more in-depth review of the president's request for the federal emergency management agency, known as fema. the president's fiscal year 2015 budget request, $10.3 billion for programs and operations at fema. this is a 3% increase from fiscal year 2014 enact level. it's important in these difficult fiscal times that fema can fulfill its mission, while at the same time be a good steward of we need to ensure that our nation is prepared and equipped to prepare for, respond to and mitigate against disasters and assure that they are first responders and resources needed to continue to do their important work. i'm interested to hear how you plan -- for the third year in a row, the budget imposes some major changes within the state and local programs account.

consolidating a number of homeland security grant programs and a new national preparedness grant program. i'm pleased that fema has finally submitted a legislative proposal with this year's request. as our subcommittee continues to review the proposal, we have a few questions about it. i'm interested to learn about the many aspects of the proposal and how it will be implemented. i've questions about the sustainment and competitive and how these funds will be allocated to states. the high risk areas and transport agencies. i have concerns about the 25% set-aside. states and local prevention activities including the sustainment of the national network have played a vital role -- the purpose of these grants as detailed in the 9/11 act are

for preventing and preparing for acts of terrorism. i'm hoping you'll be able to provide us with greater clarity on this proposal and other questions as we have related to the mpg proposal. i look forward to working with my fellow subcommittee and full committee members and the many stakeholder groups as we continue to review and consider this proposal. at this time, ask unanimous consent to insert one letter from a number of stakeholder groups, including the u.s. conference of mayors, the international association of higher chiefs come in the major cities chief and the international association of emergency managers regarding the mpg proposal. -- i also askion unanimous consent to insert a letter from the national association of realtors with respect to the homeowner flood insurance portability act. without objections, so ordered.

i'm encouraged to see that the departments took advantage of the discretion provided by congress for fiscal year 2014, homeland security grant programs and expanded the number of cities eligible for the urban area security initiative funding. after all enough to list in 2013, and the annapolis -- indianapolis is once again and eligible area. they have many top-notch events, including our indy 500 that require a public safety officials to have proper training, equipment and strategic planning. previous funding has played a vital role in ensuring our first responders are prepared for these events. as we continue to recover from disasters, we must evaluate how we are working to become more resilient and mitigate the damage caused by the storms. we also must ensure that we are always looking for ways to rebuild faster, stronger and more efficiently. i was a bit surprised to see that the president's budget request again proposes to eliminate the predisaster

mitigation program. however, it is my understanding that through the opportunity growth and security initiative proposal come up $400 million would be allocated to a competitive grant program that would be administered through the predisaster mitigation program. i would like to hear a bit more of your rationale behind this change. mediay, the use of social has been a focus of the subcommittee and has become a new reality for how first responders and survivors communicate before, during and after disaster. the recent explosion in these hard -- east harlem and the boston marathon bombings are just examples of how citizens are turning to facebook and twitter. during two subcommittee hearings held this past year, we have heard from numerous stakeholders come including the private sector on this new reality. two weeks ago, i come along with the ranking member and vice chairman and mr. small well introduced a bill to operate the

social media working group. i'm interested to learn about what fema is doing to incorporate social media into their preparedness response and recovery missions. with that, i'm very pleased to administered a trator fugate. >> good morning. i would like to thank chairwoman brooks for holding this hearing and giving the committee the opportunity to learn about the budget request for federa fema. onretary johnson testified the fy 15 budgets mission for the department of homeland security. members of this panel raised a litany of concerns, ranging from how future budget caps will

affect operations to whether resources are being allocated effectively to enhance security. there was one topic that generated significant bipartisan interest. the proposal to consolidate 18 distinct homeland security grants into one. this is not fema's first attempt at a widescale consolidation of these programs. it is the third attempt. in the past, when members asked about potential changes in how funding would be awarded under the consolidation proposal, fema stressed that it was not focused on the specifics on which cities receive funding. instead, it was concerned about building national capability. before we go down that road for the third time, i want to be clear about where members on this panel are coming from. 11 attacks of september shook america to its core.

sawr to 9/11, we only disasters in terms of natural disasters. hurricanes come earthquakes, tornadoes, etc. mother nature can be vicious. over the years, thanks to the investments in disaster prepared is in recovery, it is an enemy we can anticipate. septembers of 11, we do not see coming. unlike a natural disaster, we did not know when it would be over. ,espite our military strength our intelligence, resources and the first responder technologies, americans learned that day that we are runnable -- vulnerable to terrorism. laster, the boston marathon bombings brought the unpredictable nature of terrorism into focus once again.

americans have come to understand that the might of our military will not stop terrorists from trying to attack our streets. fragments of intelligence only tell a full story if the information is shared with the right people. . represent north new jersey i have seen firsthand the death and destruction caused by terrorist attacks and natural disasters. both the 9/11 attacks and hurricane sandy were deadly, heartbreaking and cost significant economic damage. the nature of terrorism demands a very different preparedness, response and medication approach than approaching a storm or other natural disaster. new jersey's first responders were some of the first to attend the aftermath of 9/11. they again were called to respond following hurricane sandy.

depending on the type of disaster, what is asked of our first responders is vastly different. asking any firefighter, what is the demand of him in response to a traditional fire is vastly different from what is required to respond to a blaze caused by an act of terrorism or biological toxins or booby-traps. in recognition of the difference and the needs to build core terrorism preparedness and response capabilities, congress established the homeland security grant program. onwe begin our discussion grand consolidation today, you will find that the concerns expressed about your proposal are fundamental. beyond at stake goes far considerations about who gets the money. it is about how we take the lessons learned from 9/11 to

make our communities more secure. in the absence of a dedicated program,ete grant which is exactly what would occur under your consolidation proposal, how can we be assured that the funds we appropriate will be used to achieve inoperability, protect critical infrastructure and address the r -- i look a forward to your testimony. >> other members of the subcommittee are reminded that opening statements may be cemented for the record. we are pleased to welcome ugate.strator few he was appointed by president obama to manage fema and was confirmed by the u.s. senate on

may 13, two thousand nine. prior to coming to fema, he was the director of the florida division of emergency management. a position he held for eight years. he began his emergency management career as a volunteer firefighter, emergency paramedic and finally as a lieutenant with the county fire rescue. hailew gate and his wife from gainesville, florida. welcome, administrator. your entire written statement will appear on the record could we ask that you summarize your testimony. >> thank you. members and wrecking members, written testimony. i will leave as much time for questions. i want to take on the national preparedness grants. our intention to divert them away from terrorism. it is not our intention to divert or set aside or exclude any group from that.

if anything, it is following the constitution of the u.s. i know there is a lot of groups and i know congress ultimately has the authority to authorize and appropriate the funds. when disaster strikes, whatever the cause come including terrorism, our constitution has divided the powers between federal and state to give the state the riemer responsibilities of domestic terrorist attacks -- primary responsibilities. only the governor can request assistance from the federal government. to exclude the governor from the planning process of allocation constitution sets out the responsibilities for the states. it goes around state constitutions. as a former local state -- i worked at all levels of government. the original funding restraints were not separated by jurisdictions. different pots ofen

money but they all came to the states. togress made the decision begin funding cities specifically. that probably makes sense if in states where cities are the primary response to disasters. my state, florida, counties are often bigger. we had a situation where funds were going to smaller municipalities. because these funds do not reflect the state constitutions of who and how authority is distributed between local and state officials, some states are very powerful home rule. local officials would have the primary overall responsibly for direction. in other cases, it is primarily the state level. bypasss not an intent to or eliminate any group from funding.

