campaign financing. view, what isr the effect of what the supreme court did on tuesday? well, the case that we're about, mccutcheon versus f.e.c. was brought by a wealthy businessman, sean mccutcheon, who wanted to be able to contribute more to candidates, parties and committees than the current limits allow. limits, herevious was able to contribute up to all federal candidates, parties and committees. and in the 5-4 decision that the declared thatthey limit to be unconstitutional amendment and said that he was entitled to the effect ofe so that decision takes us from a total contribution for any one

individual of $123,000 all the way up to about $3.5 million if you look at the amounts an individual can contribute to and party,didates committees, combined. a major influx of big money into the political process. our organization has estimated about $1 billion to political spending in the next election. >> and is that a good thing, a bad thing, a neutral thing? think it's -- i think it's disaster for our democracy. >> why? we already had a system in which the wealthiest few are able to exert so much more elected systemr and our elected representatives than the rest of us and a like this just makes a bad situation worse. >> donald mcgahn, do you agree opinion? >> no, i don't. >> why?

upon a fewed assumption that i don't think are necessarily true. first, the idea that there's going to automatically be $1 billion of new money in elections is frankly, with all respect, ridiculous. people in this country can spend on their owney independent of candidates already. this has been the case for years going back to a case valettouckwheat versus so the idea that there will be additional money i don't think is true. i think you'll see money that would have been spent on independent expenditures will be to candidates. that's a better approach because the candidates would disclose many they're receiving, the public would have more information, not less, and candidates would be more accountable for the message. idea of this -- we

have to be real clear on what and whate the court wasn't before the court. there are still contribution limits on money given to politicians. vted can give up to $2600 per election to a member of senator.ing or was a biannual caps all giving. the idea that there will be figure out a way to give over $3 million in an is farfetched. the supreme court dealt with this issue in the opinion and felt it was a wild hypothetical. could it happen? sure. there's a theory but it would party invery state america, every candidate and every national party to get agether and essential form massive joint fundraising committee at one time and to write aeone single check which would have to be distributed to all the within the base limits of $2600 so it's a rather

example that the court dealt with and rejected. the u.s. economy added 192,000 jobs last month. on tomorrow's "washington journal," a conversation about those numbers with pedro decosta, the "wall street journal." with 10 days left until the deadline,ax filing kevin mccorporalally of onlinger gives advice preparing tax returns. "washington journal" live with your calls, facebook comments and tweets every morning live on eastern. 7:00 a.m. [captions performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> mr. speaker, an i.r.s. agent testified under oath, the taxpayers who fight back are us, gond i quote, sue right ahead, sue us and prove wrong. are think about it, after our taxpayers are hit with tax bills, heavy

enough to cause a hernia for the giant, they're told, if you don't like it, sue us. hearsay, this isn't rumor, this is an exact quote of an i.r.s. agent who also said, the i.r.s.gress, will tell you these are isolated incidents. that's not true. is, in fact, standard policy. time forp, i say it's congress to shove these illegal the assets ofup the i.r.s. the i.r.s. has been created by congress. this problem.d congress must solve this problem thecongress must change burden of proof of the tax case or the i.r.s. will keep saying, it, sucker, prove it, wrong.e're >> find more highlights from 35 years of house floor coverage on page.cebook c-span, created by america's

cable companies 35 years ago and today as a public service by your local cable or provider. spokesmanwhite house josh earnest briefed reporters today answering questions about really israeli-palestinian conflict, the upcoming elections and raising the minimum wage. >> good afternoon, everybody. little special help preparing for the briefing from one of your colleagues. nice to see you on this friday afternoon. i actually don't have anything at the top, jim, but in the spirit of opening day, which they're celebrating across town, out firstou throw pitch. >> thank you. fastball. >> we'll take it.

josh,the middle east, kerry today sounded perhaps the has pessimistic that he since this whole process they began talks, he said it was time for a reality check. does the president share that view? i wonder when the last time he and kerry spoke about this and essentiallyident encourage the secretary of state that it was time to focus more on other pressing issues -- syria, iran nuclear talks, because this seemed to be stuck in a stalemate? >> as you know, secretary kerry and the president traveled together to europe just last week and spent a decent amount of time together over the course of that trip. they were obviously covering a principally the challenge of dealing with russia encroachment on the of ukraine integrity but they did have the

opportunity to talk about middle east on that trip as secretary kerry himself has said that it is a good indication of how critical the issue of middle east peace is that when he does meetings with world leaders on will askics, people him specifically about middle east peace. secretary kerry has played a very important role in trying to conversations between the israelis and palestinians. not because itt was obvious that an agreement struck. in fact, the reason that he was involved and the reason that he was doing so under the banner of the united states of america is very difficult for generations for the israelis to palestinians to try resolve their differences so what secretary kerry has done is tirelessly to travel to the region frequently. 11 timese's been there now just in the last year or so,

in hiss been tireless efforts to try to broker some common ground between the palestinians. ultimately, however, what we that it's the responsibility of the israelis and palestinian leaders to make difficult decisions, to take these difficult steps on their own. are the decisions that -- reachedtreeched to pursue common ground cannot be imposed by the united states country in the world. the difficult steps the israelis and palestinians need to take to that faith are not steps can be dictated by the united states or any other outside despite all of those challenges, it is clearly interest of the united states and the globe for and palestinians to resolve their differences. is a --re aiming for

creation of or the a circumstance in which you have of israel living side by side in peace and security with an independent state.nian that is the ultimate goal and reaching that goal is in the clear interest of our strong allies in israel. clear interest of the palestinian people. it's in the clear interest of greater stability to the middle east region, and the would have clear benefits for the entire world. an indication that that the states continues to be thatpensable to the world the united states has devoted so much effort to a task that is to achieve so there's no doubt that we have reached a

point where the palestinian the israeli leaders need to spend time thinking to makingr commitment difficult decisions and taking actions and secretary ahead and ihe days will anticipate that a conversation with the president future.e near >> the next step is clearly in the hands of the palestinian and the israelis. role of the u.s. as broker exhausted at this point? we remain committed to this task because the stakes are high and there is a clear for our strong allies in israel. there is a clear benefit for the for nationspeople, in the middle east region and nations around the globe. we remain committed to this task. ultimateme time, this goal we're aiming for is

something that can only be accomplished when the leaders of the israeli people and the palestinian people decide to the very difficult decisions that they alone can make. is the president disappointed that it's reached this stage? >> i think the president was realistic about how difficult a challenge this is. for generations. the leaders of other countries thistried to intervene in dispute to reach agreement and those efforts have experienced peaks and valleys but ultimately so the not reached the goal president is clear eyed in his assessment about where things stand and about the prospects of the kind of agreement that would be so clearly in the interest of the world but those difficult challenges in no way

diminish the president's passion trying to reach an outcome here that is so clearly in everybody's interest. >> yesterday we talked about the twitter story and yesterday jay said he was not aware of here in the white house who knew about the program. wondering whether that was his personal knowledge or whether you can state flatly at the white house was familiar with this program as it was underway. there's no question that the president in his administration support efforts help cuban citizens communicate more easily with one another and with the outside world. our involvement would have been the same in this instance as in any other development program of this type. the white house apprised of these developments have otherwith they

programs. we certainly were aware of the usaid wasl that aying to facility, to create mechanism for greater expression of ideas in cuba. documented, the cuban regime has been an regime that has attempted to squelch the so thison of free ideas is a clear effort by the united states to try to meet that need. do these kind of things especially rise to the level of when you'reuse dealing with an environment like cuba? it's my understanding that these -- that a policy decision this, in this case, to implement this program, is which is to say that it's likely somebody at the house would have been aware generally about the

efforts to put in place an infrastructure that would the free expression of ideas but would not be fully operationalthe details. >> can you tell me who would have been particularly informed? i don't -- it's a little speculation. what i'm talking about sort of the principle that we would policyen aware of this objective that usaid had set out necessarily aware of the operational details. >> steve? >> is the current phase of the east peace process over? >> no. say is that i would place -- and i a think secretary kerry spoke to today when he was in morocco -- that we have reached a place where it's time for a reality check. time for the israeli leaders and leaders of the palestinian people to spend time considering their options at this point.

