compliance if the secretary finds that such a requirement is not in the public interest. this requirement can be waived but only if the designation is made available for public comment 30 days before the waiver takes effect. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. latham: i reserve a point of order. the chair: the gentleman's point of order is reserved. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. garamendi: i understand the point of order. i would like to speak to this issue and also onto the others at the same time and drop the other amendments. yesterday yesterday, i had the pleasure of driving across san francisco bay on the brand new east san francisco bay bridge, a multibillion dollar project. the steel of the main project bass built in china, fabricated in china, a chinese company

bought a steel mill, most advanced in the world. 3,000 chinese jobs, zero americans jobs. the way they are able to get around the buy american provisions segmented the multibillion project into 20 different pieces delby avoiding the buy american sections. this amendment would prohibit that from ever happening again. the other amendments speak to the $50 billion that is going to be spent by this bill and would require in various ways that this money be spent here in america on american goods, american steel, american products and on american workers. . we ought to buy in america. we ought never to have another bay bridge. we ought to do what we did in the american recovery act that required that some $800 million

for amtrak locomotives be spent on american. 100% american-made and indeed semen, the german company, has established a manufacturing plant in sacramento to manufacture those locomotives. we should increase the percentage of american content from 60% to 100%. this is american taxpayer money. that money ought to be spent in america. american taxpayers should demand it, the members of congress should demand that their taxpayers' money be spent on american-made equipment, goods and services. this is part of the make it in america agenda. and it is most specific here at this time as we are about, in the next day, to spend $50 billion of american taxpayer money. are we going to spend it on

american-made equipment? american goods and services? or are they going to be coming from china? or somewhere else in the world? the question is very straightforward for all of us. unfortunately because of the point of order that will be raised on this and the other six amendments, we will not have a chance tonight, tomorrow and perhaps in the days ahead to really do something for america and rebuilding our manufacturing sector by requiring that our taxpayer money be spent on american-made goods and services and on american workers. with that i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. latham: mr. chairman, i make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation on an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule 21. the rule states in pertinent part, an amendment to a general

appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law. the amendment requires a new determination. and i ask for a ruling from the chair. i yield back. the chair: does any other member wish to be heard on this point of order? if not, the chair finds that this amendment includes language requiring a new determination of compliance with a law not otherwise applicable. the amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule 21, the point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. it's grayson amendment number 70. the chair: the clerk will eport amendment number 70. the clerk: amendment offered by

mr. grayson of florida. at the end of the bill, before the short title insert the following, section, none of the funds made available in this act may be used to authorize, approve or implement a toll on existing free lanes on any segment of interstate 4 in the state of florida. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. grayson: thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment would prohibit any funds appropriated by this bill from being used for the purpose of establishing a toll on any existing free lane of interstate 4 in the state of florida. i-4 as we call it back home is the most traveled road in the central florida region. thousands of my constituents each day commute to and from work using the road. to use their hard-earned tax dollars to implement a new fee on their commutes just seems wrong to me and that's buy i'm -- and that's why i'm offering this amendment. i don't think it should be treated differently -- floridians should be treated differently in this bill than texans are in a different part

of this bill. my constituents want to keep their free free, and i don't -- their freeway free, and i don't blame them. local authorities are free to build new lanes and expressways as the federal government and provide construction as they see fit. i'm here to make sure that the existing free lanes on i-4 remain untolled. i urge support for this amendment and after all, a toll is very much like a tax, as my colleagues on the other side of the aisle should recognize. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. latham: strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. latham: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in opposition to the amendment. there are multiple toll finance projects along the i-4 corridor that could potentially be disrupted by this prohibition. further, this prohibition could undermine the credit worthiness of pending applications for federal loans to support critical projects along i-4.

this road crosses multiple member districts and is not clear what effect it may have on future i-4 projects. therefore i must urge a no vote on the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. mr. grayson: will the gentleman yield for a question? mr. latham: i yielded back. the chair: the gentleman has yielded back. the question is on -- for what purpose does -- for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona rise? mr. pastor: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pastor: i yield to the gentleman from florida. mr. grayson: i'd like to yield to the gentleman from iowa. this amendment was originally drafted to apply to both new and existing lanes. this amendment was redrawn and redrafted to specifically limit it to existing free lanes. all of the contract work that's being done in central florida, and in fact around the country at this point, would not be affected by this amendment because it applies to only existing free lanes. my question to the gentleman from iowa is, did the gentleman realize that the amendment had been modified before the

gentleman opposed the amendment? the chair: the gentleman from arizona controls the time. the gentleman will address the chair. mr. pastor: i would like to yield to the chairman of the subcommittee for response. mr. latham: i thank the gentleman from arizona. yes, we were aware of it. we've been advised by d.o.t. of the ramifications of this amendment in the revised form and that's why i rise in opposition. it's d.o.t.'s concerns we're raising. mr. grayson: i thank the gentleman for his clarification. i yield back, mr. chairman. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. he amendment is not agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise?

