the first lady wants us all to move. it seems to conflict. messages. now, we want a better understanding of the innovations they made by sports leagues, equipment manufacturers, and the medical community to make all spore safer. one clear example is the nhl, which has been working union toand with the make us safer, dating back to 1997, a recognize the dangers of head injuries and took the proactive step of forming a ,oint concussion committee

additionally, the nhl also established a department of player safety at its headquarters, the first of its kind, bringing professional league. football, tod usa organizations that help oversee youth sports in the united states have followed the lead of their professional counterparts by employing a multipronged approach to making participation safer. usa hockey now requires coaches to complete an online education module specific to the age group their coaching at. and that includes safety information, concussion techniques.roper usa football, which is endowed by the generosity of the nfl and the nfl pa, was the first national governing body for the sport to participate in the cdc's heads of concussions in youth sports. engaged in also providing you with non-tackling

alternatives to develop their skills. additional usa football's heads up up all program encompasses six elements meant to make use football safer including coach education and concussion recognition. proactive actions like the ones i just mentioned are exactly what parents need in order to be assured that everything possible is being done to keep their child as safe as possible while they're on the field or ice. who runs the university of nebraska's brain biology and behavior center located inside the huskers football stadium has been developing an mri machine that can be used on game day to assess a head injury. this would allow medical staff to determine if a player has suffered a concussion, how

severe the injury is, and if the player is able to return. the equipment manufacturers are also using technology to make innovation changes to helmets, mouth guards, footwear, and other equipment in order to reduce injuries. i feel confident saying that given the recent rule changes and the rate which technology is advancing, when the contacts for today is likely safer than it has been in the past. however, we must accept there is no silver bullet, no helmet or pat is going to prevent 100% of the injuries 100% of the time. this is why we need to consider a multipronged approach aimed at keeping our kids safer also promoting youth participation, aimed at keeping our kids safer while still promoting youth participation in sports which involves listening to how leaders like the nfl, nhl, youth leagues and top-tier university researchers are partnering to make progress toward making sport safer. these are the types of innovations and paradigm shifts

needed to give parents the assurance that all the possible steps are being taken to improve the safety of their child on the field. i would like to thank our panelists for joining us here today. i'm willing -- and willing to answer our questions. i would like to thank you for making the trips to washington, d.c. from lincoln, nebraska. is over, so i will recognize the ranking members from illinois. >> thank you. this is a very important hearing on improving spore safety. i look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses on both panels about their experiences, proposals, about how to make spore safer for everyone from children to professional athletes. athletes are continually becoming bigger and faster and stronger.

despite some efforts to make spore safer, much work remains. 300,000 sports related traumatic brain injuries occur annually in the united states. sports are the second leading cause of traumatic brain injury among people aged 15 to 24 years old, second only to motor vehicle accidents. this is a crisis and won the subcommittee should do everything in its power to address. we are going here today from a high school senior who suffered a severe head injury during a lacrosse game in his sophomore year. despite his impressive recovery, that hit later identified as his third head injury, left him with a limited ability to enjoy the types of activities many of his high school classmates take for granted. his story should serve as a reminder that youth sports injuries can have devastating and lasting consequences. and we will also hear on the olympic and world

cup soccer champion goalie forced from the field after a brain ending dramatic injury almost four years ago. her struggle to overcome the physical and psychological injuries that followed illustrate that even our sports heroes are vulnerable to the sports injuries. they should be commended for their courage. thank you. for the recovery, and her willingness to testify on this critical issue. bowl bowl and super winning safety and former member of my hometown chicago bears tragically committed suicide just over three years ago. in doing so, he shot himself in the chest to avoid any impact on his brain, she asked that donated to medical research in toer to allow scientists study the impact of brain trauma he suffered over his 11 year

professional career. it was later disclosed that he suffered from "moderately advanced" case of chronic traumatic encephalopathy, disease and to repeated blows to the head which can result in memory loss, depression, and dementia. prove that even severe career ending sports injuries can occur at any level of competition and this case should make it puts all of is the impacts of brain trauma go way beyond and athletes days on the field and can become more severe over time. we will also hear today from medical and scientific experts who have studied impacts of brain injuries on athletes of all ages. we will hear about the importance of taking athletes off the field of play as soon as your suspicion of a brain injury , and keeping them off into their cleared by responsible and trained individual. finally, we will hear from the nhl, nfl, the leaks responsible for mitigating traumatic brain

injury in their sports. i hope to hear what they will reduce thehat will risk of brain injury moving forward. i am not advocating for an end to sports as we know it -- or maybe not exactly as we know it right now. they also feel strongly that 300,000 injuries every year are too many to overlook. we should take reasonable steps to reduce the risk. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses. i hope this will help the subcommittee to better understand the safety risks in sports and what we can and should be doing to limit these risks. i yield back. >> thank you very much. this time i recognize the vice chairman of the committee. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you for holding this extremely important hearing. i want to thank dr. james johnston who will be one of the witnesses who came to my office