secretary kerry observed that there is a limited amount of and resources that can be dedicated by the united states likeerica to an effort this and the reason that there are limits beyond the obvious and physicale space is that there are a range of challenges that are on the most indispensable country in the world. incidentere a single that pushed the talks over the edge? >> i wouldn't characterize it as a single incident. i would characterize it as steps taken by countries on both sides of the issue that have been unhelpful, that has contributed to the degradation of the trust that had been built up through the talks over the last several months. >> is the release of jonathan pollard still on the table? described it to you earlier, steve, the reason that the release of jonathan pollard still on the table is because this is something the israeli regularly raises with

the u.s. government. it is true that the president made any decision about mr. pollard. he was tried and convicted of arious crimes and is serving serious sentence. >> lastly, in conjunction with tunisian of the president today, is there any plans for a loan guarantee announcement? don't have details about any announcements that may be forthcoming. there will be an opportunity for the press corps to receive those announcements. steven? has the white house handled the critique -- it was clear a year ago that israelis have not builds political capital among their tople and were not prepared take tough decisions and therefore john kerry's political of time and capital could have been better

used elsewhere. >> well, steven, i think what i would say in response to that the is that the stakes in situation were very high, that the world would stand to benefit significantly from the peaceful resolution of the differences between the israeli people and the palestinian people and the stakes were so high and the challenges of reaching difficult,t were so they're not a lot of people volunteering to take on that think it iso what i is an indication of the world thatround the the united states still wields, that the united states is the will step into the case, and in this principally secretary kerry who would step into the breach and agreement.er an he's traveled 10 or 11 times to the region in just the last year or a little over a year. so the odds of getting something

like this done if you're -- i know people in las vegas are betting on these kinds of things these days but if they sure the odds would be very long but the benefits that the world,ined for the lives that could be saved, could spread that throughout the region would be there would be significant benefits for the two countries we're talking about here, a palestinian state and a jewish-israeli state would be significant but the benefits to americaed states of would be significant, as well. so this is why the secretary of thee at the direction of president of the united states has invested so much time and endeavor and our commitment and our passion for achieving this goal has not but again, this goal will only be achieved and only can be achieved if the decisions that are madered independently by the leaders of

leaders of the palestinian people. >> so if those decisions aren't thisat this point, critical point, is that it for this administration? do you say we're not going to until youed in this guys get back and tell us you're ready? presupposes an additional step that at some point somebody walks away. secretary kerry is not willing to do that. also notable that the designated negotiators on the designatede and the negotiators on the palestinian side continue to assert their inlingness to participate conversations so as long as continue toing to talk, that's something that continue to try to facilitate but ultimately those talks will only lead to progress if the leaders of the two sides are willing to make some difficult decisions. again, these are decisions that

the united states cannot make them. these are steps that the united states cannot impose on them. sides are, the two going to have to make these theireous decisions on own. certainly with the support of the united states and our to marshal the support communityernational but ultimately it's on them. >> what was president obama's learning one journalist had been killed and another wounded and more broadly, how much confidence does he have in the elections set to take place? saying thatart by the thoughts and prayers of the first lady and the president go family of anja niedringhaus who was killed in overnight. the president and first lady also send their best wishes and their prayers to kathy gannon who wasan a.p. reporter wounded in that incident.

there are journalists currently in afghanistan covering the elections slated to start tomorrow who are risking safety topersonal tell the story about what's happening in afghanistan. these are journalist who is have the worldrom across to cover what's happening in afghanistan. group also includes afghans courageously made the decision to tell the world about what's happening in their own it'sry and i think important particularly on this day that's marked by some sadness, that we recognize the heroism oforts and people both from afghanistan and the world whoound are trying to do the important informing the world about what's happening in afghanistan. given this violence, how much confidence does he have in the elections that are going to take concern about more violence, corruption, has the

any other officials reached out to their counterparts in afghanistan? >> we expect millions of pollsistans to go to the tomorrow. these are critical elections and the united states welcomes the democratic process underway in afghanistan. the afghanistan security forces are in the lead countrywide. in the campaign period over the months was full of open and responsible debate among the todidates but it will be up the afghan people to choose the future direction of their country. >> the potential for a recount, possibility of corruption, some people are saying there might leader in place until this summer, until june. have a timesident line in mind by which they need someone to be in place so that move forward with the b.s.a. agreement if that were to happen? a we have not established specifically time line for the

adjudication of the election. is our expectation that this thanlittle bit different most elections that are conducted in the u.s. in which we find out the results that day. or the next but at the same time we're hopeful that the elections will and inclusive and broadly acceptable to the afghan people. stable and acceptable political transition is critical to sustaining international afghanistan. >> the president talked about minimum wage, a.j. there are compromise pieces of legislation coming together on hill. would the president accept legislation that increased the to $9 as opposed to if that were a viable piece of legislation as compared to $10.10, which doesn't seem to have a chance. verye president is a strong advocate of raising the

$10.10 an hour. earlier this week we saw the state of connecticut vote in the raise theirto minimum wage to $10.10. steps taken by private companies, costco and countries around the country take a unilateral step to raise the wages of their workers. is notson they do that because they think president obama will like it, although he does. they do that is because they think it's good for business. they understand that putting more money in the pockets of good for their business, good for their local costsy, it reduces the associated with training workers because they're more likely to the job and on ultimately we're talking about a core value that we believe and president believes that hard work should be rewarded and right now based on where the minimum wage is currently slated that if you're trying to raise a and workingur full-time making minimum wage,

below raising that family the poverty line so the the actionelieves should be taken around the country to raise the minimum $10.10. >> but realistically, that doesn't receiving support so why support something that does. >> i think you come by your pessimism about congressional action honestly. president, however, is not going to allow that inaction in to stand in the way of something that is really important for the country and really important for our economy so you saw that a couple of months ago the an executivened order mandating that federal raise thes would minimum wage for their workers. the president hosted an event in connecticut where they did raise the minimum wage to $10.10 with england whoom new

advocated raising the minimum wage. the last time the minimum wage was increased, it was signed into law by a republican president. this is not one of those issues with a historic partisan divide us from making a step toward sound economic policy. be something to else motivating those who oppose a simple policy decision that hard work.d i'll let you guys decide what that might be. roger, i'll give you the question. i understand you're celebrating an anniversary today. today marks your 20th year with bloomberg? it's in my briefing book. congratulations. [applause] now that you're sufficiently embarrassed. >> thank you. president was still in saudi arabia, he took a call aboututin and they talked an hour and the readout said,

that, among other things, putin to discuss some diplomatic way to resolve the crisis in ukraine. that in mind -- and the president said he wanted it in writing. has anything come in writing, number one. have there been any calls the two since march 29, and, three, has there been any movement whatsoever between the two? >> i'll say a couple of things about that. any calls between president obama and president putin to read out to you. however, the action item, if you will, from that call, was for and hisy kerry counterpart, former minister to have a conversation about trying to find a de-escalateath to the tension in ukraine or, i the border of ukraine, as well. an update on the

conversations between secretary kerry and his counterpart, i'd you to the state department but what hasn't changed is that there is a clear path to de-escalating the in that region, that there is an opportunity for the fromans to pull back crimea and from the border along ukraine in which they have -- they have massed troops. there's an opportunity for us to observers to the andon to ensure that peace stability continued to exist there. know president putin has publicly expressed his concern that there might be ethnic russians who are victims of violence there. opportunity for us to send international monitors to ensure that's not happening. we haven't seen wide spread of that but if president putin's confidence would be sending neutral international monitors to the region to ensure that that's the

case, we would be very of that and -- >> has he said anything about >> has he said anything about that or reacted to that in any way? the neutral observers? >> i haven't seen his reaction to that. one other thing which is and this is an important step as well. in order to resolve the anderences between ukraine russia, it is important tore russian leaders to moat with counterparts in ukraine. the united states indicated a facilitate those kinds of conversations. that could be a critical step in de-escalating and trying to find a diplomatic resolution to what there.g on >> is there any u.s. evidence yet that troops are being pulled back? have seen the reports that president putin has order the withdrawal of one battalion of troops. >> yesterday he said he hasn't seen any evidence. >> that continues to be true.

