republicans from western state to have federal lands transferred to state alexander, and shepherding this control, and congress men mark spokane bill this morning. i also appreciate ranking member wasserman schultz whose institutional knowledge of the agencies in this measure is really unmatched. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for an additional two minutes. mr. bishop: both chairman cole and ranking member wasserman schultz were greatly aided by host: good morning. the excellent staff. the u.s. economy came near to liz, chuck, jennifer, and stalling in the first quarter of solanda. i look forward to supporting the 2014. bill and doing all that i can to government officials cited bad ensure swift passage by the full weather for the economic freeze. house of representatives. thank you. i yield back. a measure to raise the minimum the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady reserves the wage failed to get a vote in the balance of her time. the gentleman from oklahoma is senate. recognized. mr. cole: thank you, madam we will begin their with the chairman. economy and your ideas for i yield myself such time as i may consume. spurring growth. the chair: without objection. mr. cole: i was tempted to actually yield my friend, mr. democrats, (202) 585-3880. bishop, additional time he was being so kind to all of us on both sides of the aisle. republicans, (202) 585-3881. i genuinely want to thank my

friend who is a very valuable member of our committee. and all others, again, someone who's always (202) 585-3882. thoughtful, always helpful, always works in a bipartisan manner. you saw it on this floor yesterday when he and chairman we will begin with the culberson delivered their bill headlines. in a very bipartisan and very this is the front page of "the professional manner. he does the same thing in our financial times." committee. i just want to thank my friend and reserve the balance of my the u.s. economy came near to time. the chair: the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. stalling in the first quarter. the gentlelady from florida is recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: madam chair, at this time i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady from florida yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: without objection. mr. cole: once again thank my friend, my working partner in this, miss. in this area she's an absolute expert without peer in this house. has been enormously helpful to me. again i want to thank the members of the committee. i want to thank all the staff, frankly, both sides of the aisle, all the personal offices,

they have just been absolutely first rate. as i observed i think in one of our committee meetings, if the current chairman of the democratic national committee and the former chief of staff of the republican national committee can work this well together, then surely all things are possible in this universe. it's been a pleasure to work >> the financial times goes on with my friend. i look forward to continuing that collaboration as we go forward. with that, madam chairman, i payrollhat the private yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from oklahoma yields back. all time for general debate has processor says the u.s. added expired. pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute 220,000 private jobs in april. rule. no amendments to the bill shall be in order except those printed in house report 113-426. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent. shall not be subject to more to come on the fed as they amendment, and shall not be

subject to demand for division of the question. it is now in order to consider continue to watch the economy and decide what to do next. amendment number 1 printed in we are getting your thoughts on house report 113-426. ways to spur economic growth. what do you think the ways are? for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? less regulation? the government stimulus? mr. nugent: i have an amendment at the desk. we want to hear your thoughts. the chair: amendment number 1, printed in house report number 113-426, offered by m nugent of thiswashington times" has florida. the chair: pursuant to house story. resolution 557, the gentleman from florida, mr. nugent, and a people whoirds of member opposed, each will signed up for health care control five minutes. coverage, have paid first month the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. nugent: madam chairman, i premiums. truly appreciate this and i appreciate your service. madam chairman, my amendment is simple, it would end the practice of members leasing vehicles on the taxpayers' dime. i'm not just convinced this is a necessary use of taxpayer money, neither are my constituents that i represent. we are asking agencies throughout the federal government to use their funding

carefully and cut out unnecessary nice-to-have things. we ought to apply the same that on health care this standard to ourselves. morning. in many ways we have done an excellent job of doing that. on the minimum wage vote in the funding the house of senate, "the pittsburgh representatives has been cut since republicans took the post-gazette." majority by over 14%. we have cut our own m.r.a.'s and the attempt to lift the hourly committee funds. we have prosen our own pay. pay is scuttled. unfortunately, the vehicle lease program isn't consistent in that effort. 54-42.e was it's not to say some members who lease vehicles aren't doing it responsibly. they are. and they have good reason. congress does little to resolve vexing issues, takes lengthy unfortunately, i think the line of appropriate in terms of leasing vehicles has been breaks, takes vote on bills blurred by others. members of congress driving around the capitol in luxury designed to showcase partisan positions that have little or no vehicles financed by taxpayers, passing and everyone they represent isn't exactly the image we want to portray to the american people. knows it. especially when many of the jim, you are up first. americans are struggling just to get by. the vehicle lease program in its the only way to spur current form is simply out of touch with the economic reality economic growth is to stick in a of what our american brothers

caret. and sisters face. giving taxwe have -- therefore we can ensure all members of congress are using the program responsibly. cuts to the wealthy, they have i believe we ought to halt it kept it. entirely. the senate to their credit, one of the few times i agree with the senate, already has barred better wages, better benefits, or we will take your money in taxes. its members from -- barred its ity would much rather give members from leasing vehicles with public money and i think to their employees than to the it's time we do the same. government. they are like cocaine addicts. to be clear, my amendment is straightforward. it says the c.a.o. may not make giving them more, all they do was want more. any payments from the members you give it to your employees, you make the economy better, or for the leasing of a vehicle. my amendment excludes short-term we will take your money in vehicle rentals, mobile district taxes. offices that are often necessary that is all they understand. resources used in serving our the guy in san diego that owns the clippers had the unmitigated constituents. but having basically a personal gall to say, i give them cause, car entirely paid for by i give them money. taxpayers should no longer be no you don't. allowed. i urge adoption of my amendment you pay a wage for a service, and i reserve the balance of my sir. time. james in bristol, the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma seek tennessee. independent. believe that less recognition? mr. cole: i'd like to claim the

time in opigs. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: i want to begin by government interference with thanking my friend. companies and just let people we serve together object the rules committee. it's very seldom i would start their own companies and disagree with my friend who not just keep the government out of only has a distinguished record but a distinguished record in law enforcement. it, out of trying to control it. let me make it clear. i'm quite content to allow the body to work its will on this just let business thrive. host: why do you think that? matter. i appreciate my friend bringing it forward. i think it's important for us to discuss. i had not really thought about tennessee,n here in this a great deal until i saw my we have places that are coming friend's amendments. i don't lease a vehicle through my office at all. into tennessee and jobs that are although we discussed it, looked at it, never seemed to be encouraging growth. appropriate or make sense for us. we do have 63 members, however, who do do this practice. the average cost of the vehicle is $589. i can't tell you that i have we don't want the unions down taken a survey of all 63, but i here interfering with our lives. have talked to a few just sort these people want jobs and their of tell me what your reasoning .reating jobs down here is. it's pretty diverse, but you could break it into two or three categories. first some cover eexceptionally long periods of -- exceptionally news anden to the

you'll hear about car factories large districts and they find moving down here into tennessee. this the most cost-effective way host: why is that though? to actually cover it. i mean even to the point of less regulation? saying, as one member said, i go less interference? through rough terrain to reach remote areas. the right to work issues? i need a vehicle that, frankly, the unions? caller: all of the above, honey. is quite moreau bust than members of my staff have or that i even have personally sometimes host: sandra in massachusetts. to reach some of my constituents. i thought that was a pretty independent. caller: good morning. impressive reason. others find it much more cost-effective than paying and reimbursing for mileage. siemens has invested $600 i think the core thing here is trust the member to make the million into all of our high schools and colleges and decision. i think an important point here universities in massachusetts is to note that we are not going to save any money. this comes out of the members' and in pennsylvania. representational allowance as it is. there's not a real savings here. and it's all publicly disclosed for items that will spur jobs of so members take some year.$100,000 per your -- considerable risk if they do this, have to explain it to their constituents. at the end of the day i don't want to micromanage individual warren buffett bought three members and how they spend the factories and are down. money which we allot them -- in our town. through this bill. with that i understand my good in ourhaving a paint job friend would like to say

something. i yield the balance of the time city. i don't know what is going on, but it is big-time. i have toe my friend and ranking member. the chair: the gentlelady has three minutes remaining. the factories are being brought up. she's is recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i also rise in opposition to my we have factories down here up seeing yang. host: private company florida colleague's amendment investment? invested 600ns which seeks to dictate to other members how to spend their office budget. it's important to note that i also do not lease a vehicle. million dollars into the state the bill already sets a limit on of massachusetts. host: you think that is the best way? what members can spend on caller: no. vehicle leases to ensure that costs are appropriately controlled. what they did was charity. the nugent amendment would go further and prevent long-term vehicle leases unless they are million worth of classified as mobile district offices. the problem with the gentleman for high schools and from florida's amendment is the same we have had with similar colleges to start, so that kids amendments in the past that sought to restrict or eliminate could get a start. members' use of funds for their office budgets. we have members to represent entire states or large they can make up to $100,000 per year because it is going into geographic areas. to remove transportation options for members trying to factories. effectively represent their this is what went on. constituents force as one-size-fits-all approach to serving our congressional districts. we know that's not reasonable has bought up nor does it make sense.

three factories in our city. the house makes statements of on top of that, our city is disbursements available to the being painted. public so that our constituents it.: we got can check up on the purchases that he we make. each member has to answer to his william in east brunswick, new jersey. democratic caller. or her constituents if they spend it appropriately or if what are your thoughts? they make purchases that are at odds with the sensibilities of , i am notght now those that sent the member to office. we don't need to dictate to each other how we can most working. effectively do our jobs. with that, madam chair, i urge the defeat of this [indiscernible] well-intentioned but misguided host: you are unemployed? amendment. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. caller: yes, since february. the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: yields back the are they going to have any kind balance of his time. of extensions? host: of unemployment benefits? and the gentleman from florida has a minute and a half remaining. caller: that has not happened mr. nugent: madam chair, i do appreciate the comments of more yet in the senate. senior members of this house. there is a story in "politico" obviously i have been here three today. years and i do appreciate their senator dean heller, who has comments. been pushing for this issue. but i go back to this, think about this. the senate, they represent each

this is the headline. senator represents their whole the prospect of getting state. they gave up that privilege a long-term unemployment benefits while back because it didn't dim each day. make sense. but think about this. today, members of congress can lease lexuses, b.m.w.'s, senator dean heller sees hope. infinities, mercedes all fall he is a republican from nevada. within the guidelines. sessionsrned to pete not all do that, but does that send a message to our folks back to help push through something, home that this is the right way to do it? anything that revives benefits that expired in december. that m.r.a. that was discussed, this also covers all the wear and tear on the car, it covers the fuel, there is no expense the push has consumed the senator for the past four that is spared in regards to covering that. versus the mileage reimbursement months. if i use my own car, which i do. it's not to try to diminish or hurt any member. it really is to bring us in compliance the same thing the senate has done. it's about reasonable use of the dollars the taxpayers give us. that is the latest from once again i will tell you that i agree with most of what my