but to better recognize the central role that states would have when disaster exceeded the local capability spirit also prioritizing those areas and providing funding for that. giving states better discretion in ensuring that funding is based upon the overall issues that the state faces, not jurisdiction by jurisdiction. the reason we looked at this nationally was, when you look at the threats we face from when you look at things like improvised nuclear devices, we know that no one jurisdiction would ever have the capability to respond to that. we will have to bring resources from across the nation. in looking at the various threats, several of which are terrorist-based and some of which are natural hazards, we started adding up the numbers. casualties, fatalities, injuries, search-and-rescue, immediate recovery needs. in looking at that, we began identifying google capabilities

and gaps in that. so part of this was to address the funding, not only hoping that by jurisdiction by jurisdiction it as up to national capability, but driving some of the bigger risks and threats as an overall national response. how do you build that capability and direct that funding -- part of this would remain by the 9/11 statute ran funding based upon the division between the states. the other has to be competitive so that we can see in some areas of this country where they be sponsorship by one state or one community can provide resources to an area versus each jurisdiction trying to build ability. there's a lot of concern about the distribution of funds and concerns about our jurisdiction or my jurisdiction getting what we need. i hear this a lot. there's not a lot of trust out there. that also concerns me because come in these types of large-scale events, if we can agree upon a responsibility to work together as a team, how will that work when a real disaster that exceeds that jurisdictions capability and where's all of our capabilities,

not just the local jurisdiction and state of impact or federal resources, but multiple states and will will jurisdictions responding to these types of events? the nation needs to look at all of these resources to build capability to face the threats we face. bycan do a jurisdiction jurisdiction. our recommendation is to look at it as a nation and based upon the structures of our states. not taking away from the importance of local responders and local jurisdictions or those risks, but recognizing that when it does happen, it will be the governor's primary response ability on that state to coordinate all of that response with the federal government assistance. that is what is driving this request or it thank you, madam chair. testimony.u for your i never denies myself for five minutes for questions. keeping along the lines of what you just talked about with respect to the national

preparedness grant program and the changes that you are proposing, i think one of the things that we remain concerned about -- i'm not certain it's clear from what has been submitted thus far that has to do with the funding of the jurisdictions. the proposal and the legislative text are not clear enough for us to understand as to how high-risk areas will be funded. obviously, we do believe in risk-based funding. we appreciate that the same amounts of funding should not be distributed equally across the country. there are high risk areas. if authorized, would funding gb or will you will set asi apply to the states in which they are located with the states determining the amount of funding they will receive? >> it will be the urban areas

applying to the state with the criteria we built in. rather than setting aside specific funding, it would make those as part of the .equirements what we would do is still analysisd the hazard those urban areas and those types of activities and capabilities they need to build in that area. it would give the state the ability to make those fund allocations. we wanted to go to building this as more collaborative so we can have the local jurisdictions and the states coming together to work on these recommendations using criteria to drive that decision. confused withbit respect to the communities -- you've expanded once again. 39 communities. you saying that those are the 39 communities that would be eligible to apply to their states and others would not be? based upon -- in

the case of some of the expansions that we looked at this year for the secretary -- we were cap last year at a hard 25. that was lifted this year. one of those concerns is some of y to strategic military installations that didn't always factor into some of the risks but were significant enough to look at. when you take my home state of florida, we have not identified every location that has a military presence. if you look at florida between the air force base where we are e frently getting th 35 up and running and where the squadrons are at, none of these are necessarily on the when security list but these are areas that they could like it if there are concerns about the threats. take a look at that. --moving on to another issue the proposal seeks to change the focus of grants from terrorism

to all hazards. these programs were in a large part established in response to the 9/11 attacks as the ranking member has eloquently pointed out. believe thatdon't the terrorist threat to the u.s. has diminished significantly since 9/11. there are a lot of incredible dangers around the world and a lot of terrorist threats that we still face. what is the rationale for changing the focus of these grants to all hazards when we know we have so many natural disasters? how is it that we will be able to keep our focus on terrorism threats? >> the prevention pieces not change as much in terms of liquid. it always allows for all hazard based. the we want to focus on is consequences of those events. the need for search and rescue teams in the recent mudslide in washington state or the search

and rescue teams deployed in new jersey were built with homeland security funds. it's more of a recognition that we need to build capability against potential consequences, not just for specific threats. there are elements within that to terrorism.ning this is where we think that prioritizing that in the grand guidance ensures that funding. allow states to look at the consequences of the types of events they face. mississippi got slammed with tornado several years ago. many communities were literally wiped off the face of the map. theas the ability of homeland security grants that allow them to establish public safety. the consequences of the event. it isn't just about the hazard. it's about looking at the various consequences and that these are across an area of events. the mass casualties in boston -- theave been

capability to respond to that in the aftermath is the consequence piece of that. it doesn't detract from the prevention bs. >> thank you. i see that my time is up. i now turn to wrecking member pa yne. >> thank you. we hear what you are saying. i have repeatedly been told that the goal of your brand consolidation puzzle is to improve oversight and force better collaboration. i'm not sure if the achievement of this warns the fundamental changing. -- warrants the fundamental changing. the national association of counties and the international association of firefighters have come up with a list of principles that come in my view, are very constructive guideposts

for any grant reform effort. transparency, local involvement, flexibility and accountability, local funding, terrorism prevention and incentives for regionalization. are you open to working with this committee and to the stakeholders on the ways that the homeland grant program could be refined? to not only meet your goals, but adhere to the pitbulls outlined by the stakeholder groups. >> absolutely. we're basing this upon looking at some of the large-scale threats this country faces. i always like to go to our worst day in america. if somehow an improvised nuke your devices ever detonated in the city, it would require the full capabilities of not just the local jurisdictions and the federal government but the non-impacted jurisdictions. this -- whatok at

are the national gaps in capabilities based upon the most significant threats we face? jurisdictionach has unique as possibilities. after go back to when we bypass governors, we set up the imbalance of dealing directly through jurisdictions, not involving the governors in the process. i'm willing to work to reach all of the concerns as best we can in building national capability. >> i know there have been some --cerns about people being your experiences in florida, let me point out my experiences in new jersey. we suffered through hurricane sandy. there were still issues about how those funds that we allocated are being handled by our governor and whether he is using them sometimes and political wings.

in new jersey, we have concerns with that because we have seen -- we still have communities that are still suffering after putyear after congress those funds out there. i know a lot of it doesn't fall under you. that is our concern. we are concerned about giving that power to certain people when we have seen the funds have not necessarily gotten where they should be were used in a proper manner. also understand that the constitution was not built around the individuals here it was built around the entire system. that's why i'm proposing looking at the constitutional structure. grant ever set up the way it is? the grants originally came to

the states. jurisdictions were concerned that they weren't getting the recognition and the funding directly. they went to congress and congress began funding the urban security areas. they came after the regional homeland security funding. it was not the origination of that. it came about jurisdictions coming to you, looking to get funding more directly and bypassing the states. they were given that capability. >> i see my time is up. i yield back. >> the chair in our minds is the vice chair of the committee. >> thank you. thank you for being here today. i will change the subject a bit. isopic that's on my mind flood insurance relief. i know you were in front of the senate panel last year and we were discussing the affordability issues with bigger waters 2012. you called on congress to help