okay. jim? >> first of all, happy opening day. >> thank you. and i wanted to ask you and go the if we could to israeli-palestinian conflict. obviously when the president decided to have the leaders here and then to move forward after he must have thought there was some reason even though the therenge was high, that might be some reason there could be some success. was told been changed or has there been any bad faith or lack of good faith the parties that has changed things? >> well, let me start by answering your question this way. one of the hallmarks of the ongoing conversations taking place that had been facilitated memberstary kerry and of his negotiating team that spent a lot of time on the ground in the region has been to keep the content of the talks confidential. to build some trust. i know that made covering the

conversations challenging. they have been an important part of preserving the ability negotiators on both sides to negotiate. so i'm not in a position to specific details or commitments that may have been made to the president by one or leaders. i think it is fair to say that over the course of the last six have beenonths there courageous steps that were taken but iners on both sides the last week or so we have started to see that cooperation bit. down a little that we saw the israeli government refuse to release the fourth traunch of prisoners that was scheduled for last weekend. it didn't happen obviously. the palestinians earlier this week signed instruments seeking join a number of multilateral conventions. also earlier this week the israeli government announced 700 in east jerusalem which

is a source of great sensitivity side. palestinian so we have seen some unilateral leaders on both sides that have been not helpful these in trying to move conversations along. and actionsatements that have been taken in public. and i would point you to those recentreason for the slowdown that we have seen in the talks. specifics of what may have been promised to the president in these meetings, was fact lied to in the end? and without saying what he was lied to about, but were there agreements or promises made that not acted out in good faith by both sides? areet me tell you what we focused on. we are focus on the israelis and palestinians living up to the commitments they make to each

other. that is ultimately what is most important here. i pointed out in the last few days a breakdown in some of the trust that had been up.t the presidents concerned about that. secretary kerry articulated his about that.ntment but this -- the one thing that in is notingsolace that negotiators on both sides willing to negotiate. they haven't thrown up their are walkingid they away from the process. we are getting down to the time sides needrs on both to make some decisions. can't make these decisions for them. we can't impose these decisions. lot of hard work to

go before we get there. time. me try one more did secretary kerry walk away because they were not getting along with each other or because things they had told the united states they would do they did not do? guess it isis -- i to -- i don't want to parse this too much. integrityprotect the of the private conversations ongoing. but the source of secretary frustration and president obama's frustration unilateral unhelpful actions that we have taken that we have seen taken by leaders on sides. you know, and that has been a particularlyt and because there had been some courageous actions that were take bin leaders on both sides months.ast few but again, you know, secretary kerry said this is reality check is where we are.

that this is a time for the leaders on both sides to if they are willing to take these actions. major? >> follow up on that. looks as if the israelis and the palestinians have made decisions. they decided not to tell the states they were going to take the unilateral actions. they decided to take the actions knowing it would be inconsistent with what they committed to the other and with helping the peace process move forward. they made decisions in the last hostile to what the united states and secretary they tried to accomplish last 84. of't those decisions in and itself tell you what the status of the peace talks are and that it is fruitless to wait for other decisions to be made to get them back to a place where they were before when they already decided to do things to harm where they were before? i think that anybody who knows middle east history frankly, and do, is intimately familiar with the

kinds of conversations that have characterized previous efforts to resolve the differences between the israelis and thattinians understands there has been -- this has always been a process that has characterized by one step forward, two steps back sometimes. and so there is nobody who had the expectation there would be a straight line from talks to resolution. >> but everyone undertoed that april was -- understood that crucial month. they were brought here to discuss the crucial nature of the upcoming deadline and commitment to move beyond that and in the context of that took the processful to and didn't even tell the number they were locker that you are a goingoing to do these things. brief that tells the united states all that it needs to know about where this process is and its investment in

the last year has produced nothing? >> i'm not sure i would describe it as virtually nothing. talkedry kerry himself about the disappointments in the steps we have taken and we are couple ofout that a days here as well. >> you said the process isn't over. under thesetinue circumstances? kerry is not going to keep coming back, is he? going to wait for them to do something, right? >> i don't want to foreshadow secretary kerry's future steps will be. what he said the next step is, to return to washington and have conversations with the president and other members of a path forward. onh the lead negotiators both sides on the israeli side and palestinian side indicated a talking.ss to keep so i -- as long as the two people who are engaged in the talks are still talking it would be a little odd for me to stand talks ared say the

over. >> but they would be talking about something that was worse than it was before because of actions they decided to take. >> ultimately, the way that we are resolve these disputes not just through the talks but ultimately by important stepsons and courageous being taken by both sides that dictate.many pose or >> on ukraine, yesterday the united states said russia needs to get over crimea. is it going to and what is it it?g to do to change >> our position that russia has violated the territorial ofegrity of the nation ukraine by occupying crimea has changed. as a result of those actions, the united states has worked in concert with other allies to the russians.n there are indications that are verifiable that the costs have toll on the russian economy. and we are -- we stand ready and prepared to place on

additional sanctions if necessary. is our effort to use the sanctions to try to get the russians to agree to a diplomatic process that could deescalate the tensions and that focal point of our efforts reit now. be ason't want to pessimistic as christian was. mixed bag. report, a 190,000 jobs created in march. nothing to sneeze at. long-term unemployment still high and manufacturing that the aesident highlights a lot had small downtown, but a downturn. the first since july. recovery?he >> as someone who has stood up couple years now and talked about jobs reports the time frame in which questions askedthe jobs reports are ofa pretty good indicator how good or bad the jobs reports may be. it has been my observation when reports are really bad

a whole lot of people ask about beginning andthe when they are good the jobs come later inons the briefing. >> i'm exhausted so i thought i would ask. >> understandable. we thought the jobs report was encouraging in terms of what it our economic recovery. we continue to believe there is a lot of work that can and be done to strengthen the economy and support the private sector as it leads our recovery. said, there are plenty of reasons to look at the report and feel good about it. 192,000 private sector jobs created just last month. 2.3 million over the course of the last year. the other thing i would point out that has been observed by some, is that if you look back at the last 19 months of jobs of those18 of them, 18 19 jobs reports over the last 19 months have been revised upward. there is an indication that these initial reports don't tell thewhole story about strength of the economy.

what the president will do is see as build on what we some -- as at least a little momentum in our recovery. why the president advocated a whole range of investments in research and development to making college education a little easier for people to afford. things that will create jobs and strengthen our economy over the long-term and the presidents going to continue to advocate for those things. >> another thing noted in a goitive direction is if you 2010 now created 8.9 million private sector jobs the 8.8 million lost in the recession. nancy pelosi says that suggests wiped out all of the lost jobs from what she called policies andomic bush recession. after five years in office can you go to the voters in november mid terms and say this is still a bush recession we are coming out of after the has had nearly five

years? >> we didn't get into the worst economic recession since the great depression overnight and we are not going to dig out of it overnight. has been the case. because of the persistence and the american people and the efforts of this administration to support the a ton ofwe have mid progress. over six years we have finally areout of the hole if you counting private sector jobs. there is so much more work that be done to expand economic opportunity for everybody in the country. will be the president's top agenda.the domestic >> a chief executive at mozilla resigned because of controversy several years ago he gave a effortd dollars to an against gay marriage. criticism andnse

people wanting to boycott the firefox browser. the president himself in 2008 aen this person donated thousand dollars to that cause also was against same-sex marriage. does the white house think there should be tolerance on the issue? there should be other views heard? >> well, i certainly understand this has beenike in the news and why a lot of people are talking about it but in the going to be position to weigh in by the divisions made by a private company on this. michelle? was going to ask about jobs first. >> i should have. i have learned my lesson. learned my lesson. >> i mean after some really strong criticism over the last couple of weeks over ukraine you say the president has had a good week with the healthcare job numbers not a negative there. why do you think that the consistently don't

translate into positive poll numbers and does the administration feel like the message needs to change at all terms?nto mid we heard the speech at the university of michigan and the up andnt seemed fired feisty like a stump speechish. >> did he seem fired up and go?y to >> what is the message. >> oh, no. >> it was very -- back to that if we want. >> it was relaxed. but how do you shape the message get what you call a positive across to the public? doesn'tin our view it really seem to translate, does it? not sure i entirely agree with that assessment. the two things that you citedd anticipate would have a reaction on the polls only occurred three or four days ago. too early to assess. >> the numbers over four years. you are good at putting the media, out on social 8.9 million jobs but with the average -- would the average american know that?