"politico" on that. good friends have said. you think it is the long-term i disahe gree on this one. unemployed? i truly believe it's time for this house to move forward. ok, we cannot hear you. limit itself with regards to these types of acquisitions and lewis in georgia. republican. purchases in spending. thank you very much. i yield back. you have to turn that tv down. the chair: the gentleman's time let me put you on hold. has expired. the question is on the amendment john in lancaster, pennsylvania. offered by the gentleman from florida. so many as are in favor say aye. independent. caller: good morning. those opposed, no. need to do is rebuild in the opinion of the chair, the the industrial base. noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. nugent: madam chair, i ask but that means is that instead for a recorded vote. government money and the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida will be postponed. rebuilding highways or paying out unemployment, just begin to rebuild the factories. it is now in order to consider amendment number 2 printed in host: how do you do that? house report 113-426. money: you take the same for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from california seek you are taking to build highways recognition? and you build factories. ms. speier: madam chairwoman, i have an amendment at the desk. host: you do it with government the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2,

money? caller: yes. printed in house report number 113-426, offered by ms. speier that is a china did it. of california. they just ordered building the chair: pursuant to house factories in putting people to work. resolution 557, the gentlewoman thank you. from california, ms. speier, and ont: let me update you a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the infrastructure spending. gentlewoman from california. also a story from "politico." ms. speier: thank you. i rise today because many "washington's next class" -- americans think congress has cliff" is what politico is unchecked power. they think he we know how to make laws, but don't know how to follow them. they think of us not as the saying. house of representatives but the house of hipocrites. i have spent a lot of time here on the floor speaking about sexual harassment and the epidemic of rape in the military and on college campuses. it's just as important that we bring the same scrutiny to our own house. the american people expect us to conduct ourselves in a manner befitting the responsibilities and duties that we hold as members of congress.

we will go to joseph in houston, not like we are freshmen in a frat house. it is an embarrassment to this texas. democratic caller. institution that some members caller: good morning. have sex with teenage pages. and others have groped and bill clintonto use inappropriately touched their staff members. this behavior is illegal, administration as an example of unacceptable in the private sector and it is illegal and .aking growth throughout unacceptable here. this is not a democratic issue. this is not a republican issue. this is a house issue. just recall former congressman there is always growth when they bob finished their session. i would like for the republican who was on talking about growth as far as just leaving people alone -- i would like to see a ideas.f the republican we do not have a history of

-- of making the assertion that they do. when george w. bush left office, it was a catastrophe. it was a crisis when he got finished. whenever you hear the republican get up on television or anywhere talking about small government, we do not have a history of that eating successful. we do not have a model. if somebody has one, i would like to see it. host: we will take that point. josh in indianapolis. republican. caller: good morning. i have one thought about obamacare. the one thing that sold me on it. i'm a republican voter normally. , beingonal experience

fearful of leaving an employer because of losing health insurance because i'm the sole provider for my family. the one thing about obamacare i really like is that it seems like it will free people up to be more mobile. you will not have that fear factor of leaving a place, perhaps starting a new business. you have some innovation that is going to take you sitting in your home if you -- office for a few months. what do you think that does for the economy? you hear a lot from the right that we need more entrepreneurs, private industry, business. this is a great way to allow that to happen. you have people who may have big ideas, but they will never do anything about it because they are afraid of leaving their desk. host: you might be interested in

this piece in "the new york times." call for ands their workers except the practice of buying health exchange the government health insurance exchanges?

it is called "the upshot." some interesting figures about the affordable care act. josh, what do you think of what i just read? isler: i think it interesting the percentage of people who will be on the exchanges and for health insurance to become a perk, were now it is expected when you go and get a good job. i think that will change the landscape of things.

from personal experience, the fear for me in leaving jobs has been more health insurance than salary. job that i was ok being without health insurance for a little while. it was extremely hard to handle. the thought of not having insurance. producing slick it would add to the free market to have health it wouldt seems like add to the free market to have health insurance outside of employers. seems like it would also free up people to have more market activity that they have not had. david in conway, massachusetts. independent caller. caller: good morning.

a couple of ideas. one is to raise the minimum wage and cut the tax loopholes for the billionaires and the large corporations who have invested so heavy in lobbying for those loopholes. another would be holding companies responsible. the clean air and the water act is very important. if you are not following it, you are stealing from the american people. we also need to invest in the infrastructure, definitely in education, from pre-k on. in the senate yesterday, they took a vote to start debate on the minimum wage. they needed 60 votes, they did not get it.

the minimum wage was not brought to the floor. this is what harry reid said. he said, republicans told their onks -- turned their backs millions of hard-working americans. here is another tweet from lamar alexander. proposal -- dems proposal is a proposal that will eliminate 500,000 jobs. lamar alexander and a lot of republicans were voting -- quoting a cbo statistic. this is what they said. $10.10 raisef the

would reduce employment by about 500,000 workers were 0.3%. as with any estimate, the estimate -- actual losses could be smaller or larger. there was a two thirds chance it would be between a slight reduction in employment and a reduction of one million workers. you probably heard republicans citing this yesterday. true -- thatcome is where it comes from, from cbo. let's listen to a little bit of the debate on the senate floor. mitch mcconnell came to the floor. he said it is all politics. [video clip] focus seems' true

to be making the far left happy. they seem to think they can coast on talking points and stale ideas and that the american people have not been paying attention to the recent dismal record a claiming -- at helping the people they claim to care about. they seem to think that people will notice that they have ended up making things harder for people they claim they want to help. but the american people see through that game. it is crystal clear from pulling we have seen this week. the washington liberal establishment is out of energy and out of ideas. people got confirmation of that when democrats admitted that their so-called agenda for the rest of the year was drafted by campaign staffers. in short, washington democrats are not serious about helping the middle class.

why theys explain would consider legislation that could cost up to one million jobs. satisfyingplain why left-wing patrons has become a more urgent priority than creating well-paying middle-class jobs our country needs. host: mitch mcconnell on the floor yesterday. the vote failed 54-42. bob corker voted yes on going forward with debate. it was important to have the debate. he did not realize he would be the lone republican. president obama admonished republicans for not helping out the middle class and the economy. [video clip]

if your member of congress does not support raising the minimum wage, you have to let them know they are out of step. if they keep putting politics ahead of working americans, you will put them out of office. tell them to reconsider. tell them it's time for $10.10. you can tweet at them. how raising the minimum wage would help you or your family or someone you know. it, tell them to restore unemployment insurance for americans. [applause] president obama at the white house yesterday, with folks behind him who need a raise in the minimum wage. we are getting your thoughts on how to spur economic growth. here are some ideas on twitter. -- new homestead act on industry.

michael in bronx, new york. democratic caller. caller: good morning. we have lots of jobless and poor people in the united states. wise the government spending lots of money to fight other countries? host: how long have you been unemployed? are you there? we lost him. jim in new jersey. republican. caller: thank you c-span.

i want to bring up the unemployment extension. this is very important. i hear this 2 million figure. or 7 really like six million. you have to admit that there are one or two people who depend on a person's check. these people are hurting. i got my 26 weeks. very much. but you cannot find a job in six months. process a stay hiring where they have you come back for a second interview. it is too long. you need this bridge to keep you going. my benefits were cut off a month and a half ago. i am already feeling it and i am a single guy. i am not in the street yet. i can understand these people who were calling and who are destitute. once your income stops, you are frozen. your cell phones are turned off. i want to congratulate the

president for brain this up at this conference and i am a republican. i hope that the republicans bring this up for a vote. this is an emergency situation. host: there is an analysis piece in "the financial times" about the long-term trap. are fears from the federal reserve and other economists that the long-term unemployed is becoming structural, part of the economy. that makes them very nervous. of the it like some longer you are unemployed, to try to then sit in interviews and try to get a job? caller: i understand that their fear is the 13th extension. what does that mean? so it cuts off? as long as they can get this little in cut, which they extend , as long as these

benefits are coming in, people can still be active in looking for jobs. the $200 a week i was getting to the $800parison i was getting for a paycheck. it is not a welfare program. it is hoping people survive so they can get their life back together. host: how old are you and what did you do? caller: 47 and in retail management. devastated.ing aeropostale is closing 150 stores by the end of the year. i have a two-year degree. i was in lower level management. those jobs are disappearing very quickly. host: are you looking still in that field? thatr: i am looking in

field and i am considering job training. i am doing a lot of volunteer work. i know i have to make the leap to something different. i know i have to make the gradual transition to something different. host: let's look at the piece from the financial times. this is what they write. the implications for the united states are huge. americanser share of remain trapped, it would likely limit the future economic growth potential. it would strain welfare resources and create a dilemma for the

among the workers who had been unemployed for six months, only 36% were employed one year later. 30% are still without work. some numbers for you. the main problem is the depth and ferocity of the recession. return after five years of recovery has led to a flurry of studies. that is in "the financial times." "cnn money" has this story

today. there is a bigger offender when it comes to fast food companies underpaying employees -- that is subway. individual franchises have been found in violation in more than 1100 investigations. each investigation can lead to multiple violations and fines. they found about 17,000 fair labor standards act violations and resulted in franchisees having to reimburse subway workers more than $3.8 million. hawk,go to joe in kitty north carolina. independent caller. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a few ideas. , the value of our money

has been devaluing for years. we need to look at that. another way we could definitely generate revenue would be to legalize and tax marijuana. we can also allow industry farmers to grow hemp. you can make so many different products. the list is endless. i would like to entertain the idea of possibly a flat tax. we should revamp the tax code entirely. it would not hurt us. -- we could i have , how muchforeign aid we are sending to other countries. host: bill is next in nevada. republican caller. well, government

regulations. that is why i lost my job. i worked for intel for several years. in one night, 2500 of us lost our job. all of our jobs went overseas to ireland because they pay less money to them and the regulations are not as bad. i think we should tax the heck out of companies that do that. host: what do you make of wages in this argument for a higher minimum wage in this country? do you think that will have more companies going overseas? caller: yes. most definitely. somebody has to put a stop to it. we are letting all of this commodities and things that we buy, all coming in from walmart and everything like that, and it is putting a lot of businesses out of business because of the cheap labor overseas.

them ore start taxing putting a tariff on them, like australia does, we are going to sink. story on thes a front page of "the new york times" this morning taking a look at poverty. the headline is "change the life of the poor." what goes on to say is that even buy a lotricans can

of things like televisions and cars, those things are cheaper than they were a decade ago, other things make them poor. despite improved living standards, the poor has fallen further behind in income and consumption. the sin global economic trends that have driven down the price of most goods have also limited jobs.alth in industrial the cost of many services urschel to escaping poverty, including education, health care, and childcare, have soared. minnesota, independent caller. caller: good morning. one of the things i would like to point out is the department of transportation. our roads are in such horrible shape. politicians are afraid to

raise that federal tax or estate tax that would create jobs, put people back to work, fix our infrastructure. that is how you can create the job. when washington is interested only in their own political agenda, to get reelected, we will never get anywhere. twitter, they agree with you. on raising the minimum wage, here are a couple of tweets for you.

a vote in the senate yesterday to have debate on raising the minimum wage. senator susan collins, a republican -- i am blanking on , came to themaine floor yesterday. she is offering a compromise. [video clip] area of is a huge compromise available here $.10 --$7.25 and $10 $10 and $.10. i think it speaks to what is wrong with washington today -- that we were placed in a situation where it was take it or leave it, rather than trying

to come together and offer and debate the level that might be acceptable to members of this body and to our colleagues in the house. as of of that would not cause dramatic job losses, which would hurt the very people we are trying to help, and yet would recognize that we do need to increase the minimum wage by a reasonable amount to help struggling, low income families. host: republican susan collins of maine. she is offering up the middle ground. to was rejected by democrats have a vote on her amendment for some sort of compromise in the middle.