mr. grayson: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: will will the gentleman specify? mr. grayson: yes, grayson number 8. the chair: the clerk will report amendment number 8. amendment offered by mr. grayson of florida. at the end of the bill, before the short title, insert the following, section, none of the funds made available by this act may be used to provide a per-passenger subsidy in excess of $250 under the essential air service program. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. latham: mr. chairman, i reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the point of order is reserved. the gentleman from florida is recognized for five minutes. mr. grayson: mr. chairman, the central air service program or e.a.s. -- essential air service program, or e.a.s., is an expensive government handout. it is in effect welfare for airplanes. page 9 of this bill states that under the e.a.s., the per-passenger subsidy for flights that would otherwise

not exist to rural communities, excluding hawaii and alaska, is capped at $500 per passenger. that's simply too high. i don't see any reason why we should be paying people $500 to fly from communities. not when this congress is cutting food aid programs and development block grants to communities. i think this is a very poor use of taxpayer funds. it's an example of the waste, fraud and abuse that we constantly decry. my amendment would reduce the $500 per-passenger subsidy to the still very high $250 because $500 are00 per passenger is simple -- $500 per passenger is simply outrageous. if passengers don't want to fly those routes, the subsidies shouldn't exist and the routes shouldn't exist. for $500 per passenger, we could rent a limousine for every single person that boards some of these e.a.s. flights and drive them to the nearest commercial airport. i understand the need for rural services for necessary aspects

of life like postal service, telephones and even the internet. but i cannot understand the need to subsidize regular airline flights that would otherwise not exist to the tune of $500 per passenger. many of these flights fly empty, many of these flights have only one or two or three passengers on them on a large airplane. they exist only because the government is paying the bill. we are taxing people to subsidize other people's air fare. the bill before us today would cut funding for transit starts by 13%, tiger grants by 80%, public housing mod modernization by 5% and the home program for 30%, among other things. under these circumstances, i cannot stand here in good conscience and allow a subsidy like this to continue. i offer this amendment today because it's more important to put a roof over the heads of the poor in this housing bill, to make sure people have a means to get to work and to get to their families and their loved ones in this transportation bill, than it is to hand out corporate welfare

to united airlines. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. latham: mr. chairman, i make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation on an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule 21. the rule states in pertinent part, an amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law. the amendment requires a new determination with respect to the calculation of a per-passenger subsidy. i ask for a ruling of the chair. the chair: does any other member wish to be heard on this point of order? mr. grayson: i do. the chair: the gentleman from florida. mr. grayson: this very same bill limits this subsidy to $500 per passenger. in this bill. earlier on this bill, that is the determination that this bill requires to be made. i am simply changing that figure from $500 to $250.

it is, shall i say this, unwarranted to say that that's expecting any new law, enacting anything new, it's simply modifying another provision in this specific act. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair finds that this amendment includes language requiring a new determination. the amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule 21. the point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order. does any other member seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. latham: mr. chairman, i ove the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises.

mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union, having had under consideration h.r. 4745rks has directed me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the has come to nos remain title of the resolution on the bill -- has come to no esolution on the bill. the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence

requested for mr. danny davis of illinois for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request s granted. for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, i move that we adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the house stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning for

>> c-span's new book includes kenneth feinberg, who oversaw the 9/11 victim compensation fund. >> from the perspective of the victims, i do not see any distinction. if you try to justify my program on the basis of the witt films yes, 911 yes,ss, trade center know, i think the only way you justify this a special carveout is from the perspective of the that 9/11 along with the american civil war, pearl

harbor, maybe the assassination of president kennedy and 9/11, its impact on the american people was such that this was from americaonse to demonstrate the solidarity and cohesiveness of the american people towards these victims. >> read more of our conversation with kenneth feinberg and other featured interviews from our book notes and q&a programs in c-span's sundays at eight, now available for a father's day gift from your favorite bookseller. >> the outline of the administration plan to help college students with their loans began with education secretary arnie duncan, who spoke with reporters monday in the briefing room. comments, about 20 minutes, president obama signed the executive order changing student loan programs. >> good luck in this new job.