and what do you do with the message from there? >> right. well, what our strategy is and what it has been since the will -- i think historians will evaluate our success at doing this although the president's reelection would be an important part of this. focusrategy has been to on expanding economic opportunity for everybody in this country. on thee particular focus middle class. that is something that animated the president's campaign in 2007. it was an important part of the policies that we put in place to recover from the urgent situation that was the worst since theownturn great depression. and over the long-term as that started to gain some traction the president has been focused on trying to build that momentum and make sure that opportunity that flows from that momentum flows to everybody and that is why the president so hard to pass

healthcare reform because it will provide greater stability and security to people all across the country. lower healthcare costs for small businesses. it will lower healthcare costs for the government and reduce our deficit. it will also, and most argue,ntly, many would expand access to quality and affordable health insurance to every single american. longer do people have to go to bed at night worryd that they one illness away from bankruptcy. that is one example of how the onsident's core focus expanding economic opportunity has animated his efforts to pass a domestic agenda that he believes in. on.that he campaigned and in terms of our strategy for the second term, our priorities same. the that is why you see the advocatingtrongly for equal pay and raising the to $10.10 and

strongly advocating for more investments in research and development. the kinds of things that will create jobs in the short-term but also lay a foundation for long-term economic strength. and ultimately that is what our domestic policy-making goal is and that is the reason the for office and that is what will continue to be our priority. okay? cheryl? >> thanks. home, the president yesterday signed a bill that public funding the party conventions and the supreme court ruled this week on lifting aggregate contribution limits. this puts a lot of control or happens of a few wealthy donors. is the president concerned there influence on fewer people and can he do anything to spread that out? say that not everybody would agree with that analysis. i know that there are some who have said that there is a chance

the aggregate donor limits could lead to a there are more admittedly wealthy donors who empowered. so i think there is some dispute about exactly what the conclusions will be. frankly, don't know what the result will be of the supreme court's election. to be seen.emains as a general matter let me just president does believe that special interests often using campaign contributions wield too much in washington, d.c. and that one of the reasons that he ran for president was because business as change usual in washington. so he advocated for a range of including some campaign finance proprosals that would do exactly that. the impact assessing

of this recent supreme court is just tooink it early to tell exactly what impact it will have. mike? get back to you. >> the honor of baseball. this is a little bit out of left field. >> nice, well done. >> the president if i recall orrectly on the trip back two the memorial for mandela i'm if it was going over or coming back. >> okay. >> saw president bush's artwork on his ipad. given the -- that the art is now being displayed publicly the you have any idea whether president obama has the artwork that is being displayed and whether he or the white house has any reaction to it and the world leaders being portrayed by the former occupant of this building? >> i don't know what the overlap is between the works exhibited works that were

bush'sed on president ipad. the only thing i know is that in obamae i heard president speak about president bush's a complimentary fashion. i think that has been the peoplen from a lot of that i have seen. people have been impressed at his naturalin ability but also the way that he has pursued an interest that i people didn't expect him to have. >> any specifics that the said?ent has >> i don't. let's move around a little bit. jarred? have anyhe white house guidance for what the president will fund raise on irrespective of mccutchen? kicking out people that already donated the maximum? will the president do the fundraisers? >> jarred, i know that you asked jay about this yesterday and i have anything new for you

on this. >> in the advance of the 2014 the white house or d.n.c. have guidelines for what the president will be doing? we do have i will make sure that you are among the first to know about that. the 541 people who donated the maximum in the cycle does the president feel like it is a good thing that they will have the ability to donate more to 2014 cycle? creative yeahtive -- a way of asking that question. i compliment you on your artistic ability as well. don't have anymore in terms of the practical impact of the court rule. if we get to a place where we have a specific policy change president's the fund raising activities, like i said, you will be among the first to know. okay. will would in the back. right there in the corner. this morningernet reporting to show two russian in africa talking in

some tongue in cheek terms about taking out the world. question is whether the u.s. administration had any prior knowledge of either the interception or leak of that? the have to admit, i saw reports about the call. but i know nothing about them read in thei reports. i'm not in a position to comment on them. question and if you want to consult with one of my national security council colleagues, we can look into that for you. >> the last time this was an victoriah respect to ashton.and layty >> it was color unfortunately. >> and you expressed concern being made public. do you express the same concerns about the calls when they are russians? >> yes. we believe that diplomats should be able to have those kinds of conversations. i hesitate to just weigh in here don't knowain, i anything about it beyond what i

have read about it in the newspaper. follow upwanted to with something kind of unrelated but go back to the cuban twitter issue. jay was saying this wasn't covert. discrete.his words, given the eastbound tensive efforts that were -- extensive efforts undertaken to conceal this program would you go as far secret?mit that it was >> no, i think i will just in a jay said on what yesterday if it was secret i wouldn't be willing to talk to right now.t >> can you talk about other similar programs underway elsewhere in the world? have any knowledge of them. if you wanted to check with u.s.a.i.d. they would probably talk about other programs underway across the globe. >> chris? >> josh, pardon me. to --ant >> it happens about once a time when i'm up here. you are the one today. wanted to follow up on

thes remarks yesterday that order with j.t. booker would be redundant. i understand -- predom to work calling for a retraction. >> i know this is something that you ask about quite a bit. the fact of the matter is our legislation that would codify into the law that individuals can't be discriminated against at work weause of who they love, strongly support that legislation and continue to urge congress to pass that legislation. and that is what our position is. that is our position not just it everyou ask about day but also because this is a strongly held view of the president of the united states. and he a priority of his continues to advocate for its passage along with a number of on the democratic side in congress for the passage of this legislation and that is will continue we

to do. >> does the white house also executive order of race ande basis fender is redundant under the existing civil rights law? familiar with the specific executive order but we can look into it for you. yourerms of the thrust of question the president's unwavering support for the not changed.as >> be more specific on the afghanistan elections. confident thatt the afghan security forces can of and keep at bay or whatever those who would bring chaos to the process as they continue to try to do? or some sort of plan b where the security forces might raise their profile during a long process? >> well, i -- there has been a responsibility for security to the afghan forces. is not goingover

to be rolled back. there are there continue to be on ground inps afghanistan. but they are there merely to as theythe afghans have -- are in the lead when it comes to the security or responsibility for their country. be truel continue to over the course of the elections and we are hopeful that these conductedwill be peacefully and in the spirit of the kind of democracy that the afghan people deserve. >> president still has in the afghan security forces. >> there is no doubt and i don't minimize the challenges that they face. there continues to be a pernicious element in afghanistan that i'm confident take extreme measures to elections.un the the american people and this administration have been theessed at the resolve of afghan fem people and courage ty so in a waynd to do that reflects the kind of

kind ofy and the influence the course of their country. we are supportive of their we stand with them. a -- josh?ave >> en deed, i do. all right. on monday the president will to prince george's county, maryland to host an event on the economy. event he will return to the white house where he will meet with the commander in chief and executive director of foreign wars. on tuesday, the president will att an event on the economy the white house. on wednesday, the president and two-daydy will begin a trip to the lonestar state. will attend events for the dscc and dccc in houston. more details regarding the president and first lady's travel to houston will be forthcoming. thursday, president and first

lady will travel to the lyndon johnson library in austin, texas. deliver a speech to commemorate rightsning of the civil act. return to washington, d.c. in the afternoon. on friday the president will travel to new york to deliver remarks at the national action network's 16th annual convention. it is my understanding that couple of other former presidents in attendance but i don't have any specific tell you about right now. >> on wednesday, is it one or two? my understanding two separate events. i don't know if it is two whichte events both of jointly benefit the two different committees or one committee.ted to one as we get the detailed we will get them to you on tuesday. >> at the fort hood service next week, would he be attending that? >> i appreciate the question,

peter. i don't have any changes to the schedule to announce at this point. but if there are any changes to the schedule we will make sure that you know. nothing at that point. changes we will let you know. >> thanks, josh. >> have >> next, the joint economic committee reviewing march jobs numbers, and the house armed services subcommittee meeting on intelligence. after that, a house meeting on passport fraud. >> the new march jobs report reveals the unemployed rate remains at 6.5%, adding 192,000 jobs with net growth in the private sector. following the release, the bureau of labor statistics commissioner testified before the committee. this is just over 45 minutes.