on the economy, the front page of "the wall street journal." stocks finally manage and other high. the front page of "the los angeles times." a bubble or inflated fears? some say silicon valley is as it was before the.com bust and that there could be another bubble when it comes to technology companies. capital not rising to levels of 2001. billions of dollars are being paid for start ups. that is one of the fears. you probably saw the headline the china is going to overtake the united states this year economically. ,here is an asterisk to that according to "the washington post. this will look at the purchasing

power parity. they have to pay a prevailing exchange rate. robert, indianapolis, democratic caller. your thoughts. go ahead. i was calling about the

debate over the minimum wage. weekk two jobs, 35 hours a for both jobs. i am paid more than the minimum wage, however i do not make $10 per hour. i was calling because i was watching c-span and was looking at the debate yesterday. , theentleman from wyoming senator from there, he was comparing -- he said that he talked to somebody who worked at burger king and the guy was saying how he thought a couple months ago that he was -- i would challenge him to ask the guy would he makes. i guarantee he does not make $10.10 per hour. it is probably more like eight dollars per hour that he makes. careis not enough to take

of yourself, let alone a family. this is a debate that needs to happen. believe we can get six republicans to vote with the democrats on this. we have millions of americans in need. low wages, low paying jobs, hard jobs -- these are not easy jobs. these are the hardest jobs people have to work. they can make at least $10 per hour. i just do not agree with that. twitter --

here is "the new york times." a newly released e-mail shows that the white house officials susan to shape the way rice discussed the middle east chaos. yesterday, at the white house, jay carney was asked about this e-mail by abc. [video clip] on thoseador rice went shows and she said that the attack at benghazi was rooted in protest over an internet video. we now know that that was not true. director, former director morel, testified last

month that when she talked about the video, my reaction was that that is not something analysts have attributed that attack two. you stood there at the podium referringhat she was to talking points created by the cia. now we see a document from the white house attributing the protest to the video. we have the former director of the cia saying, that was not something the analysts attributed to. >> i would point you to what mike morrell has said repeatedly about the creation of the talking points. >> now we have new talking points. >> i answered that question. the fact of the matter is that they were protests in the region. the talking points cited the protests at that facility. the connection between protest and video turned out not to be the case. it was based on the best

information we had. and the fact that they were protests. --n, i understand >> he said, that is not something our analysts have said. >> no, you are wrong. if you look at that document, that document that we are talking about today was about the overall environment in the muslim world. the protest outside of khartoum. outside of the embassy in tunis. outside of the embassy in cairo. this was a big problem. it was an ongoing story through that weekend when ambassador rice appeared on the sunday show. to suggest that we would not have answers to questions about those situations and unless you are telling me that those protests did not have anything to do with the video, it was atirely appropriate to have

question-and-answer document prepared to the video. john, let me finish. it wasn't say that rooted in a protest over the video? >> i know that you and i are in a different time zone right now, but we are still in april 2014. this is a discussion about what she said and what turned out to be the case that we have had dozens of times in this room. att: jay carney yesterday the white house in an exchange with abc's jonathan karl over this latest e-mail. today on capitol hill, the house oversight and government reform committee led by darrell issa is having a hearing on the u.s. intervention in libya. is torpose of the hearing examine political and economic challenges facing libya and whether policy changes made during the multilateral intervention may have contributed to these challenges. that is live today on c-span 3

and 9:30 this morning. coming up next, we will talk with rob bishop, chairman of the house natural resources subcommittee about who should control public land. then we will talk with a democratic congressman, member of the budget committee. we will be right back. >> almost 5000 students enter this year's student cam contest. we talked with the top prize winners about the documentary. all decidedwhere we

that this was going to be our topic was one that was an article on fracking in our local newspaper. it said that fracking was happening two miles from our house. it is a national problem and a local problem. verythen on, we were passionate about the subject and it seemed obvious that that is what our subject should be. to life.s essential everyone requires food to live. i figured the fact that a lot of people do not know what is being done to our food supply and they just eat this food regularly, without knowing what is inside of it, i found that very concerning. that is why i chose the topic you read -- topic. >> there was a lot more that you don't know and it is hard for the average person to know because they did not know what is going on. your security over your privacy your privacy over security? hear more on saturday morning

at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. book, an posner was collection of interviews with some of the nation's stop -- top storytellers. war, the beginning of the you are afraid of holding the gun. when you shoot somebody, kill somebody, it does something to you. difficult in the beginning. after time went on, it became easy, it became normalized, this world. this could happen if you normalize the situation to live through it. if you don't, you die. --one of 41 unique forces voices. >> "washington journal"

continues. host: we are back with congressman rob bishop. of the natural resources public lands and environmental regulations subcommittee. the topic is who should control public land? who do you think should control public land? guest: the question is, should it be somebody in washington or somebody who lives in the area where the lands are? to me it should be the latter, those who live in the states, work in the area. they should have primary jurisdiction on the decisions made in public land. it is not an issue of getting rid of public land, it is just control. states have shown themselves to be far more qualified than the federal government. they're closer to the land. they have a different interest in it. only somebody in washington gets a grandview of what is important

. if there is a dispute, obviously the federal agency has to win. narratives.lse --t argues for why states what we have shown is that states are much more effective in managing public lands than the federal government is. the state lands are more productive and better run than the adjacent federal land are. wouldn't there be economic incentive for the states to allow commercial buildings, development, whatever it is of these lands in order to fill up their coffers? guest: part of that should have happened already. not every piece of property has development potential. there are areas that need to be conserved and should remain conserved. if you look at what the federal government owns, almost 400

million acres. about 350 are already set aside preservation status. host: everything in red is controlled by the federal government. that is one of every three acres. you cannot find anything similar the side of the soviet union. that is true. in the west, it is one of every two acres controlled by the federal government. you can see how disproportionate it is. host: what about this issue of resources. there is a cost to managing these lands. they have to be managing one way or the other. the state does not have the resources to do that. guest: of course the states have the resources. thetah, you have seen

process of adjudicating what the cost would be, what the infrastructure on the state level would be, and the states do have the ability and the resources to manage these lands. host: what are you proposing? what should happen? try towe should transpose as much land to state control as humanly possible. it does not have to be an all or nothing proposition. in my state, they are not proposing to take over things like national parks or wilderness areas, even though they could run those just as well as the federal government. were one of those things eventually we worked together that it does not have to an all or nothing process. we had a hearing in idaho where far less lands are prone to burn, far better

managed than the federal government land. you have been holding lots of hearings on this. how much of those hearings, how much of the focus has been with environmental groups and addressing their concerns, as well? have beeneverything i doing, especially in the state of utah, we have had all sorts of discussions with every type of group. producers, government officials, environmental groups, as well. every special-interest group out there, we have had to -- tried to talk to them. host: are they on board? some areas, yes. in some areas, no. everyone says, we have to work together. when you come up with the details, people start flaking off. in the long run, i think we will be successful in trying to come up with a different approach. he had been battling, for the last 50 years, over these

issues. it is time to think about things differently. host: this debate was reignited by clive and bundy in nevada. do you think you should be prosecuted for not paying those fees? guest: i am torn on this issue. or put should have paid them in a trust fund for when the issue was resolved. i also understand his frustration. his frustration is felt by a whole lot of people. the rules and procedures are changed by the federal recourse inith no the situation. the land plans were changed on them. that happens time and again in the west. it is one of the reasons why if you had people in the area knew the situation, you could work this much better than sending a swat team out to confront him. host: explain how this works. how does it work?

what is the agency in charge and how do they go about changing this. ? guest: you have five different agencies working for the federal government and they have five different areas. the bureau of land management were given clive and bundy's case. cliven bundy's case. they can change management plans i will and they often do. somebody who is out there, this is their livelihood, they are going to put their infrastructure and, and then all of a sudden the land agency changes the rules in the extreme and there is nothing they can do about it. it happens repeatedly. that is why it becomes -- this is not an isolated situation. it is indicative of a bigger problem that needs to be addressed. other agencies get to jump

in as well. it does the epa as say. -- does the epa have a say? guest: this is where it gets very complex. they all have something. they all have a say in all of it. epa can jump in on all of them -- you have layer upon layer of bureaucracy.sy -- host: do you do away with those federal agencies that have jurisdiction over those parts of land? guest: you cannot do anything -- if you find yourself in control of a hijacked plane and you want to go back, you do not do it by turning off the engine. nothing is going to happen overnight and quickly. ultimately, you do want to reduce those roles and put it

back on people to give them more control. host: a little bit of information about the bureau of land management. it is in charge of 200 from 45 million acres -- 245 million acres nationwide. more than 80% of nevada is owned by the government. for much of utah is owned by the government? guest: close to 70%. it is pretty bad. publicople think of land, they think of our national park system. that is only 13% of what the government owns. even though the get the bulk of the money, yell at him is all in the west -- elm is all in the west. ofhave different concepts public plans. when easterners talk about public land, they think of a national park. we think of sagebrush, a

different concept. we are using the same words, we are not talking the same language. mike hummer republican caller. caller: -- mike, republican caller. caller: i was listening to that bundy deal. he said he would pay his taxes to the state or the county, but not to the federal government. course, harry reid had to come in and say this is over, or it is not over. not by a long shot. when you have swat teams come on with sniper rifles american citizens, something have to go. can i quickly make the comment to the congressman about the job situation and how we can improve it? host: real quick. what we have lost sight of is the trade.

plumbers. have forced college, college, college down the throats. trade is one way we can turn this around. i appreciated. thank you. topicwe will stick to our and talk about public land. what do you make of what mike had to say? this has been going on for many years. you cannot go in with guns blazing. host: miami, florida, independent caller. caller: i have a general question about natural resources. belief -- ional don't pretend to be well educated on the subject -- that russia has taken kiev for sea power - natural resources of

the sea. as an american, what are we lacking in terms of natural resources? guest: i don't understand the premise of the question. as far as natural resources, the united states is not lacking anything. we have the potential to almost be self-sufficient in resources. the economy is growing today primarily because of energy development on state and private lands. if we were to actually use energy resources on public lands, we could sustain that growth and not have a roller coaster of boom and bust. we have the resources in the united states. areust need to make sure we developing those resources in every form, not just carbon-based fuels. host: here are a couple of tweets --

guest: amen. and there are some perfect examples. we have an area outside of utah which was blm land that they did easter break,one and almost broke into her right down a. finally, they contracted with the county to manage that area in the county now manages it and maximize profit and is one of the premier recreation areas we have in the state of utah if not in the nation. if indeed the federal government were to work with states and local government for management purposes, they would be far better off. we could just turn it over them -- to them for management. this has the potential for development but also outdoor recreation. outdoor recreation is constantly under attack and needs to be protected. host: what is the economic

impact? guest: hunting, fishing, bicycling, all those things. there is a great potential to do that emanates to the -- we need to make sure we pass laws that specifically guarantee there can be no loss of those host: type of activities. host:what does it mean economically for estate? guest: it is part of the tourism package. i don't know about it in dollars. why is another reason states need to have greater control over these lands. if you look at the areas of the east and the west and how much they have ron -- have grown their education funding over 20 years, the east is twice what we get to do in the west and that goes back to the fact that in the west, we have public lands that deprive the state or many tax base and are prohibiting them and developing resources there that can be used to fund education. i'm an old teacher and this is important to me. we are harming our kids because

of her land policy3 . host: because education is tied to property taxes? guest: if you have the development of some of the resources that are there, you can generate income taxes, sales taxes, all sorts of spinoff jobs that are high-paying. you can do that in the east because there is very little era land in the east. you cannot do it in the west. i think that clearly illustrates the disparity. host: guest: the people is a nebulous expression. thereestion is not should be public land but whose make the decision about how that is used. someone in washington or in the area in which the land is should be the latter answer. host: spring valley, new york, republican caller. caller: good morning, representative bishop, more of the public is becoming aware that we been lied to about what