>> thank you. >> proud of you. because itoday continue to believe, and, in fact, i am convinced that a college education is the single most important investment americans can make to build a stronger future. although college has never been more important, unfortunately, college has never been more expensive. heaps manycost students and their parents up at night, and many of you in that boat are probably in this room. some are wondering, is it worth it? is to be clear, it absolutely worth it. research continues to show the many, many benefits of higher education. secondarypost education are higher earnings, lower unemployment, and greater economic strength for our nation, and when i talk about a college education, that means everything from a four-year at ae or a two-year degree

college or technical training. in theynamic and diverse education system, but for too many of our low and middle-income families, the dream of going to college is slipping out of their reach as tuition continues to rise and more students than ever are relying on loans to pay for it. i have traveled to all 50 states, and everywhere i go, i need students and families who feel overwhelmed trying to repay student loans. even worse, students and high school who desperately want to pursue some form of higher education, but they feel college is too expensive or are afraid due to debtut loans they fear they cannot manage. -- afraid of taking out loans. that time, herat parents were trying to decide which twin to send to college, her or her brother, and that was

a very real conversation in their family. with these kinds of conversations, we obviously have to do better. it is not good for the economic strength of our families or our nation as a whole. hasobama administration made progress in terms of repayment options for borrowers, and those that determine repayment based on how much you loan and on years of public service. they are looking to raise awareness about the steps the borrowers can take to manage their debt, and we know there is more than needs to be done. as part of the impact to extend opportunity to all americans, president obama is committed to make student debt more affordable and manageable to repay. the president has called on the senate to pass legislation, allowing 25 million student loan borrowers to refinance outstanding student loans at lower interest rates.

save the typical student as much as $2000 over the life of the loan. billion, the math, $50 and you think about that going into buying cars and houses and starting businesses. and today, president obama is taking further action by signing a presidential memorandum directs our department, the department of education, to consider and develop regulation that could allow an additional 5 million student loan borrowers to cap there amounts. president is also outlying executive actions to make sure we are all doing what we can do to support federal student loan borrowers, especially vulnerable farmers who may be at risk of defaulting on their loans. there are incentives so that they are encouraged to serve students well, operating with the are, and assuring our active-duty military get the

relief they need and deserve and are entitled to. college is absolutely worth it by every measure. we want to do more to make college more affordable. so today's announcement is just one more step towards that goal, and we look forward to do this as we go forward. two questions for you. the price tag, 7.6 billion dollars in its first year. and you tell us how you are paying for that? >> obviously, there is a regulatory process, and we think this is something that will be fantastic for the economy, and, again, having people paying back loans, lying cars, starting businesses, there are huge benefits there, but we will work the details as we go through the regulatory process. legislation, basically

opting out of the common or standard, are they looking for other states following that example? >> that me be clear. we have always been about high standards, college and career ready standards, and what we are reacting to, no child left behind, we had about 20 states who actually dummied down their standards to make politicians look good, and it is bad for kids and the country and terrible for education. we need to have college standards, so whether they are the oklahoma, example is a pretty interesting one, just to give you some facts, and i think, sadly, this is not about education. it is about politics. about 40% ofa, college graduates -- this is not the dropouts -- ordered percent of the college graduates have to take remedial courses when they go to college.

why? because they are not ready. about 25% of the oklahoma eighth graders in math are proficient, and other states are out educating oklahoma, and you go back just a couple of months ago, this is what the governor said about higher standards, and i am quoting here, and she said the standards, and i am voting her, the standards need to be college and career ready. common core is not a federal program. it is driven and implemented by those state to choose to participate. it is also not a federal curriculum. in fact, it is not a curriculum at all. they still design the best lesson plans and choose that wille textbooks drive classroom learning. so what changed? politics. >> they say there is a possibility that her state could receive federal funding. is that a real possibility? >> again, we are partnering with

folks who have high standards. if you want to dummied down the standards, that is a different thing. where we will challenge the status quo. , that those yes that pull out could lose their federal funding? asking is that standards be high, college and career ready, not certified by by the localied institutions of higher education. we have a problem. we want to make sure our high school graduates are not having to take remedial classes, taking noncredit bearings, and right now, roughly, 40% of those graduates in oklahoma are having to do that. i do not think that is good for those young people, their families, or the country. >> what do you say to those who say the structure is responsible for creating the bubble that has created the wave of indebtedness?