>> we will call the joint economic committee to order. vice-chairman club chart is not here yet, but -- chairman brady went to dallas to attend a funeral of ray hutchinson, his friend and also husband of the former senator kay bailey hutchinson. in his absence, he asked me to preside this morning. i was hoping we would have a bit of the minnesota mafia starting off the hearing. senator club which are will be here shortly. the recovery that began in june 2009 is now nearly five years old, yet and nbc news poll found 57% of americans still think the economy is in a recession.

this is likely due to persistent weakness in our labor market. the fact that nonfarm payrolls increased by 192,000 and the official unemployment rate remained unchanged at 6.7% last month is positive news, but it is simply not enough. i agree with janet yellen's recent assessment of our economy. in a speech on monday she said, there's been steady progress, but there is no doubt that the economy and the job market are not back to normal health. by several measures, the recovery from the most recent recession is far below the average over the last 50 years. here at the joint economic committee, we refer to that as the growth cap. since the recession ended in real gdp growth has accumulated june 2009, 9 percentage points below the average recovery. private payroll employment growth is more than 5 percentage points below recovery. real disposable income of a

family of four grew by $13,000 less than it did in average recovery. clearly our economy is , underperforming. we should be doing better than five consecutive years of below average. statistics number of indicating that our labor market is weaker than the official unemployment rate would suggest. more than 7 million people are working part-time, even though they would prefer full-time jobs. the falling unemployment rate has not sparked a significant increase in real wages. real average earnings are up by less than one percent since the recession ended. nearly 36% of the unemployed have been unemployed six months or longer. i will say that again, more than one third of the unemployed in this country have been unemployed for six months or more. the labor force participation rate has fallen to 63.2%. only half of this decline can be

attributable to democratic factors. some may blame the housing bubble for this persistent weakness. while the collapse of the housing bubble has some lingering effects it is not the , main factor, let alone the only factor. what is unique about this recovery is the combination of the economic policies the president pursued. to 2000, federal spending declined as a percent of gdp and the private sector created more than 37 million jobs. under president obama, federal spending reached a high of funny 4.4% of gdp, and remains above its postwar average. president kennedy and president reagan passed tax cuts. they encourage new business investment. this committee has shown a correlation between new business investment and the creation of new private sector. in contrast, president obama

increase taxes on successful small businesses, capital gains, and dividends. reagan and clinton took a balanced approach toward environmental, health, and safety regulations. the obama administration has pursued an aggressive agenda of regulation without weighing costs and benefits. presidents reagan, kennedy, and clinton have pursued international trade agreements. there are several trade opportunities on the rise and are proven job creators, but the administration has not fully engaged in this issue. there has been bipartisan support in the past. i am confident there is bipartisan support in congress for trade agreements today. presidents kennedy, reagan, and clinton did not burden people with the cost of retirement programs. in contrast, president obama has pushed forward the affordable care act on partyline votes. the health care law has increased uncertainty, raised taxes by nearly half $1 trillion, undermines the medical device industry that is so important to our home state of

minnesota, and is causing millions of americans to lose access to some of the health insurance plans they like. the policies america needs now are well known. stable prices, a gradual decline in federal spending, tax reform that encourages new business investment, balance regulation, and trade liberalization. it is the best way to strengthen our economy. it is time the administration work together with republicans and democrats. with that, i look forward to your testimony. senator club chart -- club chart -- klobuchar. >> thank you very much. sorry i was a few minutes late. i was in a dentist's chair. how much more fun to be here with all of you. it is great to be here. representative paulson is chairing the meeting. as well as the commissioner. good to see you again. i would like to welcome the assistant commissioner for the office of current employment analysis. i am pleased we are having this

hearing on the monthly employment situation. i think we know that these hearings give us an opportunity to dig deeper into the numbers. march, as we discussed, saw a gain of 192,000 nonfarm gains. all of the job gains in the private sector. something we like to hear. recent economic news has been encouraging. the economy has grown for 11 straight quarters. the 2.6% growth over the course of 2013 exceeds the gains of 2011 and 2012. manufacturing, the engine of innovation, it generates 90% of all patents. it has rebounded. adding more than 600,000 jobs since exporting has been another february 2010. bright spot. experts are growing. exceeding the pre-recession peak.

all of this is good news. we have a lot of room to go. we also have accomplished much in terms of the private sector adding jobs. i think back to the first half of 2009, when we shed more jobs in this country. we were losing jobs at a rate of 700,000 per month. we shed more jobs in one month than people in vermont. five years later, we are adding jobs. we have recorded 49 straight months of private sector job growth. ofh this month's gain 192,000 private sector jobs, we have regained all of the 8.8 million private sector jobs lost during the recession. this is the month that we finally got to where we were. now i hope we are going to expand from there. the number of unemployed workers per job opening has decreased from seven in july

2014,o 2.46 in january approaching the prerecession level of roughly two unemployed workers for every job opening. at 6.7% isyment rate down nearly a full 1%. the unemployment rate is better. 4.8% in the state of minnesota. for most workers, the job market is better today than it has been in years, but we all know the recovery has not reached everyone, particularly the long-term unemployed, those who have been out of work for more than six months. nearly 4 million americans have been out of work. this committee has discussed iods of joblessness to significant damage to our nation's productivity, and we are pleased the senate is moving forward to pass an extension of unemployment insurance. i hope the house will as well.

it will help people like linda her husband from little falls, minnesota, who lost their jobs and are both over 55. they need some support if they continue to look for work. linda wrote me, encouraging congress to extend unemployment. she wrote, i feel it be people who are jobless are being forgotten. we have to approach this issue from all sides. obviously there are openings in some parts of the country and certain industries, and we need to make sure the workers are trained to do those jobs. that is a major part of this. skills training. the second part of it is to continually increase our exports. the third part is to get more kids to go into math and science and engineering and technology. the next is immigration reform. it would be very helpful to the economy. decreasing the debt by $160 -- $70 in 10 years, 7 billion in 10 years according to the cbo. one of the things i will ask you is about the unemployment with veterans.

with young people, where we are as we move forward. we have made some improvement. with more to go. our focus is on long-term policies that create jobs in the short term. g the groundwork for prosperity in the long-term. i am very much looking forward to hearing about the numbers today. i want to get some analysis from all of you. thank you very much. >> thank you. with that erica groshen is the , 14th commissioner of the bureau of labor statistics. she was vice president of the statistics group at the federal reserve bank of new york, and has been a visiting assistant professor of economics at columbia university. she earned a phd in economics from harvard university. she earned a bachelor's degree in economics and mathematics from the university of wisconsin madison. i was a mathematics major as well. welcome back to the committee. you are recognized for five minutes.