really destroyed building seven on 9/11 -- host: that is not our topic today but when it is come you're welcome to call back in. we will go to jacksonville, florida, democratic caller. caller: i want to bring forward -- stone mountain in georgia. when the federal government have control of stone mountain, it was a very nice place and they -- and i used to bring my kids there to enjoy it. took over stone mountain and it was a disaster. it was not cleaned up or anything else. alwayseral government kept things very neat. everyonenderstand why is against the federal government about how neat they are. once the states get over, it will be right back to the segregation situation we were in for 100s of years. host: why do you think that? caller: it's obvious what is

going on. once the republican party gets control of everything and puts it back in the states hands, if you lived in the south, you know that it has been horrible for african-americans. of being 80nths years old and i know exactly what i'm talking about. host: we will take your point. guest: you need to move out to the west where you don't have to face that situation again. there is no basic decision on someone working for the federal government is more competent than someone who works for a state government. it is not a fundamental foundation. host: louisiana, independent caller. caller: i want to remind the congressman that if he is taking the side of a deadbeat renter -- rancher against the other ranchers that pay their grazing fees, this man is a deadbeat. he is not a hero. his sidesnipers on

cited in on law-enforcement officers. other thing -- when george bush was in there, you all were trying to get a bill passed to mine in the grand canyon. that is not trying to take care of natural resources of the united states. which belongs to all of the people. host: let's have the congressman respond. bundy is not someone who is -- who will be nominated for sainthood. i empathize with the situation. because of the land management plans which were changed on him. he was also wrong and not paying his fees. there isn't a negative to go on both sides. violence is never a solution to any of these situations. the comments he made as far as

mining the grand canyon are patently false. it's a national park you cannot might even if you wanted to. secondly, there is never a proposal to anything similar to that. wherever he is getting his information, tell him to find -- tell him to find a different source of information. host: can people go to your website if they are interested and find out more information about public lands? guest: mine or the full committee resource committee. host: we are talking with bishop. he isb the subcommittee chairman of the natural resources committee public lands and environmental regulation subcommittee. we will go to mark in our gun, independent caller. caller: i want to relay the information about certain states. when they make a decision, especially about state land, on let's say here in oregon, it's

about four station and cutting timber -- sometimes they think of the jobs and how much money they can make off of timber howt before they realize much environmental impact it has on it and then it's too late because they already cut the forest down. it is unfortunate because the watersheds suffer and the fish supper. the animals that lived in those forests suffer and there has an issue about resources in this state and how it should be managed. it should have been managed under a minimal amount of cutting and therefore the jobs would have lasted longer. as a kid growing up, i remember when millionout 3 [indiscernible] and shift, and it goes on for decades, you will not have a resource that is the abuse.

i feel that the federal limitations did not step in and slow down this logging that took place, we would never have had the trees that we have now. it's unfortunate. i believe the states should have some say in regulation of resources. money changes hands and people are only human and corruption takes place. thank you for calling in. oregonare watching from live, you are up far too early. there is something wrong here. the issue at hand as far as the trees -- is not an all or nothing situation. you don't cut everything down or leave everything. if you leave everything, you have over growth which causes infestation and deadly fires. that is the biggest problem we have on federal land right now. they have not done a good job in managing it by doing thinning practices which improves the environment and improves the

habitat and cuts down the surrenders wildfires we have been having in the west. and infestation. it has to be managed. leaving it alone is the worst thing to take place. that's what the federal government has been doing and states have not. states have a record in recent years of far better management of their forest service and forest lands on the federal government does. host: who in congress is overseeing the management of these public lands? guest: me, i'm sorry. congress does have oversight on these areas. but it is always difficult for a collective group to have total oversight over an agency especially when the agency keeps pushing back on us. it's my committee. host: what have you tried to do? what do you mean the agency is pushing back? guest: we have continuous hearings in which we would like the agency to be more forthcoming as far as information given to us. too often, the full committee

has had to issue subpoenas to get information. the agency really has not been as helpful as i think they should have been. we willoversight and continue to do that. that is a reason why we keep having these hearings on how the west is being managed and how the west is being mismanaged by the federal government. host: you control the purse strings. what about taking voice some of the money? guest: > that is always an option. unfortunately, both the house and the senate have to agree to something financially. in our divided government, that is not necessarily the most efficient option right now. host: we'll go to westland, michigan, democratic caller. caller: hi, i have a comment. i would rather the government be in control because when the if the poorn it, -- ,uy wants to get some land

maybe he is grazing, and another rich guy -- the rich is going to get it. it is favoritism. i would rather the government just stay in control. assumption is the that everything done in washington is done well and everything in the states is done poorly. that's an assumption that does not at reality. the first national park was yellowstone when it was a territory of wyoming. the second national park was mackinaw island in michigan which was given back to the state of michigan because they could better manage it. the idea that states cannot manage even parks or land is a false narrative. it assembly wrong. there is no evidence to suggest that is possible. that is a way of looking at things. we are trying to change that perspective. just because we have done the last few decades does not mean that the way we have to do it in the future. host: here is a tweet --

but actually cute we are dealing with the issue of fees in our subcommittee right now. i will be dealing with it today. that it ish that public land and should be there but to be honest, part of the land is that it should be used in a multiple use way. there are all sorts of activities that can go on together. if indeed somebody is getting economic benefit from the land, it makes sense there should be some kind of fee attached to it. what most people don't realize is if you take all the fees and royalties we get from the public lands and add up everything that washington is spending to control the public lands, you find out that my good friends in the easter pulling out a lien dollars from their pockets to control the land.

you can keep your money and everyone will be happy in the long run. host: how to the fees work? i know there are several different types would give us an idea. guest: i can't do that in an hour. or every different activity on their, there is a grazing fee, a fee to be paid for that, a timber feet -- and also allow fees for people who just enter and use public lands for recreation purposes. there are some entrance fees and special fees if use enhanced areas. it's a very intricate system. one thing we are trying to do is simplify that especially for those who are using public lands for recreation purposes. host: what if you lease public lands? guest: there is also a fee to do that and if you extract mineral resources, there is a royalty payment that goes the federal government and the state as well. host: is that a significant amount of money into the treasury? guest: it is but one of the last charts simply says if you add up everything that comes in and every thing that goes out, the

bottom line is in red. we expend a whole lot to control this land that we actually get back. it is not a revenue producer for the federal government. host: it's not? guest: we spend more especially when you include things like education taxes. we spend more than we get back in fees and royalties. host: what also we spending on for these public lands? recreation areas, maintenance backlogs, roads, enforcement -- all those things are spent in trying to control these lands. if you diffuse the issues and allow states to have greater control, you could minimize what the federal can control and increase the royalties and fees that go to the state so they can fund their education. host: from twitter -- that's the ultimate

question right there. why? as they say in my home state and many of the western states, we are a public land state and will always be a public landscape of but the issue is who manages and controls it makes the decisions on those public lands. that went right to the basic heart of the question. what is the federal government and only the federal government make those controlling issues? it does not have to be that way and it's probably not the best way to do it. host: let's go to st. joseph, missouri, republican caller. no matter how you feel about this rancher in nevada, what happened exposes what this government, especially this administration and the blm, have been up to. they are out to seize more and to pleasein order their environmental extremists out there that want us to have nothing, basically.

reidor people like harry who sell out to their special buddies, it will give their cronies lands to hand over to them. you take a look at what is happening in texas right now. even though the supreme court said back in 1923 that land the texas andhe state of that people who have land titles, here we go again to the blm. they want to grab up more land and throw wrenches off their land. -- ranchers off their land. i think it's part of revenge since they shut down drilling and mining on public lands recently.

a lot of the states have private land producing this oil like texas and south dakota. they are starting to show what a folly this is. i think this is an attempt to shut them down. guest: i appreciate the comments. is not an isolated situation. it is indicative of a larger problem. whatever he has as far as specifics, there are still a bigger problem that must be addressed by policymakers. host: here's a story in "the washington times" about the epa -- guest: i don't know the details of this but it's something we

will look into as time goes on. it's indicative of some the problems we have especially like best sciences which is a nebulous term and whenever you make a decision based on best science, you can manipulate that. there have been problems in the past with the so-called science-based decisions being somewhat manipulated. we want to deal with this. you bestappens, how do mitigate that? how can an individual who feels egregious in the situation -- how can somebody in alaska medicaid that situation? -- mitigate the situation. coming back to washington, d.c. is not best way to do it. if people in alaska control the situation, you can easily sit down and discuss that more easily than trying to come back here and protests in the district. host: on twitter --

guest: unfortunately i do know the history. it was not supposed to be a condition of statehood. almost every state has the stamp that same language was says the federal government to use to sell land in the territories, they could get 20% of what the got comingernment from sale of lands. when a state in there come you still had some of those sales ongoing. all most every enabling act allow the federal government to continue those sales and then the land was supposed to be turned back to those states. the western states at the time in the 1800s, they lobbied to get their lands back and that's why you have very little federal land there. it's the same situation for the west. everything that was not going to be sold this post to begin back to the state and everything the federal government did sell, five percent of that was posed to go back to the state for specific reasons. my state was for an education

fund but the land was posed to be given back. it was not until 1976 when that saidassed a law it is no longer the policy of the united states to give back lands to the states even though that was the promise of statehood. there are a couple of things going on here. those of us in the west think if we were to be treated fairly, we should have those lands back or it unfortunately, few people in the courts or congress care about being fair. we are saying you're spending a lot of money on the control of the west and you don't have to and you are hurting our education systems. reasonse two compelling on why the states should have more control. host: we will leave it there. thank you for your time. coming up next, we will go back to the economy and job creations and we will talk with wisconsin democrat mark pocan after this news update from c-span radio. and labor rallies

have turned violent today in cambodia and turkey. demonstrators denounced low wages and call for better treatment of workers. security forces in istanbul used water cannons answer guest. about 100,000 people marched through the moscow red square in the first may day parade on the square since the fall of the soviet union in 1991. german chancellor angela merkel visits washington this week for meetings with president obama and ukraine is expected to be the number one topic. both leaders are meeting in an effort to show the west is united in its resolve to take even tougher measures against russia if necessary. elections in iraq, the iraqi prime minister is crediting voters with delivering a slap in the face of terrorism by turning out in large numbers for parliamentary elections. today's remarks reflect nouri al-maliki's confidence that he will eventually get another term. the turnout was estimated to have been 60% excluding volatile

areas where there was no balloting. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. years, c-span brings public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and conferences and offering complete apple ii gavel coverage of the u.s. house all is up public service of private industry. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. watch is in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. it's curious that nasa did not script this? >> in retrospect they might have wished that. julian cherr that left nasa relations with the outside

world in many ways was absolutely adamant that headquarters never put words in , notouth of their people just astronauts, but anybody. they wanted people to speak for themselves. they made it known. position was such but beyond that, to my knowledge, the never controlled statements, public statements of others and certainly they insisted. >> historian douglas wrigley discusses his 2001 interview with apollo 11 astronaut neil armstrong sunday at or 30 p.m. eastern, part of american history tv this weekend on c-span3. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with

congressman mark pocan who served on the budget committee and is in his first term in congress talking about the economy and job creation. we were asking our viewers earlier on their ideas for spurring economic growth. what are your ideas? guest: the ideas we put forth in the democratic versions of the budget like in testing and infrastructure so we can get people back to work right now and investing in education and investing in research and development are three of the pillars that i look at that can best that get the economy going especially when we know that in 2014, we were told by the congressional budget office that 3/4 of eric deficit was caused by -- of our deficit was caused economic weakness. those three pillars get is there. host: what about tackling the long-term issues with our deficit and with their budget, the things that are a drag on our economy, the amount of money on health care and medicare and social security, those sort of programs that need to be addressed?