you with that. we responded and we did in a bar bipartisan way. the president signed into law the homeowner flood insurance of the ability act. affordability. we think we have given that to you. we all know bigger waters had a lot of unintended consequences. our number one priority for many members of congress from the coastal areas has been to make sure that flood insurance remains available and affordable to the homeowners that need it. the law that was just recently signed by the president was paid for. it does so with compassion and rate management. let me move quickly. i know this law was just signed this past friday. has fema begun to plan for the implementation of this law? >> yes. we were looking at the length prior to the senate actually

taking it up. we are looking at the time frames that you gave us to do refunds. also, how to now change the rate increases. -- it willertainly not exceed 18%. you have put in the fee structure. that fee structure will have to now go back to right your wrong so that we set a point at which they will be an collecting that. that collection will be looked at. it will not be collected immediately on all policy. it will be collected when they renew. exceed one year before everybody has paid a fee as they riddling their policies. -- as they arey renewing their policies. our biggest priorities right now, the recovery of previously paid fees and their insurance

claims and the insurance payments that will be retroactively reimbursed. setting up for the right your wrong and limitation rules and time frames for the new increases and for the fee structure. need specific funding to implement this law. we are still looking at what the cost will be and whether or not it will be within that program with those additional fees and what that would cost. we are still running the analysis of what additional cost there would be. one of our challenges is the right your rungs receive a fee as a percentage when we do the refunds. we still have not addressed the percentage of fees they collected as far as their having to pay any of that back and what that means two absorbency that out of the program. congress added a provision to provide immediate rate relief to the homebuyers and eliminate the home sales under the assumption buyers of property would be allowed to assume the properties

in the current rates of sellers. this was to prevent homebuyers from seeing premium increases. while fema works on implement the rest of the law. we understand from we hope that moves extremely swiftly. a lot was just signed on friday. do you know when guidance will out?nt >> since this will be grandfathering a preferred risk to a new home buyer, we have to make sure they have clear direction so that when that transaction takes place -- this will be for the mortgage industry. when you have the requirement to have flood insurance, that they getting the preferred rate with the original seller. we have to do both the current rate and the administration having the transfer to a new buyer.

we still have some questions we are working on what is the best way to do that and the training and time frames to get that implement it. we will report back to with that. >> thank you. i want to continue to urge you to act swiftly on this. you touched on the refunds real quick. in the meantime, while all of this is being implemented and work out, is there any advice that you can give us that we can provide our constituents so they can begin getting answers to their questions? >> it's important to educate them that these new grandfather rates are transferable. it will take some time to get that out to every agent and get that in the system. i think you can help people advocate that the law has changed and if they are still not getting what they need, work back with us. we may have to handle the most immediate once. hand walk you through the process until the system is fully up and running. >> my time has expired. i yield back. this time, i would

recognize the gentleman from new york. >> thank you. the urban areas security initiative program originally started with 64 communities. it was then reduced to 25 and then bumped back up to 39. the criteria that was built into legislation which was intended to determine eligibility is something the community doesn't desire. program put into the raced on an independent alice analysis that says you're a high-impact target. it produces the largest allotment of electricity in all of new york state. niagara falls.agar

it has toronto international city. and several other justifications for including the buffalo-niagara region in the program. the last edition of inspire magazine, which is a magazine that is distributed to jihadist throughout the world to encourage homegrown terrorism, not only in the u.s., but throughout the world -- that magazine identified the buffalo vulnerable tog horrib terrorist attack. i would think that homeland security would be very concerned about that specific reference. say them experts

magazine is a thread itself. it is intended to promote and encourage aspiring jihadist in the u.s. and the world. what is the department of homeland security's response for excluding a community that never asked to be included in this program in the first place and then was excluded and now this new information, which is very alarming for anybody that lives ?n that community could funde jurisdiction by jurisdiction. the capabilities respond as a nation. there are other jurisdictions who also have compelling reasons to think or justify them being on the list. it is a finite capability. thes prioritized and secretary reviews that list and makes decisions based upon all threats. not just populations.

not just critical infrastructure and not just for intelligence. it looks at everything. there is no one single factor that goes and that. it is based upon an overall look at the nation and those communities. not being on that list does not mean we do not agree. secretary would have to prioritize which of the cities made that list. because there was not a limitation of 25, we did expand the list. -- onenew information region and the entire nation that is identified as a magazine that is intended to inspire jihadist activity against -- the region did not request to become part of the program. it was brought into the program based on independent criteria that was established by homeland security officials. -- thes new information

official who was put in place to take on a response ability to protect the homeland does the reference of one community in .his nation this magazine that promotes violent jihad -- this new it promote, does concern on your behalf? >> i'm concerned about a lot of threats and i'm concerned for the nation. -- threats we look at >> you run a program and i represent a community. represent wasi wa targeted by inspire magazine. , why myelling me about jurisdiction? >> we fund the nation. the state receives additional funds. we look at these threats across the nation.

say that ao jurisdiction does not have a mention or maybe specifically identified. does say that the funding decisions are based upon the and we try tos look at all the information to make decisions about where we will fund. >> will this new information plane to rb and evaluation of communities that are included or not? >> it potentially can based on how the information or analysis is looking at this based on other information that is nonpublic and looks up the intelligence community to verify what is in this. we see mismatches between what intelligence services will find out going on. look at not only the public information but match that against the threat streams to make sure we are addressing these threats. >> thank you. chair now recognizes the

gentleman from south carolina for five minutes. >> thank you. let me just say up front that i'm a big fan. both in my previous role in -- theret services and will always be differences of opinion. maintain this larger notion of constitutionality and federalism -- it is very important. one of the things that i saw was that there were is able host of different -- the idea to have at competing look needs is essential to maximizing our effectiveness of security. questionshave to quit -- two quick questions.

, i thinkinsurance there was a real skepticism back home on the coast. if you are conservative you are naturally skeptical. the idea of saying, show me the money and we will show you how the flood maps will fallout. there was a big world of the extension of charges at a premium level on whether or not storms will hit at high tide or low tide and how -- all thealls different variables. is there a place or when will there be a place by which folks back home in the gulf coast or the east coast might be able to look at some of those assumptions and say, i agree with them or he disagreed with them?- or i disagree with

>> i think there is a hyper awareness because of the increases proposed under bigger waters. there is no such thing as a fema flood map. is our community-based maps. fema provides the funding. the local governments are part of that process. they adopt those maps by ordinance. they have to enforce building codes based upon this maps. there is a hyper awareness -- we need to make sure that the public is where because when these maps were originally proposed, that is when public comment can come in. we are using the best available data. >> understood. the way the folks back home felt was that flood map processor not been completed. where the not sure assumptions work. where would they be able to get a snapshot on that? >> it was looking at if we knew

the base flood elevation, we knew that the risk was increasing exponentially for feet you drop down. .hat's about $3200 policy if you are one for the buffet, it is a $600 policy. -- if you are one foot above it, it is a $600 policy. we can have searches and wind by 35 feet. that's what the risk is. if you have homes that are up on stilts that are sitting 12 feet in the air, you have pretty serious problems. if you haven't been elevated come you can expect those flood insurance premiums to be extremely high. is there a public place where people can find that information? >> we are putting that

information on fema.gov. that has now changed with the changed law. we will be doing the calculations. again, if you're at base flood elevation, you are basically rate.g a neutral if you're one foot above, you are giving the preferred rate. if you're building to code, you are good. we always update the maps. what happens if you build any previous codes and now the new data says that's not high enough and now you get slapped with these increases? i appreciate congress trying to work this affordability issue. this was a concern we had previously. when will that affordability study becoming out? >> it will be a couple your process working with the research is to build that data and look at affordability and look at what those impacts are. the chair in our masses --