>> thank you. mr. chairman and numbers of the committee thank you for the , opportunity to discuss the data we released this morning. employment rose by 192,000 in march, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 6.7%. employment increased in professional and business services health care, and mining , and logging. incorporating the revisions for january and february, we can increase employment by 37,000, monthly job gains have averaged 178,000. prior to march, employment growth averaged 183,000. all of the growth occurred in the private sector. which has now exceeded its

employment level in december 2007. that is when the most recent recession began. this is a milestone. the private sector lost 8.8 million jobs due to downturn. it has now gained 8.9 million jobs since the employment level of february 2010. however government employment is , down since the recession began. therefore total nonfarm , employment remains below its december 2007 peak. in march, implement in -- employment in professional and business services rose. it was in line with the prior 12 month average. within the industry, temporary help services added 29,000 jobs. health care employment rose by 19,000. with gains in ambulatory services.

in the prior 12 months, job growth and health care average 17,000 per month. most of the growth was occurring in ambulatory care. employment in mining and logging road by 7000 -- rose by 7000, led by gains in activities for mining. employment in food and services and drinking places continue to trend up in march. this industry has added 300,000 jobs. employment continued to trend up in construction in march. it is up by 151,000. employment in other major industries including , manufacturing, wholesale trade, and retail trade changed little in march. average hourly earnings for all employees on private payrolls edged lower by one cent. after rising by nine cents in february. over the past 12 months, average

hourly earnings have risen by 2.1%. in comparison, from february 2013 to february 2014, the consumer price index rose by 1.1%. in march, the average work week for all employment increased to 34.5 hours. offsetting a decline over the prior three months. turning now to our survey of households, the unemployment rate at 6.7% was unchanged in march. the number of unemployed persons remained at 10.5 million. the number of unemployed persons who had been jobless for 27 weeks or more was also little changed. these individuals accounted for 35.8% of the unemployed. both the civilian labor force and the total employment increased in march. the labor force participation rate and the employment

to population ratio changed little. among persons who were neither working nor looking for work in march, 2.2 million were classified as marginally attached to the labor force. this was little changed. the number of discouraged workers who believe that no jobs were available for them edged down over the year. at 698,000 in march. in summary, employment rose. by 192,000 in march, and the unemployment rate was unchanged. at 6.7%. my colleagues and i will be glad to answer your questions. >> thank you. let me start. federal reserve chairwoman janet yellen mentioned earlier this week when she gave a speech , she listed signs of weakness in the u.s. labor market. she indicated that conditions were worse than the unemployment rate would suggest.

chairwoman yellen specifically mentioned meager increases in the labor and compensation and average of little more than 2% per year since the recession. the large number of part-time workers, more than 7 million who want full-time work. many more than one would expect when you have a 6.7% unemployment rate. could you explain why the unemployment rate does not convey the same extent of weakness as these other labor market indicators? >> the employment situation contains the release that we release today. it contains over 1000 numbers. all of them give you a different perspective on what is going on in the labor market. there is no one number that will convey all facets of what is the largest market in the country.

it is really important for educated users like yourselves to look at many different measures. that is what janet yellen has done. some part of the answer to the question lies in not only what the numbers have been doing, but how they are compared to what is normal for the economy. that is all the preface. we have had a lot of improvement lately. since the recession was over, not fully returned to pre-recession levels. so, for example, the number of people who are part-time for economic reasons i have had -- who would like a full-time job but do not have one or had their hours cut, has come down

dramatically since the recession began. but it is still much higher than prerecession levels. this is a measure of underutilization of labor in the economy. that continues to be high. the unemployment rate is still much higher than its prerecession levels. >> do you have thoughts on why those indicators might be weak? >> i guess we are -- we are more about counting the way things are. than on dividing this up. rut we know that the labo market is large and complex. what happens when you have this big decline in aggregate demand is that this underutilization of

labor goes into many different ways. it goes into people working fewer hours. it works into people being unemployed. it spreads throughout the labor market and it takes a while for all of these different parts of the labor market to return. >> maybe you could explain the linkage that exist between private investment and economic growth on the one hand, and then you have labor demands and employment. and the labor force participation rate. >> well, we know we have had a ,ot of, during the recession the biggest hit in the recession immediately was a big increase in job destruction. we had a huge number of layoffs of workers. at the same time, we had a

slowing in hiring. we now returned to normal in the job destruction rates by most measures, but we have not returned to normal in job creation rates. job creation rates have not been high enough to absorb all of the slack that has remained in the labor market. >> is it fair to say that the slower economic growth is the root cause of the problems? the unemployment rate has been declining because more people are disengaged from the labor market? >> going to be labor force participation, the estimates are about half of the decline in the labor force participation is due to demographic factors. that would not be associated with the slowdown. half of the remaining part, and

this is what we have done largely at the federal reserve. ls,her than at the b estimates are that half the remaining part is due to behavior of various demographic groups. for example, young people enrolling in college. staying in high school longer. theirno longer increasing labor force participation. the remaining quarter seem to be associated with a downturn in the economy. there is an assumption that as the economy improves, that part will generally go away. we will see a slower decline in labor force participation. so it is not that much of a decline by these estimates. due to the slower economy. >> thank you, commissioner. >> thank you very much.

welcome. we have talked about how there have been some improvements over the last few months. we have looked at our weekly and monthly report. they have been affected somewhat by the cold weather. did that have a negative impact the last few months, as i look at 10 more inches of snow for minnesota this morning? >> yes. we see some evidence that is consistent with the weather and -- having an impact on the last few months. particularly in hours. we have now in march for covered most of the decline in hours that we have seen. that is the clearest part. the impact on job creation is harder. >> i think it had a very temporary effect.

the recession was especially tough on younger workers. we know that. they have faced high levels of unemployment. older workers have faced longer durations of unemployment. what is the unemployment rate for workers who are 20 to 24 years old? how about the long-term unemployment rate? >> the unemployment rate for 20 to 24-year-olds declined over the year from 13.3% to 12.2% in march, and of those people in that age range, 31% were employed. >> you may not have this right now, but what it was previous to the recession, the year before the recession, that age group? >> much lower. see if i got it. >> we will get it. it clearly has to be a focus. older workers, what is the rate for workers 55 and older? >> 4.7%.

>> did that improve over last year? >> yes. it was 5.5% a year ago. >> did you know how that was pre-recession? >> no. >> women now have more about 500,000 more jobs since the recession began, while men -- is -- still need to add one million jobs to return to the december 2007 level. is that right? >> yes. >> they called it the man -cession? i still think we have an issue, and i touched on this with the long-term unemployed, and issue with some of the wages that people make, even though they have jobs they are not able to support their families. and one of the ways we know works is education. the two-year or four-year college degree makes a big difference. what is the unemployment rate for college graduates now?

>> ok, let's see. let me see if we got -- ok. >> that is ok, you can give it to me later. i am just trying, i would always ask this every month to find out where we were. >> here we go, unemployment rates for college graduates. 3.7%. >> ok, and do you know what it is for high school or people who did not complete high school? >> 7.5% for high school graduates with no college, and 11% for those without a high school diploma. >> have there been any trends on that over the last two years? >> all of these have been declining since the recession was over. >> how about the veteran unemployment rate? we have had a focus across the country on private employers focusing on trying to employ

some of our post-gulf war ii veterans and make sure we are getting people employed that left, especially while the numbers when they left, the numbers were high, and the recession happened, and then we had trouble getting them employ. -- getting employed. where is that for veterans? >> focusing on the unemployment rate for gulf war veterans, that is 6.9%. >> do you know where was before? >> last month it was 9.2%. this is a huge drop, all these drops could be that these numbers are volatile. >> i was meeting more over the long term it is improving. for many years, it is around the same as our nation's unemployment rate. that is a big shift. for a long time it was a number of percentage points above the nation's unemployment rate. this is some of the best news of the report. thank you very much. i think i am out of time.