>> it is not true. we have to work together. it is not about pointing fingers. it is about mutual responsibility and accountability. we want to continue to invest at the federal level. there are $40 billion of additional programs. grants,money into wildly controversial in washington. about 9 million. we want to continue to play with what we have done. we went to continue to reduce that debt burden, but we cannot do it alone. this dates have to invest, and when states stop investing, and universities have to do a better job of keeping down their tuition and focusing not just on access but on completion, so all of us have to work together in this effort and do the right thing. do the same thing. airplanes, wherever i am, for hard-working americans. it is a huge, huge challenge.

it worries the vice president, the president, and it worries me. >> can you give us an update on your report card that is supposed to show the value? >> yes. we are on track to have that december 15. the school year. to takeill ask congress federal funds? >> this has been controversial. nation, we put out 150 billion dollars in grants and loans each year. that is all of us, taxpayer money going out, and basically zero of that, very little of that goes to outcomes. just getting transparency. what is a grant? what is a loan? what is a four-year college? what is the graduation rate of the college you're going to? transparency and having that. example, ipositive

did the commencement address at arizona state a couple of weeks ago. the president has done an amazing job over the past 6 p.m. in eight years increasing graduation rates, record numbers of african-american and hispanic and native americans going. it is around inclusion rather than exclusion. it is bringing student costs down in a pretty interesting way. are some of the most reasons for college costs escalating? ori do not know if it is one two. the state disinvestment in tough economic times was not helpful, and, again, challenging universities to do a better job of containing costs and to make it not about costs. it is about value. not access, but graduation. the goal is not to go to college. it is to get that degree.

like thexample, university of maryland system, they are using technology in classes to drive down costs and increasing completion rates. that is the type of innovation that we want to incentivize. universities, not doing such a great job. >> the legal rationale for what the president is doing today? rationale, why was it not done at years ago? >> he have done this in the past. we didgo back to 2010, this for future students going forward. we came back in 2011 and did it for current students. what the president is doing and asking folks i i'm not the constitutional

dollar -- scholar. >> you can do this above and beyond? >> in the past nobody challenged it. >> roger. in the 10% cap, how many students are taking advantage of it now? has there been any research saying they are doing what they are supposed to do? >> i will have to get the numbers to you. ising this as an option

really important. >> and might of today's events, i am wondering if there is any regret and the administration. >> i don't know the details. we have a real opportunity to break through. we are doing a series of executive actions ourselves. this is something we have to think about when you have a trillion dollars in debt. what do you do to help young people going to college? there have been lots of focus on the cost of debt. we also want to focus on the amount of debt. >> i am wondering as an athlete what you think about the into aa issues being debated right now.

>> i don't have an opinion. i have followed it not as closely as i maybe should. these are complex issues. i think student athletes should not just be going to the institution to make millions of dollars for the institution and have no degree to show for it. i grew up playing with students who did exactly that. and cameake the nba home and had very tough lives. making sure young people had a chance not just to play but to be students first, athletes second. having a chance to come back and earn their diploma, and looking at their long-term medical needs. i think there is a commonsense middleground people should get to. beingyou think they are taken advantage of? >> i don't know the details.

i challenge universities and university presidents and athletic erectors. where they are being used to generate revenues for the , it is absolutely abusing those young men and women. if they can get that college degree that changes their life. degree get that college they have a huge opportunity in front of them. if they don't have that, if they compete for a couple years and go back to the streets with nothing, they have been used, and that is not acceptable. we have challenged them to use graduation rates in order to the final thing is it is interesting. ,he vast majority of contracts the majority of incentives are

tied to wins and losses. very little is tied to academic performance. the structure is backwards. they would have to meet a minimum academic success. is there a crisis when it comes to minorities and student loan implementation? >> young people have access to loans. we want to make sure they have access not just to loans but to pell grants. the challenge is getting more young people to pay back these loans. if we can mitigate the costs we can have more young people paying back loans, buying houses, becoming entrepreneurs. we think that is the right thing to do. we are still working on that. they have done some very good work together.