the chair now recognizes the lady from new york. for being here this morning. i have a question with respect to the hurricane sandy after reporting. clearly, hurricane sandy -- weated the east coast have seen fema really respond well. you have improved since hurricane katrina. we recognize that it was and after report. there is room for improvement. could you give us a sense of what steps fema is taking to address the current actions identified in the send the after action report of july 2013? key one is to make sure

we are providing consistent information about the requirement to follow federal purchasing guidelines and contracting requirements. this has been a systemic issue across all disasters. when that isn't clear, we often times get bad information. ig finds you weren't compliant with federal regulations. we are trying to make sure we are providing good information. another example was, we did some pilot programs and you gave us a lot more flexibility with the sandy recovery improvement act in addition to the supplemental funds. we are in the process of doing an alternative project where instead of having reimbursing actual costs, we can do an estimate on the front end and fully fund a project using authority gave us. there are some large projects in new york and new jersey that are taking advantage of that. hopefully we can speed up recovery process while

maintaining response ability to the taxpayers. >> lb will also give guidance that in that special pilot, we are seeing that same practice being applied. >> this was one of the key findings from the ig. there are requirements that would apply to subcontractors. fema had not done a good job of enforcing that you are putting people on the front so when grantees are working these projects, we make sure that they understand all of the federal procurement laws that are applicable. it is no longer just a state or local procurement law. you could hear to federal procurement law. outstanding. i want to turn your attention to around the fema preparedness grant proposal. can you provide specific examples of changes fema made to

address concerns raised by stakeholders with this consolidation? guest there are>> there are sev. atause we wanted to look consolidation, the 9/11 act refers to specific government entities. that would potentially live out certain transit groups that don't follow that initially. we were including in the authorizing language to expand the definition. that was the only reason we put the leg which in their. we are not trying to open it up to anybody. there were some specific groups that previously received funding that would be limited unless we had the authorizing wing which appeared we cannot give a consolidated grant by appropriations without authorization that would have groups left out. >> very well. npg.e a question about a court capbuild the

abilities identified in the national preparedness goal. unfortunately, firefighting would be a key element of any response to a terrorist attack. it does not identify firefighting is one of its core capabilities. will the program eliminate funding for fire departments? >> no. in fact, to standalone grants that weren't tied to 9/11, the safer and the grants for fire departments, for staffing and requirement ars are not touched. the focus on those things are not the day-to-day responsibility of the fire department. this is the homeland security speak to they do not enhancement of those teams. >> would firefighting still be eligible for you to fund?

>> yes. >> i ask unanimous consent that the gentlewoman from texas be permitted to participate in today's hearing. >> without objection, so ordered. at this time, i would turn over to the gentlelady from texas. >> thank you. thank you for your courtesies and to my colleagues as well. thank you for your courtesies. good to see you again. questions --es of this is a very important subcommittee. we have seen you often. we have seen fema often and we thank them for their service.

i want to start out with the omission for citizens and first responders. we work together to build and improve our capabilities. my questions will follow along those lines. presently, the houston area suffering a non-noticed devastating oil spill. --on't know whether or not we have requested a disaster status. i have asked if you have the oil a notice of spill in the houston area. guardnow that the coast have the lead for the federal was busted cleanup. we will have region six reach out. i've not heard anything from the state of texas about a declaration request your dad you know that coast guard is correlating the response for cleanup.

>> it was creeping into local communities here and i will ask if they can contact my office as well regarding this. to that point, noticed that you have -- i would assume it would be under the no notice of and. all of your notice funding for last fiscal year? is this going to be enough? >> usually come with all spills, that wouldriorities have to be determined. because you have fully funded the disaster relief fund, we are still able to maintain response for the ongoing disasters. you're in good shape. is that what you're saying? >> yes. as you know, there is always a struggle to have the money. we have many times had to stop.

with the budget stabilization agreement and fully funding the disaster relief fund, congress has enabled fema to respond to our existing previous disasters as well as maintaining the cap oldies for no notice catastrophic response. monitor this issue of the oil spill. reimbursement of those that were responsible. i know, from looking at the immediacy of the response -- that is why i would like to be brief. publicly thank the u.s. coast guard. they have done a stupendous job. i'm certainly advocating for their full funding. quickly, to the flood insurance reform. the legislation was just passed . i have had the fema director in my town reworking the flood vast because they literally destroyed whole communities in terms of a the value of their homes. youyou including -- i know

are dealing with the insurance aspect of it. does that legislation that was just passed impact how you are doing or flood maps? >> there are key provisions in better waters and this that require us to have a technical advisory committee and to have more validation of the methodology. we will be providing reports back on the time frames. part of this was to have outside validation of the mapping criteria. and more clarity and appeal process for communities to use when they are challenging maps. >> can we reach out when our -- so we can make sure -- when i had this issue in my district, we did have the fema director and he was very helpful in saying this is not the interpretation. do we still have that gratitude to be able to do so? >> absolutely.

staff is always available to you. >> i want to make mention of the tragedy in washington state. i hope you will be heading there. , when a disaster looks like it's growing -- i want to thank the first responders. let me add my other question so you can respond to both of them. my colleague from new york asked about firefighters. having aesently devastating ground map in the state of texas. you come from a firefighter community. in terms of not having fire stations, equipment and personnel out on the streets, could we enhance our homeland security response? our response abilities are being diminished or we have the energy industry there. what kind of grants could we utilize that would legally fit this in in utilizing more

firefighters in the needs that we have in our community? >> i will have staff brief you on the programs. you have two currently funded. .he afg and the state grants one refers to funding personnel during these types of crisis and the other is about equipment. we can provide that. as far as washington state, we have been engaged. ae governor made i verbal request. it is the legacy of the homeland security -- the resources being applied are washington state resources. there is still search-and-rescue -- >> is a very dangerous situation. the best way to describe the mudslide is like quicksand. it is not stable and you can't walk into it. it is almost an impossible task to get to some areas.

there are many responders standing by. in some cases, they can't get into the hardest hit areas because is too unstable into dangerous. >> let me thank you very much. these are ongoing issues to both of you. thank you very much for allowing me this time. with that, you back. thank you. for youryou so much reminder to all of us about the dangers that not only coast guard in response but this incredibly dangerous situation that of the mudslides. several lives have been lost. we are praying for the safety of the first responders. we want to thank you for that. we will be getting our second round of questioning. i will defer my five minutes of questioning and turn it over to vice chair -- the gentleman from mississippi. >> thank you again. as a florida native, you know ouris to visitur communitie

areas. there are several counties that were devastated by hurricane katrina in 2006. many of our peers word destroyed and had to be repaired. person county repaired its peers -- harrison county repaired its ers.od hurricane isaac hit in 2012 and destroyed many of the piers again. harrison county and long beach have petitioned for disaster relief funds to rebuild and repair piers damaged by hurricane isaac. fema has denied the requests because it has insisted in ese municipalities through additional studies. even though they were subjected to environmental impact studies completed only a few years earlier. the work involved with repairs

-- this is actures prime example of bureaucratic red tape. to repeatly necessary the environment will impact study on a structure that had that study completed only a few years earlier? >> i would have to look into that. all i can tell you is that the general criteria used when you're over 50% destroyed, we have to follow the law that requires an environmental review for the investment of federal dollars. we have been working -- to speed that process up so we are not hrough concurrent loops. we are trying to prove that process. i will have to go back and look. generally, we look at something that is over 50% and we consider that not repairs to read that maybe triggering it. >> we are already entering into the spring season.

it would be nice to be able to begin construction and have it completed before the summer months. if we did an environmental review just a few years ago and we are not completely rebuilding the structures but just preparing them, it would make , why wastee taxpayer additional funds or time? >> we have been pushing to take these types of projects and move them into a concurrence where it's not required for a formal review. i will have to find out what's triggering this. >> great. going back to flood insurance -- this is something i was thinking about this morning. communities will be mapped into the floodplains, which is making people more aware of the possibility of their rates increasing. the mudslides in washington -- homeowners insurance does not cover mudslides. is it true that you need a flood insurance premium to cover that?