i had one last question. rural areas, is there a difference in unemployment numbers between rural and urban? >> yes, there is. and i think i have that. ok. yes, the unemployment rate for urban areas was 7.5%, but for rural areas it was 6.7%, so lower in the rural areas -- >> than urban areas. surprising. thank you very much. appreciated. >> you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you very much. there is a purported education or skills job gap, and it's just -- it is suggested it it poses a hindrance to employment and may relate to a decline in labor force participation rates in the employment to population ratio. when the economy is growing at a

healthy pace and demand for labor is strong, our skill differentials is as great as a factor as getting a job offer as when there is an excess of labor? perhaps that is a subjective question -- it is, but if you have any idea, i would appreciate it. >> generally speaking, the lower skilled people have bigger increases in their unemployment rate during recessions than higher skilled people. the wages of higher skilled people and employment of higher skilled people are preserved much more than lower skilled people during recessions. >> using that suggestion, do you believe we have a long-term structural problem with in terms of what senator klobuchar referred to in terms of matching the skills up with education, and, therefore, is it something

that is structural in a way that we have to respond to differently than we are, and are many of these people permanently displaced? do you see some change in that,u see some change in and there's a demand in a growing economy? whatever you think. >> sure. generally speaking they don't have data about the specific skills required for job vacancies employers are trying to fill. however, we would say that from what we can see, there doesn't appear to be a larger-than-normal mismatch between skilled employers seeking and thoughs jobseekers have. one of the reason whys we say this is because we have not seen an increase in wages. and that's what you would -- that's what you would expect if

you had a big, sudden mismatch in what employees -- what employers were demanding and skills that workers had. you see an increase in wages for those work horse had those skills. we're not seing that. >> other things could be, the reason for that as well. you talk about basing supply and demand. but wage growth in general has been relatively stagnant in some areas even in decline. >> that's right. if had you some employers who were -- a group of employers who really wanted to get a certain -- workers with a certain skill, you would expect that they would start hiring -- they would start poaching each other's workers and in response employers would raise their wages to retain them. >> perhaps this is -- thank you. perhaps this has been asked but do you think there's been some

conversation about there's -- population in our country not well prepared for retirement. 50-year-olds, a littler, not prepared. with see elderly people who might otherwise wish to be retired or not engaging in the labor force, and there's also a suggestion there's a displacement because of that for younger people who might enter that saying workforce for those same jobs. can you talk about that, if you think that's the case or what that may look like on the ground? >> the increase in labor force participation amongst older an important to be part of that is the jobs that they're in are increasingly ones

that one can do later in life. they're less likely to be blue collard jobs where the physical demands become difficult for eople at older ages. so seen as an important factor in the increasing participation -- >> wouldn't the same jobs be the one as people enterering the workforce would also be likely to take? the sort of crowding out that people think about, it's not internationally hasn't been seen as that much of a factor in whether or not you have overall wage employment growth. usually when you have a growing economy, then you can accommodate all of the workers. >> so growth helps everyone? >> growth helps everyone. >> thank you. >> thank you. mr. cummings recognized for five minutes. >> thank you very much.

commissioner, the unemployment rate, while the unemployment rate among african-americans had been declining last month, it ncreased to 12.4%. why did the rate of unemployment for of an americans increase in march. do you have any idea? do the numbers tell us? >> while it did increase -- sorry, point estimate of it went up. this is based on a small enough sample unfortunately that it's not statistically significant. that this is st noise around a high level. clearly the unemployment rate for african-americans is very high. but this particular pick up is probably noise -- tick up is probably noise although it will take a couple months to see if it sticks or goes higher. >> when we look at the situation

th latinos, we see the unemployment rate has gone down significantly. is that accurate? >> not in this particular month. >> but overall? >> but it's been -- the change over the years, decline of 1.3 percentage points, where as the decline for black and african-americans is .8 of a percentage point. >> so today's job report shows that in march the unemployment rate for hispanic workers is 7.9%, is that right? >> that's right. >> and 5.2 percentage is more than the peak? >> let's see. for -- >> the peak was 16.8? >> we have -- yes, for hispanics, i have a decline of 4.3% since january '09. >> that's significant, is it not?

>> yes. >> do we have -- do we know why that is? do we have -- do the numbers tell us anything? >> this is consistent with what's been happening with all -- throughout the labor market. and since they had a particularly large increase in unemployment over the course of the recession, then you would expect them to have a larger decrease when -- when the lrk markets returns to normal. >> i was at the university of maryland law school, which is where i went to school, and they were telling me that law schools throughout the country are having less and less people apply. and they said there were reasons for that. one being people don't have money. and two, they don't see the jobs. do we have any -- i always ask this question when you all come in somebody watching this right now that doesn't have a job,

what would you tell them? are there certain areas of the country that are doing well? what areas might one graduated from high school getting ready for regular college want to go into, because i think more and more people are concerned that hen they get out of college, they won't have a job. based upon the numbers -- i know you don't give a lot of advice -- but just putting the numbers out there, what would you say to young people who are trying to figure out their way and who don't want to go back and live with their mother and father after they get out of college? >> the main thing, main advice i would give them is to get a good education. if there's one thing that is under people's control and has a ry important role in

determining people's unemployment rate is how much education they have. that would be the main thing. and then the choice of industries makes a difference. we project that occupations and industries related to health care will add the most new jobs ver the next 10 years. and we think social assistance jobs, we project them to add nearly a third of all new jobs, 15.6 million jobs between now and 2022. we also actually project large gains from construction jobs. primarily reflect recovery from the very severe downturn that we had in construction jobs. >> are there any regions of the country you would tell them they might want to travel to or -- >> of late, the regions that

have had the most job growth have been in the south and the west. so, for instance, the average -- let's see. change in employment in the south has been adding about 49,000 jobs per month from january 9 to february 14 and the west is adding 32,000 jobs per month. so these are the areas where we see most of the job growth regionally. >> thank you very much. >> you're welcome. >> the answer for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you commissioner for being here today. to provide what i view as a positive report with fair amount of evidence that things are getting back on track after a winter slowdown. and there was very good news in

the numbers you reported, not that there's not a lot for us to do but certainly good things to build upon. my questions keeping with my friend and colleague's theme of -- more kind of direct questions as opposed to advice. is trying to dissegregate some of the data. do you compile any analysis of how jobs breakdown between low, middle and high-skilled in terms of their profiles? those are subjective categorizations but do you disaggregate any of your data along those lines? if so, can you observe any rends that are relevant? > let's see. i am looking for --

>> while you're looking for that, i will add another question, which is related, which is the concern i have is obviously the headline unemployment number and kind of subsidiary numbers that flow from that are largely affected by choices people are making about the type of jobs they want to pursue. do you compile any data about trends and the standard of living of average jobs which would feekively be -- effectively be aggregation of the low, middle and high skill level if you will. >> yes. let me track that. o we -- let's see. >> if it's easier, you can get me the information after the fact. >> well, we have been finding the largest over-the-year

employment increases have come in professional and business services. and these -- this industry has rell tvly high earnings and that's -- >> high skills. >> and high skills, right. >> those are growing? >> yes. >> but the next highest job gains occurred in the industry which has the lowest average hourly earnings, leisure and hospitality. we're having growth at both ends of the spectrum. >> would that lead us to conclude we continue to see this kind of barbell job creation where we're creating high-skilled jobs at a decent race, reflecting kind of the company's -- country's competitiveness position in industries like technology, medical devices, et cetera, et cetera and income driven by those high-skilled jobs is creating low-skill jobs but we continue to see hollowing out, if you will, with the middle-skill jobs. would data suggest that is continuing deerks sell rating or

accelerating? continuing, y it's certainly by industry. it's a little more mixed by occupation. >> got it. and related point, you talked about this ratio that's kind of -- or framing the job over job n rate creation rate. the impact of technology on the workforce is obviously fairly profound as it relates to those two statistics. job creation rate and job destruction rate. obviously technology is destroying a lot of jobs and technology creating a lot of jobs. do you have a view as to what that ratio is based on technology and is it changing? in other words, is technology creating more jobs relative to the number it's destroying or is it going the other way?

o you have a view on that? >> the simple question is by and large, within any net change we observe for the economy as a whole, the amount of turn in the u.s., dynamic u.s. economy that we have is very high. so we will for every job, every net job we create, we probably destroy eight or nine jobs and e have -- and we have a huge number of -- at the same time we have a huge number of jobs created, nine gross jobs for every -- > got you. getting back to one of the questions you had, the stem jobs, if we want to focus on those, have grown much faster

than total employment during this time. they grew at 5.1% between 2009 and 2013, while total employment grew by just 1.5%. so certainly or demand for stem jobs is much faster than for other jobs. >> we may follow up with some more specific questions on some of that. thank you. >> thank you, commissioner, for taking the time to be here with your team and testifying this morning. i know senator klobuchar and i are getting ready to head back to several inches of snow in minnesota. we thank everyone for being here this morning. committee is adjourned.