thanks, guys. >> thank you, everybody. everybody have a seat. welcome to the white house. i want to thank andy for the terrific introduction. this is commencement season. i would say we have some folks who just graduated. raise your hands. we have a couple of folks feeling pretty good. of course once the glow wears off this can be a stressful time for millions of students. themselves how on earth am i going to pay off all these student loans. that is what we are here to talk about. andy i think gave a vivid example of what is going through the minds of so many young people who had the drive and energy and have succeeded in

everything they do but because of family circumstances find themselves in the situation where they have got significant debt. we know that in the 21st century economy, higher education is the single best investment you can make in yourself and your future. we have to make sure that investment pays off. here is why. 451 months in a row our businesses have created new jobs. 9.4 million new jobs in total. we have averaged 200,000 new jobs every month. are doinge at the top better than ever average wages have barely fudged. -- average wages have barely budge. sure whened at making

they are diminishing the number of letters that go into the middle class. of my life at michelle's life is this is a country where opportunity should be available for anybody. the idea that no matter who you are and how you were raised, if you are willing to work hard and live up to your responsibilities you can make it here in america. in american higher education opens the doors of opportunity for all. it doesn't have to be a four-year education. we have community colleges and technical schools. we know some additional skills is going to be your surest path to the middle class. the typical american with a bachelors degree or higher earns over $28,000 more per year than somebody with just a high school education. 28 grand a year.

right now the unemployment rate for workers with a bachelors degree is about half what it is for folks with vista high school education. -- with just a high school education. you know this is a smart investment. that is why so many have made such big sacrifices to make sure you could get into college and 90 you through your high school years. here is the problem. -- nag you through your high school years. college has never been so expenses. the average tuition at a public university is more than tripled at the same time and income has gone up just 16%. michelle and i to college because of work and grants. i will be honest. out ofd, but when i got

school, it took about a year to pay off my entire undergraduate education. that was it. i went to a private school. i didn't even go to a public school. as recently as the 70's and the 80's, when you made a commitment to college, you weren't anticipating you would have this massive debt on the backend. was i went to law school it a different story, but that made sense because the idea was if you got a professional debris like a lot agree you would probably be able to pay it off, so i didn't feel sorry for myself or other lawyers who took on law school debt. justre that experience half a generation or a generation ago to what kids are going through now. s have leftg cost middle-class families feeling trapped.

to be honest, families at the top can easily save more than enough money to pay for school out of pocket. families at the bottom face a lot of obstacles but can turn to federal programs designed to help them handle costs, and you have a lot of middle-class families who can't hold enough savings, don't qualify for support, feeling nobody is looking out for them. the equity inthat their home gets used up for some other family emergency or suddenly home values sink, and people feel they are left in the lurch. i am only here because this country gave me a chance through education. we are here because we believe in america no hard-working young person should be priced out of a higher education. made auntry has always

commitment to putting young people in the workforce. my rant fathers education. i just came back from normandy where we celebrated d-day. when that generation of young people came back from world war the men, my grandfather was able to go to college on the g.i. bill. that helped build the greatest middle-class the world has ever known. grants helped my mother raise two kids by herself while she got through school. she didn't have $75,000 worth of debt. she was raising two kids at the same time. neither michelle or i came from a lot money, but with hard work and help from scholarships and student loans we got to go to great schools. we did not have this type of burden we are seeing at the undergraduate stages, because at law school we only just finished

paying off her student loans 10 years ago. we know what many of you look forward to or don't look forward to. we already had to start saving 's education. sasha this is why i feel so strongly about this. it's why we took on a student loan system that basically gave away tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to big banks. we said, let's cut out the middleman. bank should be making a profit on what they do but not on the backs of the students. we reformed it. more money went to students. we expanded grants to low income students. we created a tax credit. we offered millions the offer to cap their student loan payments at 10% of their income. that is what andy was referring to. michel is working with students to help them overcome the obstacles that can between them and graduation.

this is something we are deeply invested in, but as long as college costs the soaring, we at't just keep pouring money the problem. we have to initiate reforms from the colleges themselves. states have to invest more in higher education. the reason we had such a great public education system was states understood we will benefit if we invest in higher education. somewhere along the line they started to think we have to invest more in prisons than they do in higher education. part of the reason that tuition has been jacked up is state legislatures are not prioritizing this. the cause ontog taxpayers. it is not sustainable. that is why i laid out a plan to encourage colleges to finally college costs.