>> i would need to defer back. it depends on if you're talking about shifting soils or an actual mudflow, which would be caused by flooding. i will have to go back and see if there is a difference. in general, when you have flooding that is producing mudflows that causes that kind of damage, is considered flood damage. local flood insurance agent i was talking to this morning did mention that. bigger waters authorize monthly installment premiums yet fema has not implemented this section. now that hr 30 37, a law just signed this past friday, again emphasizing that congress wants homeowners to be able to spread their premiums across 12 months. how quickly will fema implement monthly installment premiums -- payments for premiums? i have to work to right the wrongs that are in the process of collecting and paying the premiums back the program. i need to get back to white takes us longer.

right wrongs actually had to have that collection process. is they willncerns only buy it for the months that are hurricane season. no, they're buying the full policy. we will seek damages and get that money back. i think of it this way, why can't we get the installment program? to follow-up with my colleague from the east coast, he mentioned some mapping concerns. i will jump through the narrative and just go to the heart of my question. what efforts has fema taken to make sure accurate mapping information is being used? job. are not doing a good $27 billion in the hole. >> we're going to have additional questions for the record. >> i turn it over to the ranking of the -- ranking member of the committee.

>> i believe i stated it before. it has been a concern in the past few years, congress is rebuffing budget requests to reconsolidation 18 programs. indeed in last year's full committee hearing, boston bombings -- the boston police commissioner stated that without the response would have been less comprehensive than it was. without the exercise supported through the funding, there would have been more people who have died in these attacks. what does it say to the people who are concerned about the discrete program targeting keep abilities?

respectful, notwithstanding the proposal three years old -- three years in a row, i have never failed to implement what congress has authorized. this goes back to not talking about not funding the city of boston but giving greater oversight and following the structures through the states to boston versus by passing the governor to the state and including them in that process. moneys not about taking away from jurisdictions but giving visibility to the states so they have the overall responsibility for those to ensure all of the issues in the state are funded. it's going to point to point the city press. the governor's team more oversight responsibilities and hopefully by increasing competitiveness building more

capability in the country worth -- in the country that's lacking. governor doesn't see things the way you have seen them where you have funded the cities because of what you have determined and the government doesn't necessarily agree with you? >> that is the great debate of our country. to make the authority those funding decisions. look at this from the standpoint that unlike other programs watched the disaster -- it falls under the state constitution and the powers that were originated in that constitution is unique to every state. -- mismatches between how a state operates and how it comes down. unlike a lot of programs in this case, it is the authorities investment in the state constitution that drives how the state is built, how they are

going to prevent that, some states have greater law enforcement for local law enforcement. states that city are so large that they are special categories by themselves. they all originate from the state constitution. we work around what we don't like about that. i have to support that system to the asked of my ability because that is the foundation of our response. fema does not walk in and take charge. they said this is a reflection, philosophically, of how we best do that. also understand that we have to look at these threats not just jurisdiction by jurisdiction but across the nation. understand that we may not get -- get hit when we expect. we look at boston and new york as huge resources that may be called upon elsewhere in this country.

>> have worked well with the state. they were brought in on the process. were does not sure if if it worked back the other way. that is our problem. what about the terrorism capabilities? thingsut emphasis on like prevention, fusion centers. a lot of this information and looking at how you get the best intelligence and look at these threats, there's no specific set aside for law enforcement. do 25% set-aside, is that all they are going to get? if you limited to 25% that is all they will get. it may be more money on the

front-end but we have to look on this -- look at this basing on threats. we are working -- we are willing to work with the community. our asked us to go back to a system that goes through a consultation -- a consolidation. that is a call the state would have to make and the state would be accountable for that to their citizens and taxpayers. theirconstitution is state. >> thank you, i will yield back. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from south carolina for five minutes. deeper, if you were to look at the overall budget it is very specific. you pick your category.

if you were to pick the two biggest ways to jump at it, what would it be? >> this will make me real popular. what mother nature takes away we have to put back. largest costs. it is primarily an economic issue. is in budget constraint times. we have to make decisions about when our beaches really tied to safety or if they are tied to commerce. the other thing is the overhead in response to disasters because we have all the systems built around a reimbursement of actual cost. i think we can show significant savings because congress gave us the stability. we did go back year after year, looking at every dog -- looking at every year. it would make sense if congress gives the authority.

let's figure out what it's going to cost to build a fire station versus waiting to do every project. how we look at the overhead and how we look at some things -- it would be nice to do a lot of things. beaches are a key part of our economy. again you can look at beaches versus other things and if you have to make decisions about what you can and can't fund, beaches fallen to the category that it is not national security. it is more economic. knowing that the storms come in and take out a lot of these speech improvements and we come back next year and faced with the same situation. reagan --ld be for for re-nourishment programs, such as miami beach? thinkthe state of florida

sydney support we are the fund. >> can we get more specific in terms of a specific area of duplication. you at the federal state and local overlay with regard to security perhaps. you look at these contractor logins. efficiency isn't a driver at the time of the storm. there's a lot of perfect -- a lot of profit margin built into these areas is their efficiency you have seen over the years in terms of best practice? >> absolutely. the system has waited more in using contractors because you couldn't get your straight time out of it. we have the improvement act that is gone. instead of forcing local jurisdictions they are only

using contractors because they can get fully reimbursed for that. will be faster and cheaper to do your own public works. if they choose to they can use a contractor or they can use their own crews to fix that up and we won't penalize them. >> this is a big point. the degree of money wasted in that particular program i thought was particularly egregious. to workve the capacity on it that you get no reimbursement. idling.r guys are implementedtly have the authorities. we are tracking those dollars. i think we're going to be able to make a good case to make this permanent.

it's not the say we don't need contractors but we shouldn't take the existing workforce out of the picture because there's a rule that says you can only pay overtime when this is often time the fastest way to get debris out. >> is there a particular stovepipe you have noticed in the federal state overlay that does not work as well as you would like to see? back to thearken historical review piece of that. out, weresident pointed cannot suspend the law. it we certainly look at have to have every agency or can we do concurrent reviews, speed this process up, come to some consensus on some things. when we do it, do it so it does one for everybody. not each agency doing it. you could be using hud daughters -- hud allers, engineering dollars.

we are past that. we are working to make sure that whatever one of these agencies does at first it is sufficient for all of the federal dollars going to that project somewhere not repeating these reviews over and over again because different agencies have different requirements. >> my time is expired. >> thank you for bringing to life the efficiencies the taxpayers expect us to hone in on. i want to thank you for that question. we turn it over to the gentleman from new york for five minutes of questions. >> -- national flood insurance program policy. but not a single one has been new data demonstrating their continued need to be in a high risk flood zone. oftentimes communities are told by fema that if they undertake certain litigation projects the widening of channels, the design of new bridges would perhaps

piers,wer peers -- fewer there is less of a risk of catastrophic flooding. they come out of the high-risk area. we do see the premiums that they have to pay. mapping is a big part of this program. if you could give us a status as wille remapping, when it be finished, and what steps are taken to ensure the accuracy and categories i -- and categorize the flood zones. >> that is a lot of questions. the community rating system is something they can apply for now and get discounts based on a lot of things they do already, maintaining drainage disses -- drainage ditches.