>> after of release of the jobs numbers for march, republican house speaker john boehner ssued a statement saying -- and democratic senate majority leader harry reid said -- >> next, a house arms services subcommittee hearing on intelligence activities. after that house 0 hearing on passport fraud. then house majority leader eric cantor and minority whip steny hoyer discuss next week's u.s. ouse schedule.

>> mr. speaker, an i.r.s. act testified under oath the taxpayers who fight back are told, and i quote, sue us! go right ahead, sue us and prove that we are wrong! think about it. after our taxpayers are hit with unnecessary tax bills, heavy enough to cause a hernia for the jolly green giant, they're told if you don't like it, sue us. this sent hearsay. this is is not rumor. this is an exact quote of an i.r.s. act who also said, beware, congress, the i.r.s. will tell you these are isolated incidents. that's not true. this is in fact standard policy. beam me up, i say it's time for congress to shove these illegal tactics right up the assets of the i.r.s. the i.r.s. has been created by congress. congress caused this problem,

congress must solve this problem and congress must change the burden of proof in the tax case or else the i.r.s. will keep saying, prove it, sucker. prove it. prove we're wrong. i yield back all of the balance of these illegal tactics. >> gentleman's time has expired. >> more highlights from 35 years of house floor coverage on our facebook page. c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago and brought to you today as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. >> next, intelligence officials appearing before a house armed services subcommittee regarding the 2015 defense authorization request for intelligence activities. the president's budget includes 45.6 billion dollars in funding for national intelligence programs. among the witnesses testifying, defense intelligence agency lieutenant general michael flynn and n.s.a. deputy director richard legend. here are their opening statements. the rest of the hearing was

closed behind closed doors. his is 30 minutes. you can come to order. today is the first of two events the subcommittee is hosting related to the fiscal year 2015 defense intelligence budget. today we will hear from the undersecretary of defense of intelligence as well as heads of n.i.a. and nga. next weak we will hold a hearing with senior officers from the military services plus special operations command. armed services committee continues to be focused on making sure our watt fighters have the best possible intelligence support. d.i.a., n.s.a. and n.g.a. are each combat-support agencies and we asked them to describe today their efforts to support current military operations as well as to help d.o.d. anticipate and

prepare for future conflicts. each is part of the intelligence community and has responsibilities to both the larger u.s. government and department of defense. that is a delicate balance and both are critical to our nation. over the past year we have been presented with numerous additional challenges, whether it's the current crisis in ukraine, ongoing military operations against terrorist groups or mitigating the most serious compromise of classified information in u.s. history, intelligence and protection of that intelligence continues to be one of the most important parts of our national defense. let me yield to the distinguishing ranking member for any opening comments he would like to make. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank our witnesses for being here today 0. especially chairman thornberry for orking and putting together this very important hearing. i hope today's discussion will be both productive and constructive as we continue to

exercise this subcommittee's new oversight spoments relating to the intelligence portfolio for which the armed services committee has responsibilities for. first and unfortunately foremost, of course, i continue to be concerned about the implications and ramifications to the department from the leaks of the n.s.a. contractor. i have read the information review task force report. it was an essential assessment and very sobering one indeed. however, i would like to get a better idea of what we know now and what we don't know and what we're going to do about it. after all, as d.n.i. clapper testified before the intelligence committee, the vast majority of the information comprised has nothing to do with n.s.a. surveillance and collection but instead has dire impacts directly on dod.

i'm very concerned about the damage assessment and practical effects of these leaks on our men and women in uniform who are at risk each day. just as important is the way forward on mitigation. we certainly don't need to scrap every operations plan but we need to look at shifting some department priority and policies and i appreciate you speaking to the magnitude of what we will have to face in the coming years. i'm also interested in the progress of the defense clandestine service and its ability to meet strategic efense priorities. i know it is not new to the i.a. but under general flynn's direction and that of secretary vickers has enhanced its capabilities and looking forward to getting an update on that. there have been growing pains but i strongly believe the

d.o.d. must maintain a clandestine human capability, which i have to say is sometimes challenged in the intelligence committee. how is d.c.s. progressing on improving capabilities, refining its requirements, moving officers into places where they can be most ee -- effective and integrating with others in the intelligence community. for a budget perspective, money above the budget control act levels, the bipartisan budget act was given back largely to the services. this points a particular strain on agencies like yours. we will have to take some risk but there's a breaking point. as your partners on the little, we would like to help you avoid that breaking point and manage your risk wherever possible. we would also appreciate the benefits of your perspective on particular cuts and other parts of department that can impair why are active -- activities.

finally, and fittingly, given today's hearing on the q.d.r. -- yesterday's hearing on the q.d.r., i would like to discuss the overall defense strategy of vocations to intelligence. when department looks out over the next decade, is the defense intelligence apparatus correctly postured to meet our operational priorities? d is it correctly aligned to cover the globe, operate where we need and operate to sustain our counterterrorism operations? for, that mr. chairman, i would like to thank you for holding this important hearing. to our witnesses thank you for your appearance today and service to the nation. i certainly look forward to continuing a productive relationship as we work together to ensure the best intelligence posture for the nation. thank you, i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. i want to welcome our witnesses, dr. michael vickers undersecretary of defense for intelligence. general michael flynn, intelligence agency, miss

director long, and mr. richard leggett, the deputy director of the national scuft agency. we will start with unclassified opening statements from each of our witnesses. and reconvene in a classified setting next door, where each witness will be able to make brief classified remarks ollowed by members' questions. >> chairman, distinguished members of the subcommittee, i appreciate the opportunity to come before you today to discuss the fiscal year 2015 budget requests for defense intelligence. i'm especially pleased to be here with mike, tisch and rick. betty sapp, our director of the national reconnaissance office testified yesterday before the strategic forces subcommittee. while the unclassified nature of our opening remarks keeps us from discussing in detail many

aspects of defense intelligence, we look forward to meeting in closed sessions to discuss these topics more fully. intelligence is major search of u.s. advantage. it informs wise policy and enables precision operations. it's our front line of defense. the challenges we face, however, increasing and becoming more complex and our resources are declining. it's imperative, therefore, we make the best use of available resources given the challenges we confront. as usdi, i'm the program executive for the military intelligence program and have oversight over the related programs that comprise what we call the battle space awareness portfolio. the department's fy-2015 budget request for base appropriations is 13.3 billion, which does not include overseas contingencies operations funds. the portfolio includes significant additional resources. defense intelligence collectively enencompasses the

defense portion of the national intelligence program, the m.i.p. and b.a. portfolio. my close relationship with d.n.i. clapper enables d.o.d. and intelligence community to work seamlessly to manage resource and apply our intelligence capabilities in pursuit of our national security objectives while avoiding duplication of effort. we have five defense intelligence operational priorities -- countering terrorism, particularly countering the threat posed by al qaeda. countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and associated delivery systems. countering the actions of oppressive governments against our people, such as in syria. countering state-on-state aggression and countering cyber threats. to address the intelligence gaps that exist within these operational priority areas, we're focused on enhancing defense intelligence capabilities in five areas.

enhancing global coverage, improving our ability to operate in n.i. access, aerial denial or a2ad environments. sustaining counterproliferation capabilities. continuing to develop our cyber operations capabilities and strengthening our counterintelligence capabilities and reforming our security clearance all four of us are committed to working with congress to continuing to deliver the intelligence advantage to our war fighters. i give for the subcommittee to you for the chance to address the subcommittee. thorne, and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the men and women of the defense intelligence agency,