democrats don't want to put them on the table. guest: because we are putting other solutions on the table, perhaps. under president obama, the deficit has been reduced by 60%. that does not get a lot of it tension but that is good news. we want to look at how you get people back to work right now which is why we talked about unemployment benefits for people currently out of work while the economy is slowly coming back for getting people to work right now and having them pay taxes is a cycle test thing we could do. host: what about the minimum wage? we were talking to our viewers earlier. the senate failed to have a debate on the issue. guest: i think america deserves a raise. we put out a bill to increase minimum wage in three years. the vast majority of the public supports that regardless of their political affiliation. you should not be working and-time or multiple jobs not getting by. if we raise the wage, we help the economy. when people who are getting that

wage get the extra money, it almost all goes immediately back into the economy which helps other jobs. in myworthwhile doing and state of wisconsin, i spent 14 years in the legislature and every time we raise the minimum wage, we had more people go into the workforce. it is a win-win across the board. i think it is long overdue and the value from the 60's is significantly lower than where it should be. we need to give america a raise. host: republicans disagree -- >> madam president, i think people listening to the debate on a him wage -- on the minimum wage issue may be a little bit confused. we all want to see hard-working american families work their way toward the american dream. but we are not going to be able to do that by the federal

government setting wages for restaurants, small businesses, and other people across the country. i have no objection, obviously, if massachusetts or minnesota or some other state wants to raise and among wage. but that is their choice. what they are now asking is for the federal government, or the nation, to set a minimum wage at a level which will destroy between half a million and one million jobs and that's not just me talking. that's the congressional budget office which is the official scorecard for the united states congress. guest: the senator is wrong. jobsequester cost american and not extending unemployment benefits costs american jobs. republican budget costs 3 million jobs.

raising minimum wage does not cost jobs. hundreds of economists agree with us including nobel prize winners. the senator is wrong and that's why we should raise the minimum wage. host: he references the cbo that whatever report this as if you raise the minimum wage, one of the immediate impacts as you could see a job loss. guest: hundreds of economists disagree. from my own experience in wisconsin and other states where one state raises minimum wage in one state wouldn't, there has been no effect. more people came in to the workforce in my state. the cbo looks at everything and that's when area where we have a disagreement. hundreds of economists say it is different. to make that the excuse when we sets of these other information is ridiculous. host: fort collins, colorado, independent caller. caller: i think we just need to look back at history. last time the minimum wage was

raised, it had pretty much a zero effect on job loss. elmendorf talk, that was one of the statements he said. he said it could lose or gain but this was a zero effect before. one thing i hear all these -- what theyaying really need to do is go look at history. we had a 40% higher tax and you will see when our taxes are higher, during those times, our economy was better. you cut the taxes down. i asked republicans this -- tell worked inntry that austerity mode. estonia and they hated it. if you look at history and you look at economics and you look economics, we've

tried the supply-side with ronald reagan. we went to friedman and what happened? here is a president who says getting government out and no more taxes and he raise taxes 11 times, more than any non--were president in the history of presidents. host: we will have the congressman jump then. guest: i agree. prove differently than some of the rhetoric you get in washington. we all have a tendency to live in a bubble and people talk to each other within the bubble but not in the real world. when you raise minimum wage in the real world, you help improve the economy and get people back into the workforce. there is a lot of benefits. in the ryan budget, the tax rate is lowered to 25%. the only way to do that is to put all those cuts you will have to do to make that money

available on the backs of the middle class. you will have the average middle-class family having about a $2000 increase in the average millionaire gets about $200,000 cut. the map does not work in the budget but it's a good point that history has a tendency to prove otherwise than some of the rhetoric we have had this year in congress. host: raleigh, north carolina, democratic caller -- caller: thanks for taking my call. raising the minimum wage and staving off on employment is it creates jobs because it creates demand. when we do that, we put more money into social security and we should raise taxes on the wealthy which creates jobs. once we create jobs, it takes people off food stamps and it takes people off [indiscernible] it keeps the economy going and flowing.

once we grow the economy, then the long term.wn we need to work on the short term first. it has gotten better and we have created some jobs but we could create more jobs. i agree, the best social program is a job. the more we can do to help create jobs is we help the overall economy but everyone out of work. thefocus when you look at democrat version of the budget are the investments and infrastructure. we have roads and bridges that are eligible for medicare they are so old. when a tooth do things to repair those -- we need to do things to repair those for the overall economy. we need to have safe roads and bridges but it helps create jobs right now. when he to invest in education. sure people have those opportunities in a global economy. investing in research and development is important.

world-class university and my business and so many businesses have started from there. making sure that we can invest in that research and develop an to create the jobs they keep us competitive are the smart things to do. need to raise men on wage and extend unemployment benefits and get people back working and put money into the economy. host: here is an e-mail -- guest: the states are slowly doing it but we have a lot of states that won't. in my state, we haven't. is it fair that you live in one state or another that you will work two or three jobs and still be in poverty? the standard has to happen at the national level. if we were where we were in

1967, it would be $10 six to cents per hour. the proposal is fairly modest. the proposal is to raise it to $10.10 within three years. i am a small business owner. not have the effect some say in the economy and usually the people who are not paying a higher wage are businesses that had -- i should have of different business model. it does not focus on their employees or the public. host: here's a story from "politico" guest: we are having a lot of conversations but we have to do some action. i have always supported increasing the gas tax if we have an index like we used to in my home state.

you took away that keeping up with inflation and major you still had that investment. there are other options that are talked about. a per mileyou can do charge but simply ignoring it which is what this congress has done for too long is not the answer. you have to have the revenues to make sure we have that infrastructure not only for creating jobs but for the long-term safety of people on our roads and for congress. host: do you agree with the political headline that this is the next class? guest: there is no question. if cap -- if congress continues not to act like for the last 3.5 years, you will have problems in this area. my one hope is that out of the shot down, i think we hit rock bottom. i hope that was the rock bottom and it was, the fact that we are getting some appropriation bills -- that's our job in congress and we should not come back up we are not getting those jobs done. i'm hoping this is one of them we have to take care of. host: from twitter --

not at all. some of the bad trade deals of the past are coming back again in the new transpacific partnership. i strongly opposed that. fairink we need to have ai trade. areasconsin, jobs lead our and it's hard to bring in a country like vietnam which has $.28 per hour minimum wage. it depresses our wages and does not add jobs. we need to have a much smarter policy. unfortunately, the transpacific are to ship i think is the wrong direction. host: the president disagrees with you. on his swingg it duration countries specifically with japan and asking if japan and the united states can come to some sort of agreement that this will lead to a larger regional pact.

the white house puts out these numbers -- the white house is saying those numbers will increase. they say it will get better under this transpacific partnership. guest: they have been saying that but the past reality does not show that at all. sorts worried about all of different things in trade when it comes to milk which is important to my state. we are afraid that everything we have seen so far in this trade you will be bad for the very local farmers in the state of wisconsin and across the country. i disagree and one thing the some of the in import and export numbers, they

re-imports. something that lancer and goes to mexico and somehow that's a new export, that's not an export. let's talk about a real set of numbers. we have a trade deficit and they have been caused by bad trade deals. let seven open debate. i have a fundamental disagreement with the white house on this. i have seen the experience of are my years. for 27 small business years and we do a lot of suppliers that make things and create jobs in manufacturing. i have watched them leave the country largely due to these bad trade deals. i don't want to see that happen again i don't want it to hurt the culture of my area. host: mark pocan, democrat from wisconsin in his first term and sits on the budget committee and education and workforce committee. before coming to congress, he served in the wisconsin state assembly from 1998-2012. marvin and kentucky, republican caller. in 1998, when -- my

wife started working for a company locally at about seven dollars per hour. she has worked her tail off for the last 15 years to get up to $10.25. if you kick the minimum wage up to $10.10, what will that do for her? that will make her start over. guest: just the opposite, that will raise her wage. the's the deal behind minimum wage. you help people making minimum help boost theou other people with low wages. that puts more money into the pockets of people to put back into the economy. your wife will benefit from having that minimum wage increase. her wage will also increase. it's unfair that she has worked that long and only got to $10.20. her labor is worth more than that. everybody labor is. the budgeterve on

committee but also on the education and workforce committee. let's tie together these two with this tweet -- guest: the public charter schools have been experiments. we reauthorized in helena bipartisan way but when you get from myer schools, years of watching it closely and visiting a number of schools, i would not say it is a complete failure but it's about 90%. too often we are taking money out of the public schools and putting them at to these private schools that do not have the same standards and don't have and kidsrequirements with disabilities get left behind and people who are not as strong learners. moreind up having a expensive issue to deal with than the public schools, taking money out of the public schools and putting money into where you

don't have any standards. when we started this program in wisconsin, money went to schools where someone who ran the school said he could read a book simply by placing his hand on it. you are taking taxpayer-funded dollars and putting it there. we have improve some of the standards but why went to visit south division high school in milwaukee, it has about a 50% graduation rate. it's a tough area and i said when they had transfer students, they have no records and have to start all over with these kids. all too often, these programs do not have the same standards and that takes money out of public schools and makes public schools weaker. part of it is intentional. eople want to privatize the school system. every kid should have a chance and opportunity they need in this country. guest: from twitter -- theses part of trade deals and we have a problem with this. it's an interesting point in the

sense that when you try to have a trade deal, the country that has $.28 minimum wage that has four days off per month, you cannot have a trade deal that works. increase thenally wages in vietnam which is good for people there but we will also depress the wages in the united states. that does not necessarily make sense for the average worker. however, it does not make sense we have a minimum wage that is so far behind where we were a few decades ago. and people have to work two or three jobs to get by, what does that say about our set of values as a country? we need to give america a raise. host: rochester, new hampshire, you are next. caller: i don't think raising the minimum wage will help. if minimum wage goes up, consumers will be paying more for the product because businesses will have to raise that,prices and on top of being a small business person myself, a lot of people don't realize that when that wage goes

up, the very small business that , ourwith six employees federal and state unemployment goes up which is based on gross payroll. all your taxes on that small business goes up. that will be another $1000 per month that i have to pay in just to cover that employee -- those employees. i don't think that's fair to a small business like mine. and inly a hair salon don't feel that's fair. people will not get ahead. prices will have to go up. i feel that what you should do is you need to lower the prices of what the consumers buy. had a hardear, we winter like everyone else. i paid over $5,000 for heating oil. for the year. gas is going up again. you raise the gas highs so when it goes down a little bit, you say thank god.

you guys screw us to know and. look at the prices of things. host: why do you think congress controls the price of oil and gas in this country or anything? guest: they control the gas taxes. they control all that stuff. one of the problems is we still subsidize the oil and gas industry with all of our taxes. the republican budget does not reduce a single special interest tax. it is on the backs of the middle class. i think that while we don't set i think weof gas, subsidize the industry that still has an awful lot of spikes we are still paying for. employees in my small business i know where you are at. you are the janitor and in charge of marketing and human

resources and you do everything as a small business owner. when that money gets put into the increase in weight, it goes back to the economy and people buy more. you will have more people going into a hair salon because they can afford to with that increase. the wage you're paying goes up in some of your workman's, another things go up accordingly but also, you will have more it is this because more people of money in their pockets to spur the economy. it has been proven every time we have done this that this is what happens. don't be afraid of that. in reality, you will wind up having more business to make up for that wage increase. host: what about the point and gas taxes? you said you are for raising the gas tax. guest: she said it was four cents per gallon. bought 250e, i just gallons of propane. it went higher in our region. happeneda spike that because of some use issues. that had nothing to do with a gas tax.