just moving from a 10 to and nine will give you a five percent across-the-board discount for all of your -- including your high risk. not only is it a remapping. servicecommunity rating is in of a program that communities can use outside of remapping to start planning discounts for things they do to reduce the flood risks. public information, maintenance records, and starting getting records for businesses. >> can you give buffalo back in the area of securing -- i yield back. to ms. clarkever from the state of new york for five minutes of questions. >> under the current homeland security grant program the law allows states to pass through 80% of the funding to locals. some local governments have indicated that they have had little opportunity for inputting.

sometimes little opportunity to consent the state use of the funds. how would you address this issue to make sure that local governments truly have use of the 80% pass-through to apply to the specific and unique needs. >> it is going to be based on working through the states. i understand the sensitivity ire and i refer back -- hearken back to the ranking chair. again you have to look at the state agencies provide a lot of the capabilities so the 20-year-old works against those states. a because we are captive, 80% was locally and you couldn't fund it. we will work with the community but i strongly recommend that we have to recognize there are 50 thats and the territories it is not going to be the same.

i understand why it is different. program we are try to make it back to the structures and ensure your desires to make sure funding hits specific immunities. >> we do have to acknowledge the nuances. it is very challenging given whatever dynamics may be giving at any state of time to not have the flexibility in place and address the unique needs of that particular your locality that particular locality. found the peer review process was the most effective way. it is one thing to say i need something and have all your peers look around saying, do we need to ask in our response? statesre some mechanisms

have used to engage her local state agencies. but also by discipline and a peer review process that drives outcomes that are than any or personhery review making this decision. >> would you say the peer review process -- >> this would be an opportunity to work with the community. when irience has been have a subject expert sitting at the table, i have the fire chief, the police chief, the officials, the port folks, and they are all sitting down anding at these threats having to consent on those, this we're not heard -- getting our share because we're looking at how much the hazmat crew is getting versus the bomb squad.

they can keep that. often times if they are not working as a team they are not even aware of what other parts of the team are doing. what we found by doing it that way. way, it was definitely the process of looking at how you build collaborative capability by discipline and local and stay the we build upon the two in one year. he it was homeland security driven. because it was the consensus problem state locals don't bother themselves. of says when you do that you can build a more resilient nation. i will be happy to drive that kind of outcome. >> thank you very much. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from texas for five minutes. think the chair and the ranking member. i think you're member we had a

--cussion -- as someone someone was talking about constables and make sure they can be a recipient of grants be -- of grants. it would please collaborate again? it is a law-enforcement structure in the state of texas and i have advocated for them to be eligible for grants during emergency designs. to worktaff will begin with your staff on that. i would ask administered a few gate -- administrator few --administrator fugate. >> this goes back to the states three every state has unique structures that oftentimes that oftentimes by passing them we do not recognize when redefine things here we

often times don't take into account that states have sherifft provisions, a has different authorities and powers than different parts of the country. part of the challenge is making -- this would be one more example of giving greater flex ability so states can do with unique positions by their laws that would not necessarily be in every state. forward to working with the gentlelady from texas to learn more about what constitutes -- constables response abilities are. i reclaim my time. thank you for the courtesy. the instance of texas, i probably that it is something forgotten without review.

continually do exercises and homeland security throughout the state. we are working both directions sometimes federal government needs to give a little guidance to the states on the thought of unified stationery business consolidateck to the state local preparedness program and the target preparedness programs. the new preparedness grant program, without requesting sufficient levels of funding, which is my belief that there is not a sufficient level of funding -- as i look at the long this my perception is that -- that the sophisticated entities will overcome those that are much smaller and less sophisticated. area't see the urban

security initiative matching up with the citizen quarry. court.zen i'm curious if the security grant smashed against the nonprofit security program. the other issue is, which i agree, when we organize these , homelandelements security designed after 9/11. i think this was a mistake. it smudges or it confuses or create smoke and mirrors. this is not suggesting the intent of it. but i am talking about those the -- those that are applying. efficient it did test efficient individuals --

we have an opportunity to change this? to see what we are speaking of? and do you have enough money? >> the administration has been asking for consistence local level funding base on our constraint. census process we involve a lot of the stakeholders gives you a better outcome. i know that joseph -- that those jurisdictions -- these have been consolidated anyway. your listing all of the original programs. but the last couple of years of appropriations, they broke it down to three broad categories. the urban security. grant and competitive grants for transit and ports. consistent funding hasn't been separated for the past couple of years, even though it has allowed expense. when i was in staten island, they had a response there.

the city had funded those programs. the last couple of years through the appropriations, we have actually limited down to three broad categories of which these are eligible funding under the stay-at-home homeland security grants. >> emphasis under this structure? >> it is part of our threat. we have to look at all the threats. is it recognition that although we are funding those threats against the nation, that it is designed to be used. haveof the national habits significance that go beyond the traditional staff accretion and reimbursement. there are several hazards of a hurricane coming into the houston channel, which would not

only have damages to the hurricane but would threaten or disrupt a refinery. those are the reasons why in some national hazards, they can produce greater threats to the country. back and will continue to inquire. >> thank you for those questions and for the continued focus on terrorism and prevention in response to terrorism. i mentioned during my opening that we had to social media hearings in the subcommittee. sourced questions for this hearing during the weekly chat on twitter. some of the chat members, the majority of extensive experience for the use of financial purposes have put their input

and. heard,cern that we have and i see it as we talk with and each ofities the eight counties in my jurisdiction said it was local elected officials, what concern we have is many local management offices are sometimes one-person shops. they often lack that mitigation skills or the resources and they don't know how to maintain active social media operations and validate the information they receive on social media. i'm asking what you believe fema's role is in providing assistance. fema does a terrific job on its own, as we have learned other organizations such as red cross. how are we helping train the

first responders and local communities on how to effectively incorporate social media into their preparedness plans? >> a lot of the someone to respond for records -- we have some tools out there to help. director byty myself with a tiny budget of 325 box. i started this back in 1987. >> we have come a long way. opm,e thing i learned is other people's money. you have government private sector volunteers. what i had to do back then just give out press releases and deal with at that time, fax machines would recruit the public information and sheriffs office it's always a -- sheriffs office. it is always a staffing issue.

that the advice and recommendations that the department is giving because that is something that i shared with members of these havenities -- they often mayors offices or sheriffs departments. >> i think is more agencies are starting to look at how they use social media am a we developed two training courses. soon as youe is as have had it done it is moved on. we're still talking about twitter and facebook. part of this is engaging other people in part of it is we have learned techniques and resources. there are things we worked on to consolidate some of the things we want to make available, such as being able to consolidate all the various twitter feeds into one place so when something starts up the public does not know who to follow.

we will build it based on particular threats so the public has a place to go to. times you may have social media accounts but no one knows about it before the disaster. we are trying to point back to the best information so people know that is where it is coming from. >> what is fema's role in training local officials on what your process is and how they should learn to collaborate and rely on upon each other? is primarily done through the public information officer course training. the independent study course that anybody can take is free. we actually have courses on that. a lot of the expertise is in that fema. -- isn't fema. it is at the practitioner level.