i imposed a rule to make sure more colleges keep their promises and train students with the skills for today's jobs without saddling them with that. debt.h some do a fine job, but many recruit kids. kids don't graduate, but they are left with the debt. do graduate they often don't have the marketable skills that help them get a job that allows them to service the debt. been easy.se have all of them have been worth it. you have outstanding members of congress who have been fighting to make sure we are giving you a fair shake. youngod news is more people are earning college degrees than ever before. that's something we should be proud of and some that we should celebrate, but more of them are graduating with debt. despite everything we are doing we are seeing two big a debt load onto many young people. collegemajority of

seniors have taken out loans to pay for school. the average bar or at a four-year college are in -- owes nearly $30,000 by graduation day. americans now own more on student loans than they do on credit cards. outrages they are just doing what they are told to do. i can't tell you how many letters i get from people saying i did everything i was supposed to, and now i find myself with that i can't a off. i want to pay them off, but i can't make ends meet. if someone lays by the rules they shouldn't be punished for it. a young woman named ashley wrote me a letter a few months ago. she wanted to let me know she is young, ambitious. sheis proud of the degree earned. she said, i am the future. letters soin capital meansd know she kne

business. she is worried because of her student loan debt she will never be able to buy a car or a house. she said, i am not even 30, and i have given up on my future because i cannot afford to have one. i said it's a little early in your 20's to give up. i'm sure ashley was trying to make a point, but it's a point all of us need to pay attention to. in america no young person who works hard and plays by the rules should feel that way. i have made it clear i want to work with congress on this issue. unfortunately, a generation of young people can't afford to wait for congress to get going. the members of congress who are here are working very hard and putting forth legislation to help make this happen, but they have not gotten some of the support they need. whereverear of action, i have seen ways i can act on my own to expand opportunity to

more americans i have. today i am going to take reactions to help young americans pay off their student loan debt. i am directing arnie duggan to give more americans who are already making their loan payments a chance to cap those at 10% of their income. we call it a as you -- pay as you earn. we have already offered it to young people. hundreds of dollars a month. opportunity tohe pursue the dream that inspired them in the first place. we want more young people to become teachers and nurses and social workers. we want young people to be in a position to pursue their dreams. we want more young people to act responsibly and be able to manage their debts over time. we are announcing steps that will open up pay as you earn to nearly 5 million more americans. the first action.

the second is to renegotiate contracts with companies like sallie mae that service our student loans. we are going to make it clear these companies are in the business of helping students, not just collecting payments. they owe young people the financial flexibility they that is number two. number three, we are doing more to help every borrower know all the options that are out there so they can pick the one that is right for them. we are going to work with his newsgroups, with the ymca and nonprofits and companies like turbotax and h&r block. tomorrow i'm going to do a student loan q&a with tumbler to help spread the word. you are laughing because you are thinking, what does he know about tumbler, but you will teenage have two daughters, so i am hip to all these things. have all these twentysomethings that are working for me although time.

give student borrowers a chance to save money requires action by congress. i am going to sign an executive order. it's going to make rugrats but not enough. we need more. -- it is going to make progress but not enough. we need to have congress make progress. there are some folks in congress who want to do it. there are folks who are helping to lead this fight in the house. we have elizabeth warren helping to lead this fight in the senate. she has written a bill that will let students refinance at lower interest rates. it pays for itself by closing loopholes and allowing some millionaires to pay lower tax rates that middle-class families. i don't know why folks aren't more outraged about this. pause out oftake a my prepared thoughts.

you would think if someone like me has done really well, in part investedhe country has in them, then they wouldn't mind paying at least the same rate as a teacher or a nurse. there's not a good economic argument for it. that they should pay a lower rate. it's just clout. it's bad enough that is already happening. it would be scandalous if we allowed those kinds of tax fortunatefor the very to survive while students are having trouble getting started. you have a pretty straightforward bill. congress will vote on that bill. i want americans to pay attention to see where their lawmakers priorities lie. more tax bill for million hours or loader -- lower student loan

for the middle class. this should the it a no-brainer. -- this should be a no-brainer. two years ago republicans nearly let student loans rates double for young people. strip it they tried to from younger students. this year they voted to slash telegrams that make it harder to afford college. if you're a big oil company they will go to bat for you. if you are a student, good luck. some of these republicans in congress seem to believe just because some of the young people help, theyeed some are not trying hard enough. they don't get it. maybe they need to talk to andy.