when the price goes up, it's more about supply and demand. i agree we need to have some control on that. we try to deal with that in wisconsin but it's not because of government action. i would also argue that if has roads that work in her area and people can get to her hair salon, small tax increases are what we need to do. host: from the front page of "the new york times" - at americansks buying cars and tvs and they can have internet but they are still struggling because other things cost so much. part of the problem is there is a growing gap between the very rich, the few percent on the top, and the rest of us, 98% of the rest of us. it's not just that the middle class is getting squeezed.

it has a whole lot more to do with what we do to help those folks have more money in their pocket. we talk about raising minimum wage and we try to talk about a different set of taxes. the republicans don't take away any special interest tax breaks and they want to lower the top see to 25% so millionaires a tax break and middle-class people have to pay a next trip tax and that's the wrong direction to go. we have been trying to address it. how do you invest in those three things i talked about earlier and have you put more money in the pockets of people who spur the economy. in 1988, the ceo to their lowest isloyee is 40:1 and now it 40001. we have to address that. host: mark is next in north carolina, democratic caller. finally aod morning,

politician that is speaking out against these trade deals. i would like to say that this man wage problem is the direct result of jobs that are being filled with people that used to have blue-collar middle-class jobs and now they are working on mcdonald's and stuff like that that used to be high school kids in college kids trying to get through school. mothers,ave single retirees and everyone else working in these fast food places trying to make ends meet. there are no jobs for students and in the south where i live, all the manufacturing has been tanked out to china and mexico. you are not getting the tax base that we once got and you don't have workers working and paying taxes. you have to make up for that summer else. the few people that are working are getting squeezed.

the wealthy are taking control of the state with the republican party and they are dodging their tax responsibility in north carolina is sliding down the tubes faster than any state and our surrounding area. guest: i think that's a really good point. the reality of the minimum wage disagreeost people with this and they think it's a high school kid living in him getting pocket change for the percentage of people under 20 make minimum wage is 12%. the average man wage worker is 35 years old. they're working full-time and the majority of them are women. it has really changed quite a bit. when you affect the minimum wage, you affect those aspiring to the middle class stronger m than just theyth of a high school kid. these bad trade deals -- i grew up in a town that was originally american motors.

pacers and gremlins were probably a bad design choice but when eventually to chrysler and they completely left and that was thousands of jobs. everyone in my community knew someone who worked there. it was really tough on the economy. it allowed those jobs to go overseas in these industries. it has a real effect on we do this. that's why we have to be very careful in these trade deals. host: another tweet -- what about job training? guest: we can help the people who need it most right now and put money into the economy and help create those jobs and that's the investment in research and development. the investments in education, the republican budget cuts pell grants 145 billion dollars. i group at a lower middle-class family and i got pell grants and that's how i went to college. that's the reality for them. you cut that and you're taking away those ladders of

opportunity for more people. better help create paying jobs by investing in research and development and investing in education and investing in infrastructure? those are decent family supporting wages. we can do both and we should do both. the republican budget cuts job training dollars. let's help people get retold for the jobs of future because they will pay well but if we keep having bad trade deals come you'll lose more opportunities. host: we will go to new york, republican caller. caller: how are you? good morning, i have a couple of statements and questions. wage, i'ml minimum kind of against because in new york, there's not a lot of people that actually start at minimum wage. =unless the job includes tips. i don't think a lot of politicians are looking at the financials of each individual business and how they can afford

to pay their employees. host: i will leave it there because we are running out of time. the house is coming in early for their legislative session. the minimum wage worker who earns tips is a good example and does not get enough attention. they are sometimes $2.35 an hour and are expected to get by on additional tips. can you imagine working full-time to support your family on something at that low of a level? we need to increase that bottom was because too many people are living in poverty and living on government programs that we are funding his taxpayers. why should we subsidize people working at walmart and make donald? -- and mcdonald's. ? host: independent caller is next. caller: the number one thing you can do is repatriate these trillions of dollars overseas. bring it back and don't tax it, put people back to work.

people out of madison, all you care about is your bailouts for your union friends. forget the tar sands in canada and keep everybody. it's amazing we have turned into a dollar general. your tax policies keep is down. guest: what was his question? host: it was repatriation. town 800live in a people outside the town of madison. host: you represent the madison area? guest: yes but i live in the town of vermont. we should not have people hiding their profits overseas. you should not have a five-story building in the cayman islands home to 18,000 corporations. each corporations about that day, it's a mailbox. those are things we should address. why should we let them bring that money back for zero on the

dollar? should we reword the bad behavior? we pay taxes through our small businesses and we don't have a little po box nine cayman islands. let's go after those folks who are tax cheats and support the small business owners who are working hard with that hair salon and that printing business. host: on the transatlantic partnership program, what could the president put in there that you would support? guest: there are about 24 chapters to it. i will try to do it in a minute. you have to have some fair standards for trade. right now, too much of the standards they have do not support us whether it be environmentally or labor standards, they don't address currency manipulation. there are things in the pure creelman -- in the procurement chapter. we could be challenged by outside companies like buy

america and the multinational company could say that hurts our trade and they could sue us. about a twitter campaign truth in trade and we put out five cases of actual losses that of happen from bad trade deals and five areas where you can see what could happen in the future. when you look at that, there is a lot that has to happen. they want to do fast track and give up our voices in congress. that is wrong. we want to have just as strong a conversation from the perspective of congress who was not involved with the drafting, 600 people involved in drafting with multinational corporations and not people representing the public. host: the next meeting is in may for all the countries to get together with the negotiators and try to hammer out some sort of deal for the so-called tpp. guest: we are all for trade but we want fair trade not so-called

free trade. it puts america at a disadvantage. host: we will go to gary and canton, ohio, republican caller. caller: top of the day -- i have an important question -- how many years need to pass before we have a majority in congress courageous enough to launch a real investigation into the obvious scientific evidence -- host: that is not our topic this morning. let's move on to virginia beach, independent caller. caller: my name is cheryl. independent but i want to tell the representative that i totally agree with his comments on thetpp. i believe in fair trade and i starts that congress needing to create more it -- the government needs to create more jobs in our country to repair

them for structure. for the woman who called in about her small business, i completely understand where she is coming from. paid, justbody gets , susane woman previously collins made the comment that the minimum wage can be negotiated. $7.25-$10.10 per hour. i'm sorry, but i totally disagree with that and i think it should be increased more than $10.10. host: we will get a quick response. guest: there are people out there that think wages should go up even more. i probably have a tendency to agree with that comment. our job is to compromise and i think a $10.10 wage increase is a reasonable compromise in three years to get us a wage increase for the bottom wage earners. when youely agree that

are making the bare minimum wage, you are paying your rent and groceries and the basics, when you make more money come it starts to go to things like getting your hair done or going to the movies ongetting your hat stimulates the economy. wbaltv.com host: thank you for talking to our viewers. live coverage of the house on c-span. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. eternal god to whom we see who we are and what we can become, thank you for giving us another

day. send your spirit upon the members of this people's house to encourage them and their official tasks. be with them and with all who labor here to serve this great nation and its people. assure them that whatever their responsibilities you provide the grace to enable them to be faithful in their duties and the wisdom to be conscious of their obligations and fulfill them with integrity. remind us all of the dignity of work and teach us to use our talents and abilities in ways that are honorable and just and are a benefit to those we serve. may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his pproval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance today

will be led by the gentlelady from the district of columbia, ms. norton. ms. norton: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? >> mr. speaker, i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker: without objection. >> mr. speaker, i rise in celebration of the gentry, arkansas, fire department's 100th birthday. they are home to over 3,000 of my constituents and for the past 100 years the gentry fire department has been steadfastly committed to their safety and well-being as well as the safety of thousands more who reside in the surrounding areas of benton county. mr. womack: from its humble beginnings in 1914 to the

purchase of the first fire truck in the 19450es, the gentry fire department and its firefighters who have worked tirelessly for its citizens, protecting the lives and property of others. we rest easy knowing the department will continue to do so for the next century and i join the residents of gentry to express my profound gratitude. thank you tore the gentry firefighters, past and present, for 100 years of selfless service to the pioneer community. i wish you a very happy 100th birthday, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from hawaii seek recognition? without objection, the gentlelady is recognized. ms. hanabusa: thank you, madam speaker. the bottom line is we need bold visions to achieve full employment. we know only too well that we have had unprecedented periods of high unemployment.

we know that we have about 50 million people, 13 million who are children, living below the poverty in this the greatest country in the world. we know we must expand economic opportunity to have a strong middle class who are the backbone of this great country. we know that getting every american working will add to not only our tax base but also reduce the deficit and debt and eliminate poverty. so the question is, madam speaker, why aren't we doing it? where are the visionaries? where is the president's american jobs act of 2013? or the 21st century full employment and training act, where are they? madam speaker, let's bring them to the floor. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? ms. ros-lehtinen: to address

the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady from florida is recognized for one minute. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so much, mr. speaker. and i rise today to bring attention to the case of juliette diaz, an independent afro-cuban journalist who was unjustly detained by castro's thugs simply for photographing the brutality of the state security forces of fidel and raul castro in havana. the detention of this young journalist is not just the example of the regime's efforts to silence those who are critical of its actions but it also shows how ruthless the castro brothers continue to be in their policy of repressing independent voices and violating human rights. there's no independent press in cuba, and many journalists are afraid to speak out against the dictatorship for fear of incarceration. that is why it is so important to support the free flow of information on the island so that the cuban people can exchange ideas to promote democratic principles and the rule of law.