earlier this morning. thank you. experts generally agree that concussion can be classified as a brain injury ranging in seriousness from mild to dramatic. this interpret disease control states a concussion is caused by a bomb, blow, or jolt to the head or a blow to the body and causes the head to move quickly. cdc, the sports that reported the highest number of traumatic rain injuries are bicycling, football, ground activities, basketball, and soccer. in 2010-2013, the participation rate of children in youth soccer and football dropped considerably. some have pointed to the increased risk of tbi as a result of participating these sports as a reason for the drop in the participation. the increased spotlight on concussions in sports has resulted in increased amount of

research and brain injuries as well as research on how to improve sports equipment in order to prevent such injuries from occurring. collegiate and professional sports leagues have implemented standards and revised the rules in order to decrease the number of brain injury incidents. required -- has required its players to wear helmets on the ice in the nfl instituted new standards for evaluating concussions on the sidelines after the leak reported an occurrence of 223 concussions in just over 300 games in the 2010 season. state and federal governments have also been involved in tightening safety standards. since 2009, all 50 states and the district of columbia have adopted laws protecting youth and high school athletes from returning to play too soon after suffering a concussion or potential concussion. this hearing will focus on what more can be done to prevent brain injuries from occurring in sports. this is at the youth i'm a

amateur, and professional level. i look forward to the testimony of our distinguished panels. thank you, mr. chairman. i have two point five minutes remaining. is there any other member on the republican side that would like to speak with an opening statement? i yield back -- >> missouri, do they play sports? [laughter] on behalf of the big ten, i want to welcome rutgers to the big ten. >> thank you very much. >> five minutes to the full ranking member of the energy and commerce committee, mr. waxman. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. decades ago, many thought that head injury was serious only if a player was completely knocked out unconscious or suffered a severe contusion. after frequent painful blows, even a young athlete could continue to play.

but we now have strong indications that the effects of repeated brain trauma in sports, even those received during one's youth, can accumulate the consequences that are long-term debilitating and even life-threatening. these consequences can stem from injuries once considered minor known as sub concussive blows from a which may not be accompanied by any immediate adverse symptoms. serious psychological and emotional disorders have been documented among former athletes that have suffered repetitive brain trauma. researchers a number of times have found evidence of the neurodegenerative disease when examining the brain tissue of dozens of deceased former nfl players. newman to technologies have enabled to show the metabolic

changes in the brain associated sub concussions and concussive blows. brain injuries in sports can occur in a wide variety of situations, and different athletes brands may respond to freely to an injury. sports related brain injury is a complex matter. it requires addressing many issues. so when the title of this hearing suggests we take a multifaceted approach to improve sports safety, i could not agree more. first, we need more narrow neuroce research -- science research. they can lead to a better understanding of the risk factors and maybe better treatment options for brain injuries. second, doctors, parents,

players need to work together to establish health regulations, game rules in the sporting culture that reflects the seriousness of brain injury and for the athletes help first. third, we must address the health and safety risks associated with the athletic equipment and pursue a better understanding of how the significant might be improved -- the government might be improved. mr. butterfield and i called for hearings about ,nadequate testing standards lacks reconditioning certifications, economic disparities regarding the safety of football helmets used by millions of american athletes. we are to touch on some of those issues today. but i believe those issues very deep it -- a consideration and are likely to get today. the subcommittee chairman mike consider holding a separate meeting on these matters. i think it is viable the

national football league is testifying here today given recent and ongoing disputes between leak and its players on this very topic. however, i believe as traders commiserations should also others -- i also believe should testify. mr. chairman, today's hearing is important. i appreciate the subcommittee review of sports related brain injuries. i look forward working together with all of us on this issue in the months ahead. thank you for holding the hearing. i look forward to the testimony of the witnesses. i yield back my time. >> still have a minute left with the gentleman from utah wanted to use it. >> i might just point out that moving physically and conditioning the body is not anywhere near dangerous as objective -- subjecting oneself

to brain injuries. i don't think they're contradictory. >> interesting, because that issue is we want kids to go out and play. we want them to join you for leaks -- >> and we want sports, but we want the mess as possible. >> absolutely. to use your last 26 seconds, this is one of those where jan was necessary.ed this has been a bipartisan effort. our that, let's move on to witness panel. i'm going to introduce the entire panel now and then we will start with mr. daily. there blessed to have deputy commissioner of nhl. am, the executive director of usa hockey. then we have the senior vice president player health and safety policy national football league. thank you very much for being here. and the executive director of

usa football. a phase of her brain injury, multiple concussions within soccer, briana scur a former professional goalkeeper of u.s. women's national soccer team. oh we will have even cover the other face of high school level concussions. with that, mr. daily cover your noun recognized for your five minutes. >> i would like to thank the ranking members to invite me to testify today in the reactive steps the hockey league is taken to make the best perpetual players in the world. it is the only major professional sport with no out of out of hockey is a physical game.