hard to getts work where they are today. the first of her family to graduate from a four-year college. she knows she is not asking for a handout. none of these folks are. they are working hard. they are working while they go to school. they are doing exactly what we told them they should do. they want a chance. if they do what they are told not should do, they are suddenly loaded up where they have so much debt they cannot buy a house. they cannot think about starting a family. they cannot imagine starting a business on their own. i have been in politics long enough to hear plenty from all parties paying lip service to the next generation, and then they abandon them when it

counts. and we, the voters, let it happen. this should be really straightforward, just like minimum wage should be straightforward, just like equal pay for equal work should be straightforward. all thehe things i want voters to consider, particularly parents, who are struggling, trying to figure out how i am going to pay my kid's education, take a look and see who is it fighting for you and your kids and who is it that is not. if there are no consequences this kind of a responsible behavior continues on the part of members of congress. -- irresponsible behavior continues on the part of members of congress. progressade good

despite the efforts of some to block that progress. think of how much we could do if they were not standing in the way. this week we had a chance to help millions of young people. i hope they do. you should let them know you are watching and paying attention to what they do. out for youot look and them throw up a whole bunch obfuscatets meant to -- meaning confuse rather to clarify and eliminate, then you should call them to account. in the meantime, i am going to take these actions today on behalf of all these young people here today and every striving american who believes there is a place where you can still make it if you try. thank you. god bless you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national

cable satellite corp. 2014] there you go. that was quick. [applause] ♪ they queue. -- thank you. thank you so much. >> religion is a powerful identity forming mechanism. part of human society is figuring out who is us and who is them. answers the question

pretty easily. if you pray like me. if you eat like me. if you go to the same church as i do, you are us. if you don't, you are them. you can see how that mindset could easily lead to extremism, to marginalization. mostion may be the powerful form of identity powerful, but just as is violence. how do you know who is us and who is them? if you are fighting alongside me you are us. if you are fighting against me you are them. far from religion and violence being these things that should have nothing to do with each other, they have been much more aligned than we would like them to be. >> the religious scholar is the in depth the guest. he will take your calls for

three hours on july 6. and in the months ahead, the former texas congressman ron paul and september 7 the former chair of the u.s. commission on civil rights and children right advocate mary frances berry. and we are discussing the forgotten man, a new history of the great depression. start reading and enjoying our chat room at the tv.org. book tv, television for serious readers. booktv.org.room at >> up next, a look at this week's agenda. this is 40 minutes. >> the house and senate are coming back for a couple of weeks of intense work. thanks for joining us this

warning. >> thanks for having me on. >> if you look a couple weeks ago in terms of notable legislation what would you say would get done in the house and senate? think that they will get done in the house and congress? finishingy should be up the appropriations process. eric cantor put it out there in june on appropriations, talking surprisingly not about immigration, but about obamacare alternatives. you will also see a lot of talk about the v.a. and the prisoner swap. that is really going to be the focus of the next couple of weeks. hearings this weekend on the v.a. controversy, there will be a crossfire briefing tonight on the prisoner swap. the long last slog before the august recess, the last thing that congress needs to get done. houses coming in today to deal with the transportation

bill. off -- bo -- boberg bergdahl? a cold reception from the senators. they showed a video of him suffering, ma ca did. one of the words that was used to describe him. it did not change a lot of parts in the senate. it is going to meet a colder reception in the house, much less friendly to the white house than the senate. you have house republicans who have been -- some are more reserved and were on recess when the prisoner swap came up, but this is the first time they will really hear about it, talking to run-of-the-mill intel community members, even senior members of the republican party, they are saying that they feel misled by

the white house, that the white them errored in not giving the 30 days notice required for any gitmo prisoner transfer. there will be a lot of issues coming out today. host: have we heard that yet from the house side? absolutely. you have members coming out, and like i said, they were in recess, which always makes the house a bit more quiet, but they are saying it is the law and you have to notify us within 30 days if you are transferring any prisoner and they say the white house did not do that. there was that back and forth last week that they worked with congress and told congress. that was the line from the white house. then they backpedaled and said that they thought that if they notified you, it would have been the to the press and his life would have been in danger. but the republicans are very concerned about these five damagers who might pose