are a lot of concepts of how you personalize this information. it is just another way to issue a press release. it is also a way to listen to the public and how you make that mayal decisions have some information relevant to how you are responding. whether it is hurricane sandy or others, how much information are responders actually getting through social media? >> it's dependent on the skill sets. we had a hurricane moving up toward the carolina coast. evacuation area and local officials weren't doing much. they need toing get all its first out kos. they just don't think the threat

wants them even acting. it was and that they weren't hearing it but they were taking an action they weren't expecting. sometimes crowd sourcing can go here is what i said, here's what the public thinks i said, now i can change my message. they don't always know if the heard what they thought you went and the government -- say something and the public doesn't understand it. if you listen to the response go back and can reemphasize that. >> i want to applaud you and fema for hopefully taking the lead in educating the country about the importance of social media during mass disasters or with fairness response. we are going to a brief third round of questioning. we will turn into a ranking

member for five minutes of questioning. >> just to go back to the conversation we had prior, in my local police departments played a crucial .ole in preventing terrorism the law-enforcement terrorism prevention funding is the only funding this new for prevention. given the ability to build across all those threats, where they want to put their emphasis, whether or not there are additional funds or other things are a priority -- i guess i am coming back to understanding your concern about how we make sure these events occur.

wouldk that's where i like to work on the uprising language. when we had the disciplines working and had the to vegas part up in the region. that was driven by the disciplines and locals. i understand the concerns, i would be willing to work on the appropriation. i still think we need to come back to looking at going through and looking at national driven -- what are the capabilities? what funding may be required. putting in 20 five percent? that is to set aside but what if it is more? if you say, this is a priority, and you need to fund these types of activities a matrox more investment on the prevention. >> just a topic that was

nationally important and i hope in latebe with you -- october with hurricane sandy, cleared my state of new jersey on january 29, 2013. the president signed a disaster appropriations relations act, included $50 billion in supplemental appropriations to 19 federal agencies for expenses related to the consequences of hurricane sandy. disasterxtent has appropriation and funds for the metaprograms obligated spending? , weriting to the specifics focused on the emergency response because we knew those were expenses up front. that is usually the first thing the jurisdiction have to pay out and those are extraordinary

costs. we try to fund on the front end as much as we can get it done. now that we get it to rebuilding, you give us a couple of tools that we are now starting to get some traction. this can sound like a very bureaucratic answer. but he gives us the ability to go in and get the best estimate and fully fund a project on the front end versus fully reimbursing. some of the larger projects are moving through the system. we are getting to closure on what that is. this is the other thing that may , i am trying down to drive some decisions about not using our traditional cost-benefit analysis, always looking at our past determine risk. if we are going to build back a water pump station, we need to build it for the future.

that may mean a different investment and more finance so we do not come back next storm and have to replace or deal with the consequences again. >> i think you heard me loud and clear in terms of following the constitution and states rights and that. think you have seen what is going on in new jersey and using these funds for leverage and reasons for other than what they are prescribed for. oversight can make sure the funds are going where they are needed? are in rightwe now, there is no direction by the state. there is not a lot of destruction -- not a lot of discretionary state-level. we have been looking with state and local jurisdictions on their hazard mitigation plan.

they have had very aggressive programs to look at competitive loss areas. you talk now, when about our funds, they are directly tied to some kind of damages or expenses tied to the disaster. there's not discretion about prioritizing who gets one -- gets what funding. it will give you the numbers on how much has been allocated in those categories. am i yield back. >> i now recognize myself for five minutes. -- are indicating the funds the state of new jersey does not have much discretion. the ranking numbers are being directed by fema. who determines that funding

is based on the county that is declared. we have eligible damages. we are making those reimbursements. tied to the is improvement ask. what will be interesting is where we are at now, giving you a comparison of what this looks like now for permanent work versus some of the other disasters. upsomething that has come not only in my jurisdiction but many others is the issues about flood insurance and under the have created a flood insurance advocate for homeowners and the purpose is to provide homeowners with a single point of contact and see who can help begin to answer some any of these questions that so many of us certainly have. can you please share with us are fema's current plans and what we might anticipate being as the implementation timeline.

>> we look at this when the language is still being drafted. it better be more than one person. we have a separate advocacy group within the flood insurance program so they are reporting structures and evaluation structures tied to other programs, goals, and objectives. we want to have a so they are independent of that process although it will be part of the flood insurance program. i'll have to ask the manager where we are at on that. we agreed it was a good idea. ist of it is making sure it staffed adequately. >> to follow up on that with respect to the new law, it also requires fema certified when it has him committed a flood mapping program based on review of the technical mapping advisory council. 2012, towas created in

this point i don't think that counsel has been established by fema. what you anticipate is the timeline on that very important beginl so it can reviewing and improving the accuracy of what most of us referred to as fema's flood maps. >> the technical advisory committee and rules were created. we solicited the applications and are in the process of making the appointment. ofwere in the process implementing that. toill just have to get back you when the first scheduled meetings are going to start. >> thank you for that. as you can tell from many members on the subcommittee and across the country, the issues involving the flood mapping and the law that was just signed into law last week were so very

critical across the country. we want to work with you to try to ease the pain that this has caused so many homeowners across the country. i want to thank you for your valuable testimony. it is so very clear to me and anyone listening that your local state and federal experience is . it seems moree and more action across the country. of a lot of support you and appreciate your responses to questions about your budget. subcommittee may have additional questions for you and may ask that you respond to those in writing. we hope to be very helpful. this agency is so critically important to countries and communities all across the country. forhearing will be open seven days and without objection, the committee stands adjourned.

marie harford is tweeting about

john kerry's changing travel plans. that halfway home from saudi arabia, secretary kerry abruptly changed course to turn around and head to europe. vladimir putin called president obama to talk about diplomatic solutions in the ukraine. secretary kerry is going to me russia's foreign minister in paris as early as tomorrow or monday. president obama is on his way back. tamara washington journal will review the trip. deadline forllment health care under the new law. and then the tea party and its influence over the coming election cycles, with an incoming view of the tees -- of the tea parties cofounder.

a r on washington journal. obama out oft town, vice president joe biden delivered this week's address. he talked about raising the minimum wage. jackie lower ski talks about a bill she cosponsored to fix a backlog at the v.a.. >> i'm jill biden. i am filling in for president obama, who is abroad. i want to talk about the minimum wage and the overwhelming need to raise the minimum wage. there's no reason in the world why one american has to live in poverty. and --r at the federal federal minimum wage makes $14,000. --t is hard enough realm enough for an individual to live on. would be making $20,200 per year.

he would earn enough to bring that family out of poverty. not only would it put more hard-earned money into the pockets of 28 million americans, many millions of them would be pulled out of poverty, it is also good for business. let me tell you why. there is clear data that shows had the benefit of their -- of least turnover and more productivity. the minimum wage would generate an additional $19 billion in additional income for people who need it the most. the big difference between giving a raise and the minimum wage is instead of a tax break to the wealthy, they are living on the edge.

needed to pay their electric bill, put gas in the automobile, to find accessories. this generates economic growth in the communities. companies big and small recognize these benefits. in atlantatly georgia and met the owner of a small advertising company. he independently raised the wages of his workers to $10.10 per hour. choosing the gap are to give their a ploy ease higher wages. -- their employees higher wages. -- like the folks serving our troops males on the basis. they are all doing this for a simple reason. raising the minimum wage will help rock -- will help hard-working people rise out of poverty.