thank you, mr. speaker for the time, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from the district of columbia seek recognition? ms. norton: i ask -- the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady seek unanimous consent? ms. norton: unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. norton: mr. chairman -- mr. speaker, 18 states and the district of columbia have rapidly decriminalized marijuana laws, making them subject to only fines. they did so for various reasons. none of those reasons were more solid or important than the council's decision to decriminalize d.c.'s marijuana laws. african-americans in the district of columbia and whites use marijuana at the same rate but blacks have an arrest record for possession eight times that of whites. that's discrimination. it's the same thing when chairman john mica of the government operations committee of the oversight and government

reform committee decides to hold a hearing on d.c.'s marijuana decriminalization laws but none others. two prior hearings have looked at marijuana decriminalization. none has called public officials. be on notice. the district of columbia insist it not be treated any differently from the 18 states that decriminalized marijuana and the states who have legalized it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. last week i had the pleasure of holding a veterans affairs economic town hall and several houn -- town halls throughout my district. mr. walberg: i heard a growing concern about the increasing government intrusiveness, whether it's in the doctor's office, the classroom or the

economy. house republicans understand that our constituents want government to work efficiently and we've offered real solutions that will grow good-paying jobs and expand opportunity for all. in fact, we've already passed over 200 bills that will start helping people today, but unfortunately are still collecting dust in senator harry reid's desk. this includes bills that would lower health care costs and return choice back to patients as well as expand domestic energy production to both create jobs and lower costs for consumers. it's time, madam speaker, for the senate to join us in advancing real solutions. it's time to make life work better for all americans. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one

minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. today i rise to honor mr. harold corbin and thank him for his service to the 11th congressional district. this last saturday marked 50 years of continued service to this great district. it was the first district meeting that he had missed. mr. corbin is a life-long resident of franklin, north carolina, which is a testament to his commitment to our community. and from 1980 to 1989, mr. corbin served as republican chairman of the 11th congressional district, a chairman mr. corbin made important contributions that have had a lasting impact on western north carolina. in 1981, his activism led to the former representative bill hendon, which was the first republican congressman to represent the 11th district in over 100 years. mr. meadows: mr. corbin served as as chairman of the macon county board of commissioners. his leadership and inspiration to his son led his son to get

involved in politics, and they now hold -- he now holds that same position. it is both of them that have set a tremendous example for our nation. and i'll close with this. all of us in washington can learn a lesson from mr. corbin who has long said once elected representatives serving their constituents ought to leave their politics at the door and truly serve the citizens. i thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is so recognized. mr. desjarlais: madam speaker, i rise today to share my findings from last week's visit to the nuclear facility in ray county. the wattsboro facility is constructing a second nuclear unit which will be completed late next year. it will be the 21st century's first new reactor to go online,

doubling the facility's capacity and then creating reliable energy for nearly 1.3 million homes and businesses. this project has contributed significantly to the local economy by providing more than 3,300 high-paying jobs. t.v.a. makes safety and security its top priority and during the construction of unit two, the workers have achieved a milestone of 22.8 million work hours without a lost time incident. i'd like to extend a special thanks to t.v.a. senior vice president of operations and construction, mike skaggs, and his team for making my visit so educational and productive. madam speaker, it is imperative we continue to support the safe, affordable and reliable energy that nuclear provides in order to attract industry and create jobs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma seek recognition? mr. cole: mr. speaker, i ask

unanimous consent that all members have five days to -- in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 4487, and i may include tabular material in the same. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cole: mr. chairman -- the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 557 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of h.r. 4487. the chair appoints the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen, to preside over he committee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of h.r. 4487 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for the

legislative branch for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2015, and for other purposes. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read the first time. the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. cole, and the gentlewoman from florida, ms. wasserman schultz, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: madam chairman, thank you very much for the recognition, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: h.r. 4487, the legislative branch appropriations act for fiscal year 2015, provides $3.3 billion for the operations of the legislative branch excluding senate items. the recommendation is the equivalent to the fiscal year 2014 level and a decrease of $122.5 million or 3.7% from the requested level. conforming with the long-standing practice under which each body of congress determines its own housekeeping requirements and the other

concurs without intervention, funds for the senate are not included in the bill, as reported by the committee. through seven hearings and meetings with agency heads, the subcommittee listened to all who presented their respective concerns and budget request. it was necessary to make some critical decisions and prioritize programs and we did this in a bipartisan and transparent manner. we're presenting to the house today a bill that is fiscally responsible and maintains current operations for the legislative branch agencies. the bill includes $1.2 billion for the operations of the house. this is the equivalent to the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $20 million below the request. it's worthy to note that the funding provided for members' representational allowances in committees provides for the current operations, and i do not anticipate further reductions in the coming year. the bill also includes the members' pay freeze for fiscal year 2015. this bill total funding for the

house of representatives is 14% below the fiscal year 2010. the bill includes $348 million for the capitol police. this is $9.5 million above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $7.7 million less than the requested level. this will support 1,775 sworn officers and 370 civilian positions. . a slight i crease to ep sure capitol police maintain current operations and restore mission essential travening. knowing access to the house office buildings is of critical concern to members, we directed that the chief of police develop an action plan that will make sure public access to our buildings is easily accessible during the heightened periods of visitation. the implementation of this plan -- we will continue to monitor the budgetary impacts to the capitol police. the bill includes $45.7 million

for the congressional budget office. this is at the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $378,000 below the requested level. the bill includes $488.6 million for the architect of the capitol, excluding senate ime thames. this is a decrease of $40.5 million from the fiscal year 2014 enacted level and $79 million below the requested level. within the recommended level, the committee continues its prioritization of projects that promote the safety and public health of workers and occupants. decrease deferred maintenance backlog, and invest in future energy savings. the committee recognizes the continuing challenge of preserving and maintaining our infrastructure and prioritizing critical projects in the current budgetary environment. it's important to note that $21 million as recommended for the final phase of dome restoration, a very high priority of this

committee. in addition, we are continuing the five-year practice of including funds to the house historic buildings revitalization trust fund. a fund established by ms. wasserman schultz when she was the chair of the subcommittee in an tiss of the ren nation of the historic cannon office building might i say one of the really tremendous contributions that my friend and colleague has made, and i hope it stays inside of our operating procedures for many years to come. it was a wise decision. also included in $16 million for the lease cost for the portion of the thomas p. o'neill fatherly office buildings in preparation for the cannon renewal project. the bill includes $595 million for the operations of the library of congress. this is an increase of $16 million above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. and $1.9 million above the requested level. the amount will allow the library to continue its current operations. established by congress in 1800,

the library of congress is one of the largest libraries in the world, with a collection of more than 130 million print, audio, and video items in 460 languages. it's imperative adequate fund something provided to maintain acquisitions, preservation, and the administration of u.s. copyright laws by the copyright office research and analysis policy issues for congress by the congressional research services, and the administration of the national program to provide reading materials to the blind and physically handicapped. the bill before you accomplishes that. it's important to note $5.5 million of the funding is he provided for the deacidfication program, $1 million over the library's request. $8. million for the teaching and primary sources. and developing interactive and apps for classroom use on congress and civic

participation. $1.2 million above the request for the copyright office to reduce the claims and process processing time for copyright registrations and conduct business analysis for the process of engineering and documentation recordation function. the bill includes $122.6 million for the government printing office. an increase of $3.3 million above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level, and $6.3 million below the requested level. funds have been included for a continuation of the development and infrastructure cost associated with the federal digital system, and the system replacement of upgrading the extendable markup language. the bill includes $519 million for the government accountability office. this is an increase of $14.2 million above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. and $5.5 million below the requested level.

language is included to establish a senate for audit excellence to build global institutional auditing capacity and promote good governance. this center is to be operated on a fee-based basis. finally, the bill includes $3.42 million for the open world leadership trust fund. this is $2.58 billion below the fiscal year 2014 enacted level, and $4.58 million below the requested level. as a sign of support for the ukraine, the committee has reduced the program by 43%. this represents the program's percentage of participants from russia. it's important to stress that open world program does not just focus on work with russia. ukraine has the next largest group of participants, closely followed by other nations in the surrounding regions. therefore we encourage the senate to do more in ukraine and with other participating countries in the surrounding region. i'd like to thank my good friend, the ranking member, debbie wasserman schultz, for her role throughout the process. we have worked well together in a bipartisan manner.

it's truly been a team effort. also i extend my appreciation to all members of the subcommittee in their efforts in helping bring this measure to the floor. and i also want to thank the truly excellent staff who has nursed me through this. let me just add, parenthetically, we had a pretty unusual situation because of some early retirements and the loss of our dear friend, bill young, we had a lot of reshuffling to do on our committee. on our side, that meant we only had one carryover member, that was my vice chairman, mr. harris from maryland, who was indefensible and helpful to the rest of us. again we got a capable staff and without, frankly, wonderful working partner in my ranking member, we would have had a much more difficult time. frankly i don't think anybody in this institution knows this bill and this process better than ms. wasserman schultz. she's been my friend and as i was once on her committee as a very junior member when she

chaired it, i learned a lot from her then and learned more this time. i look forward to debate. with that, madam -- madam chairman, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from florida is recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: without objection. ms. wasserman schultz: first, i want to thank chairman rogers and my ranking member, nita lowey, for the commitments they made to regular order, which is why we have our second appropriations bill on the house floor by may 1. it is my hope that we can stay true to this commitment throughout the remainder of this year. i also want to thank my friend, the gentleman from oklahoma, tom cole, who really i couldn't say enough good things about what an incredible partner he has been. we really have an i'll say that several times throughout my remarks worked cooperatively, collaboratively, and i think the finest compliment i can pay another member is that they are an institutionalist. someone who has incredible respect for those that came before us, and the history and

led ion and all that has to us being the finest democratic institution in the entire world. we are stewards of the capitol come plecks in the legislative branch appropriations subcommittee, and the chairman really has most definitely recognized that and honored it. the budget deal struck during the shutdown last year gave us two years of discretionary caps so that the appropriations committee can now get on with the business of funding important government programs. there are many opinions about how these resources should be allocate the amongst programs, but that's a legitimate debate rather than the alternative which we saw during the government shutdown last october. for my part, i'm pleased with and supportive of the bill that my good friend, chairman cole, has put forward today, done within the funding constraints that the legislative branch subcommittee had to operate under. he we worked collaboratively and as always it was a pleasure to work with him. the bill provides level funding and unfortunately the constrained allocation has

ensured that there is no increase for member and committee offices. personal office budgets have been cut by 16% since 2010. while committees have been cut by 14% over the same period. when considered through a long lens, those cuts are even more damaging. the congressional research service reported on august, 2010, that house committee staff levels declined 28% between 1977 and 2009. the recent cuts have only served to compound the decline in staffing levels highlighted by c.r.s. there is no question that these cuts will continue to have a harmful effect on this institution. on our ability to retain the best and brightest, and to serve our constituents most effectively. we have gone through some difficult economic times. there's no question. but as we emerge, we need to consider how continuing these stark funding levels affect our ability to compete with the executive branch and the senate for the best talent. when a senator can offer to double the salary of a legislative assistant working

for a house member, there is an imbalance that we ignore as the house at our peril. i want to thank chairman cole also for the focus placed on the copyright office in this bill. in the f.y. 2015 budget hearing with the library of congress last month, we heard about the need to bring the system into the 21st century with business practices that provide more for interact and improved interact with the copy -- interaction with the copyright community. this invests for much needed improvements. it sarves out $750,000 to deal with the backlog which grew larger over the last few years as they lost staff due to tightening budgets. as the authorizing committees reviewed these laws, these additional investments will ensure the copyright office can meet immediate needs as well as prepare for new ways to do business. during the capitol police hearing and during subcommittee markup, we heard from members on both sides of the aisle about the impact that door closures have had on our constituents and

staff. this is why we included report language requesting a report on how the capitol police can accomplish door openings without increasing overtime. we have now received what i can only hope is a draft report from the capitol police that details the opening of only two doors for 2 1/2 hours each day. the committee has been clear that access is one of the capitol police's top priorities, and the current plan does not reflect that priority. my expectation, which i know is shared by many members s. that now that the capitol police have been provided essentially full relief from the sequester, multiple doors throughout the house should be staffed and opened for the entire workday. reducing overtime costs through door closures is unacceptable. forcing our constituents, staff, and people trying to do business at the capitol into long lines is inefficient and strussful for the public and officers -- stressful for the public and officers. i will be asking the chief to go back to the drawing board on this report. the bill continues funding for the house historic building's

revitalization trust fund. since the estimate to rehabilitate the cannon house office buildings, which is 100 years old, has come in at a staggering $753 million, investing a little at a time in the trust fund is the most responsible way to fund this and other major projects. the bill also includes funding for the final phase of the capitol dome project at $21.2 million. the funding provided this year will address the interior walls, columns, and coppered ceilings that have sustained significant water damage. the public will soon see the sky line of our nation's capitol changed with scaffolding that will begin to go up at the end of this month using funding from previous years. the total price tag to restore the dome will be around $1 o 06 million. this bill also directs the library of congress to continue their 30-year program to deaside phi books and provides and additional $1 million to keep that program on track. also of note, the bill cuts the open world leadership center by