it is good for business, it is helpful for the overall economy. up more thanmake half of the workers who would benefit from increasing the minimum wage. a low minimum wage is one of the reasons why women in america make only $.77 on the dollar every man makes. by raising the minimum wage we can close that gap by five percent. it matters to a lot of hard-working families, particularly moms raising families on the minimum wage. it is with the american people want to do. three out of four americans -- they know this is the right and fair thing to do and a good thing to do for the economy. it is time for congress to get over the minimum wage. would raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $10.10 per hour.

ask your percentages who oppose raising the minimum wage why they oppose it, how can you look at the men and women are vying many services to us all so -- basic service to us all. how can they say that we don't deserve to take them out of poverty? the president and i think they deserve it. we think you do too. it is time to give america a raise. thanks for listening and have a great weekend. god bless you all and may god protect our troops. >> good morning, i am jackie will lower ski -- jackie will lorski.ki -- jackie wa asupport the community act as member of the veterans affairs committee and a presumptive of voters.n --

we need a commonsense bill. without this real-world accountability, the v.a. has become the epitome of the bureaucracy 1:00. i hear every day from veterans who are forced to wait months on end for their disability claim process. unfortunately this isn't typical. daysge wait times are 330 run the country. the backlog has been associated with thousands of patients waiting for their paperwork to clear. on top of that they are greeting love -- and their grieving loved ones have to wait on the conversation they're owed. it these men and women fought for our country. they should not have to fight for their own benefits. we trace much of this problem back to the sheer lack of accountability. at least three preventable

deaths have occurred. two officials were to retire early and three were recommended while the rest face unspecified actions. that is bad enough. in many cases we have found not only have managers received no discipline, they have gotten bonuses as well. these pats on the back and slaps on the wrist only protect bureaucrats, enabling their improper behavior and putting our veterans at risk. that is where the v.a. management accountability act comes in. this bill would give the v.a. sex carried the authority he needs to fix things. it will bring in people who cleaned it up. otherwise all the form and the world will help. this is a big step in the right direction. as we speak this bill is under consideration by our committee. it continues to pick up bipartisan support. him already we have seen --

already we have seen the backing of house speaker john boehner and key organizations. today we are reaching out to the president and to all americans. has a stake in solving this problem. all the things we say about owing our veterans a debt of gratitude, all the promises we make to take care of them, to the v.a. exists to turn those words and actions. america is a grateful nation. cannot allow anyone or anything to given in the way of that. the federal backlog should never have appeared in the same sentence. let's make that our mission and the work. godless those that serve and got blessed united states of america. serve bless those that and god bless the united states of america.

>> he appeared before the house oversight and government reform committee. we're going to show a portion of the hearing. it's about an hour and a half. >> the committee will come to order. would you please close the doors? oversight committee exists to secure two fundamental principles. americans have a right to know the money is well spent. oversight and government reform committee is to protect these rights. taxpayers have a

government. it's our job to work tirelessly in partnership with citizens watchdogs to deliver the facts to the american people and bring genuine reform to the federal bureaucracy. it's now my privilege to recognize the ranking member for the opening statement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. commissioner koskinen, i want to thank you for being here this morning and i want to thank you, mr. chairman, for calling this hearing. i think it's very important that we look at what the inspector general for the treasury recommended and take a look back at the research that he did. nearly one year ago the treasury inspector general for tax administration, russell george, issued a report that included irs employees and i, quote, inappropriate criteria to

identify tax exempt applications for review. i want to revisit the findings of his report. the ig found that there was ineffective management, and that's a quote, at the irs. the first line of the results section of the report said this began with employees in the determinations unit of the irs office in cincinnati. i didn't say that. the ig said that. the ig also went on to say that these employees, and i quote, developed and used inappropriate criteria to identify applications from organizations with the words tea party in their names. end of quote. the ig also said these employees, quote, developed and imme meanted inappropriate criteria due to insufficient oversight provided by management, end of quote. the ig report that former irs official lewis learner did not

disclose the use of these inappropriate criteria until 2011 a year after it began. i didn't say that the ig said that. although she immediately ordered the practice to stop, the ig stated that employees began, again, using different inappropriate criteria, quote, without management knowledge, end of quote. in contrast, the inspector general never found any evidence to support the central republican accusations in this investigation. it just was a political collusion erected on behalf of the white house. before our committee received a single document or interviewed one witness, chairman issa went on national television and said, and i quote, this was the targeting of the president's political enemies. effectively lies about it during the election, end of quote. similarly, representative al rogers, the chairman of the

committee on appropriations stated on national television and i quote, the enemies list of our -- out of the white house that the irs was engaged in shutting down or trying to shut down the conservative political viewpoint across the country and enemies list that rivals that of another president some time ago, end of quote. representative dave camp chairman of the ways and means committee said and i, quote, this appears to be just the latest example of a culture of cover-ups and political intimidation in this administration, end of quote. the inspector general identified no evidence to support these wild political accusations. the ig reported according to the interviews they conducted, the inappropriate criteria and i quote, were not influenced by any individual organization outside the irs. the ig testified before this committee that his own chief investigator reviewed more than

5,500 e-mails and found no evidence of any political motivation and the actions of the irs employees. rather than continuing this partisan search for a nonexisting connections to the white house, i believe the committee should focus squarely on the recommendations made by the inspector general. the ig made nine recommendations in his report last may. as of february of this year the irs now reports that it has completed all nine. for example, the ig recommended that the irs change its screening and approval process for tax exempt applications. in response, the irs ended the end of so-called be on the lookout lists and developed a new guidance. the, ig recommended to the irs ensure that applicants are, quote, approved or denied expeditiously. in response the irs made significant progress on its backlog over the past year,

closing 87% of these cases. as i close, i want to thank the commissioner and his predecessor danny warfall for the extraordinary cooperation with congress. i disagree with the chairman's letter complaining about the agency's so-called failure to produce documents in noncompliance with committee request. nothing could be further than the truth. more than 250 irs employees have spent nearly 100,000 hours responding to congressional requests. they have delivered more than 420,000 pages of documents to this committee. and they have spent at least $14 million in doing so the chairman's statements simply disregard these facts and they're also at odds with chairman cam of the ways and means committee who issued a press release just this month praising irs for its cooperation

with document requests as a, and i quote, significant step forward. commissioner, i wanted to thank you for your efforts during things investigation and for your exceptional cooperation and i want to thank all of those irs employees who are working so hard and tirelessly to do their jobs and with that, mr. chairman, i thank you and i yield back. >> thank the gentleman. i am pleased to welcome our witness, mr. -- commissioner john koskinen. he was appointed by the president to report and restore trust and accountability to the irs. commissioner, you have a difficult task ahead of you. the american people do not have, in my opening statement says any faith, but they certainly don't have the faith they once had in the irs to be truly a nonpartisan, nonpolitical tax collector. and rightfully so. does nonpartisan, nonpolitical

agency target certain groups based on their names or political ideology? the irs did. does a nonpartisan or nonpolitical agency conspire to leak the findings of an independent inspector general report? the irs did. does a nonpartisan, nonpolitical agency withhold documents requested during a congressional investigation subject to a lawful subpoena? the irs does, did, and continues to. does a nonpartisan, nonpolitical agency reinterpret laws protecting taxpayer information when it appears their employees violated the law? the irs does. does a nonpartisan, nonpolitical agency blatantly ignore congressional subpoena? again, the irs continues to. the perform people believe the irs is now a politicized agency beca