43% to $3.4 million. and the senate leadership program is funded at $435,000 after finally and thankfully providing the committee with a budget justification for the first time on time. i congratulate chairman cole on writing a balanced bill with a few targeted investments. even though i wish we could do more, and i know he does, to invest in our staff, i know the chairman had many competing priorities, including or back infrastructure needs. chairman cole, again i have enjoyed, truly, working with you in this role and i appreciate the accommodations made for the minority in this bill, working with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, has been an absolute pleasure and collaborative and cooperative effort. we are truly the -- i think the example for the entire congress on what collegiality means. the process in putting this bill together was really a team effort. the chairman coal understands that this -- cole understands this may be the smallest but one that is essential to his colleagues and the job they do. in conclusion, mr. chairman, i

want to thank the committee staff as well who has helped to craft this bill and assisted the subcommittee in a bipartisan manner over the course of the year. shalonda, liz, who continues to amaze every single year. chuck turner, and jenny. and also we could not have done this without our personal staff, maria and sean with chairman cole's personal office, and ian from my office. madam chair, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: thank you, matam -- madam chairman. i yield two minutes to my good friend from the great state of tennessee, mrs. blackburn. the chair: the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized tore two minutes. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam chairman. i seek the opportunity to have a colloquy with chairman cole. i thank them for their work. the chairman and his staff, the work they have put into the legislation they are bringing before us this morning. as a member of the congressional yellow pages caucus, i strongly believe that if an activity is

available from a private company that can be found in the yellow pages, it should yield either not be a responsibility carried out by the federal government or at the very least performed by a private firm under contract with the federal government. it's in that spirit that congress needs to begin the process of leveling the playing field between the government printing office, the g.p.o., and private industry. nowhere is the overreach of the g.p.o. and its statutory authority found in title 44 of the united states code, more egregious than in the area of secure federal credentials. consider this, title 44 was codified in 1968, secure credentials produced by the private sector first appeared about 30 years later, and then became pervasive after 9/11. . i can't imagine that policymakers in the 1960's

could ever envision that it would go beyond the federal register or declaration to cover credentials, let alone to secure credentials as the kind of printed products the g.p.o. has traditionally produced. the g.p.o. statutory monopoly on this issue has been challenged by numerous reports by the g.a.o. and groups such as the national performance review. secure credentials are a world apart from the products g.p.o. has traditionally produced and should not be subject to title 44. i hope that we can take steps to define a clear role for the g.p.o., create competition and sure that the private secure credentials industry, like a company in tennessee, can perform the functions that g.p.o. has no business in carrying out. and i yield the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady

yields back. the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. and the gentlelady from florida is recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself 30 seconds just to note that -- the chair: you're recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: just to note that the government printing office has been in business doing the job beyond the scope of printing the federal register for more than 100 years. it's also important to note that they specifically contract with the private sector to print a myriad of documents, and they are not the only institution that prints documents. at this time, madam chair, i'd like to yield five minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for five minutes. mr. moran: thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank my good friend from florida for her leadership on this bill as well as my very good friend from oklahoma who's done a terrific job as chair. both of you take your responsibilities extremely seriously, as you should.

this is the bill that funds the institution itself. d you've both resisted efforts to demean this nstitution and to suggest that traditions and resources that have been available to this institution in the past are not necessary. both of you understand because you are institutionalists and revere this institution. there are a lot of things that go on in this institution that play an important role towards serving the american public. i do regret the fact that there was an amendment that was not made in order. i didn't expect that this amendment would have passed, but it was an amendment, an issue that needed to be discussed on the house floor because it sets a precedent what i believe is a very

dangerous precedent. this year this bill freezes congressional compensation. it's the sixth year in a row that we have frozen our own salaries, but by putting it in this bill -- i've been part of this institution long enough to know that once you do that there's a very high likelihood that neither political party, no matter who has the majority, is going to be willing to ever take it out. and so it will acquire an aspect of perm assistance. so what i -- permanence. so what i suggested is that we have a $25 a day housing stipend just for those members that live at least 50 miles from washington, d.c. i'm 10 miles. it wouldn't have affected me. none of the other things that as available to members

small as they might be wouldn't affect us either. it wouldn't apply to the next term. i'm retiring, but i will never lose my love for this institution and that's why i'm doing it. just happens that we be in session in 112 times days times $25. it would come to exactly what the salary increase would have been had we not frozen it. the reason for doing it is since i was first elected to the congress, an inflation -- in inflation adjusted to dollars, compensation has gone by 1/5. meantime, the cost of rental housing in d.c. has increased substantially. rental housing is going up as fast or faster than most other

metropolitan areas of the country. in fact, the median cost per month for rental -- well, per month it's $2,250. per year it's $27,000. the problem is that if we continue to freeze the compensation to members, my fear is -- mr. cole, i know, is going to provide a different perspective. but i think the fear is legitimate that what we will wind up with are a composition of the congress composed primarily of members who don't need the pay or independently wealthly who can blightly send a check back and get credit for it because they don't need it. in fact, more than half the congress today, i understand, are millionaires. on the other hand, you may have some who figure, well, i'll serve, one, two, three terms

and then go into the private sector. and use that experience, albeit limited, to enrich themselves. a lot of people do it. not being particularly critical, but i want to raise the issue as to what that means for the congress itself, for this institution. i don't think this is the right thing to do, madam speaker. we need people who represent those folks who barely make it, who have to pay a mortgage, who have student loans to pay, who have kids to raise. they represent the majority in this country, and it is so difficult for members to maintain two residences. wouldn't have expected us to lose an opportunity but i think

we should have raised this issue -- ms. wasserman schultz: if the gentleman isn't finished i'd be happy to yield an additional minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. moran: i thank my very good friend. i think i made my point. we need to be as representive of the country as possible. for all our failings, for all our deficiencies, for all our needs, our struggles, we need to be able to empathize with people who have the same kind of financial constraints. and i know people think this is a lot of money, but you know, if you're not going to show respect to yourself as an institution, you can't expect the public to show you respect either. we are the board of directors of the largest economic entity in the world. we deserve that respect. we ought to stand up for ourselves, defend this congress

because what we do is defensible, and show that we merit adequate compensation so we can be wholly representative of this great american public. thank you, madam speaker. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady reserves, and the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: thank you, madam chairman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: my friend and i had a number of opportunities to talk about this issue. we talked about it in committee. we talked about it yesterday in discussion on the rule and we're talking about it today. because i think he wants to make his point. i think he's using every opportunity to make his point, and quite frankly it's a point that needs to be made and a point that deserves to be heard. and one of the things i will miss about my friend a lot is his tenacity when he's got something that he think's important and his willingness to go through a little heat and

criticism which i know he received over this to make his point. i think it's characteristic in any member. i don't think we are in immediate danger of the kind of future and the kind of house that my friend describes, but i do think if we were to continue this course indefinitely we would be. as i mentioned yesterday in our exchange, remember people that come here for a short time, they are not going to cash out on anything. they believe in a limitted time of public service. that's a popular point of view in their districts so i cash no aspersions on someone that comes for six or eight years and that's their choice. in my state that's exactly what senator tom coburn did in this body for six years and what he's done in the united states senate. i know that's a sincere opinion as to what i thinks is the appropriate thing is and quite frankly never cashed himself out. i think that's true of many, many members. but i also think, you know, as my friend makes a good point

about the character of the body and where we may be headed if we do the wrong things over time, i also think we're in a really critical point in our country where we're having to make a lot of difficult decisions. we've made a lot of difficult decisions on this committee. made a lot of cuts that we didn't want to make because we thought the budget deficit was too high and we needed to ask people to make some painful reductions. and i think if you're going to ask people to make painful reductions you got to lead by example. i think that's actually what both sides have tried to do. again, i know when my friends were in the majority we didn't always get cost of living increases and those sorts of things either. they inherited a difficult situation. they were making tough choices. they were tried to lead by example. i think that's what this majority has tried to continue to do. so maintaining your credibility and your institutional responsibility while you're

administering -- arriving and administering difficult decisions is a very important characteristic. that's what we tried to do in this bill. i appreciate my friend for making his point. i think over time we could change the character of the institution. it's one we ought to reflect on as we move forward. again, i thank him for his service and i thank him for his persistence and tenacity. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. and the gentlelady from florida is recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, madam chair. at this time i yield such time as she may consume to our distinguished ranking member of the full appropriations committee, nita lowey from new york. the chair: the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: well, thank you, madam speaker. d i want to thank chairman cole and ranking member debbie wasserman schultz for their hard work on this bill. it really was a bipartisan effort, and i do think you have produced a good bill. today we consider the smallest

of the appropriations bills which funds the operations of our nation's legislative branch. without senate items, the bill as .326 billion, the same 2014. while i'm pleased with the overall funding level, it was my hope that after years of cuts to members' representational allowances, or the m.r.a.'s, we might provide a modest increase this year. member offices have sustained . 06 million in cuts since while some reductions were appropriate, it has strained the house's ability to serve the american people due to fewer staff or constituent casework, the inability to effectively communicate with our constituents and fewer district offices. unless we return to sensible funding levels, we cannot stave

off the further erosion of expertise, morale and comity in this great institution. this bill funds the open world leadership program at $3.42 million, a reduction of $2.58 million. instead of reducing funds equivalent to the amount for exchanges with russians, we should ship the funds to support a larger presence in ukraine and other countries fostering democratic principles, as suggested in the committee report. mr. speaker -- madam speaker, with that said, i congratulate once again the chairman and the ranking member of the subcommittee for putting forth a balanced bill and urge your support. the chair: the gentlelady from new york yields back, and the gentlelady from florida reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: i reserve the balance

of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from florida is recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, madam chair. at this time i yield three minutes to our distinguished ranking member from the military construction appropriations subcommittee and the gentleman from georgia, mr. bishop. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for three minutes. . mr. bishop: i thank the gentlelady for yielding and for recognizing me. madam chair, i just wanted to say a few words in support of this year's legislative branch appropriations act. i have been honored to serve on this subcommittee for the last four years. i am the only member, in fact, who has served on the subcommittee for the last two congresses. it may have the smallest budget of the 12 appropriations bills, but it is vital to the work we do here in congress and to serve our constituents. from paying our staffs to maintaining a digital and printed report of our work, to

getting cost estimates of our legislative proposals, the leg branch is so important to the proper functioning of our system of government. it's especially gratifying that this year reverses some of the draconian cuts to the legislative branch which has occurred over the last few years. i said last year including these cuts would have been like cutting our nose to spite our face. after all, agencies under the bill's jurisdiction like the congressional budget office and the government accountability office, help congress to identify potential savings and efficiencies throughout the government. or consider the architect of the capitol which is responsible for the maintenance, operation, development, and preservation of the united states capitol. two years ago the house couldn't find the necessary funds to complete the restoration of one of the most vital symbols of our democracy, the capitol dome. i'm pleased this year that the legislature includes $21.2 million for the last phase of the capitol dome restoration.

other agencies in the bill received much needed investments, including library of congress, united states capitol police, and government printing office. i'd like to commend the outstanding bipartisan work of chairman cole and ranking member wasserman schultz in crafting this year's bill. chairman cole has done a yeoman's job in stepping in at the last moment following the retirement of our colleague, mr.