to national interests. heard some of that yesterday, if there was a marquee hearing of the week, chuck hagel coming up about the with the taliban and. what do you expect will be the result of that hearing? what will be the result of that? first,irst, --guest: there will be a lot more coming out of the private reefing with the more candid discussion. that is the classified information that was included that they will not be able to divulge publicly, but the administration will be making their case about why this was the proper action, why getting him home was the proper action at this point in time, and they will be grilled a little bit about why they did not give 30 days notice and you will be seeing tensions coming forward about journalists, about the

white house feeling that they never get a fair deal from house republicans and republicans hitting back about the trust issues, that they don't trust the administration to keep its word. host: we will be covering that hearing on wednesday, c-span3, and live on c-span radio. one issue that gained a lot of traction last week, the veterans health care agreement forged john mccain and bernie sanders. what is in play there? that is going to come back to the house, giving the secretary more latitude to fire any employees involved in a controversy, incompetence, or underperforming. now the two sides really have to come together. the bernie sanders legislation also establishes what he considers to be more health centers across the country.

willouse and the senate come back and negotiate that formally. you are going to see both sides hoping to bridge the gap. you have legislation from the house that they want to pass that will give veterans who are not close to be a facilities or who have been waiting for longer than 90 days ability to leave the system and get health care treatment elsewhere with the government paying for it. that is a big priority for house republicans coming up. you are going to see the two sides kind of negotiating with the speaker to figure out what they can do to pass a bill in the v.a.. >> we welcome your calls on the --host: we welcome your calls on the agenda ahead.

we spent the first 45 minutes talking about edward snowden. before the house left a past their pfizer reform bill. the intelligence committee to get up in the senate last week. something both the house and senate will come to an agreement on before the august recess should mark are they going to get intelligence reform done? --guest: it looks likely. the bill was actually very watered down and the silicon valley groups wound up jumping off supporting that build. this compromise bill will get action in the house and the priority.king this a people likely want to see action on the nsa and it is something

where any time edward snowden does something where new revelations from his documents come out, everyone is very passionate about this issue. thatis one of those things would be not necessarily extraordinary as the time is running out, but it is a priority and you can absolutely see the sides coming together. host: 20 working days before they take a break for elections, how much of what they are doing now is aimed at looking good in that election? is everything sort of a political calculation from this point out? host: of course. unless they are counting on 25, absolutely. the house is going to take up the skills act this week, for high skilled worker training house republicans are going to do a obamacare alternatives.

this is all about setting themselves up or the november election and doing bills that make their sides look good and making the other side look really bad. you are definitely seeing that. there is just not that much time left. appropriations are the last check ox of the year, then the log -- the long august recess, and then campaign mode. intense national security issues. ken, republican line, go ahead. caller: one of the things i noticed about president obama, he took over student loans a few years ago and if you really want to help the students, all you have to do is reduce loan rates across-the-board. secondly, the obama administration is fearful of the va hospital story. people think it look like it could be a forerunner to

obamacare run hospitals. on the student loan issue, today the president is going to take another executive action on that? --guest: he is, he is going to announce the cap to prevent drowning out of students with loans who owe more like something around 75 hundred dollars, cap that 10% of monthly income to help students. it might take longer to pay off, but they will not be drowning in debt each month and worried about making these loan payments. default will destroy your credit for decades. for --host: that is set 1:45 this afternoon. lansdale, pennsylvania, hello, go ahead. -- caller: my husband has

been out of work for a month and a half. we have been encouraging our congressmen to continue to ask that it be brought up for a vote in the senate. it is falling on deaf ears. ishear the jobs report improving slightly, wonderful for the people fortunate enough to be workingworking are still . each month there are bills and there is more struggle and people are losing their homes and we are encouraging, trying to get people to discuss this and it doesn't look like this is important enough, we follow the weekly schedule and it is going nowhere. it is still a very real problem for millions of people. host: what is happening on that front? guest: it really has stalled.

this is an issue that was sent to the house by the senate but the negotiation of that bill -- the extension from the senate that never went anywhere has already expired. house republicans put it on the obama administration to offer job creation measures but the white house did not do so, they said it was a congressional responsibility. so that really stalled and a couple of weeks ago, -- it was really the talk of capitol hill. democrats were debating this every single day and those in the house are still carrying the mantle. it is on the priority list of having actual legislation. host: it seems from the economic issue there has been a shift from unemployment insurance to focusing on -- we saw a news conference that was on student loan debt and now the president is making the announcement today. guest: absolutely. house democrats and senate democrats did make a big push -- this was going to be the

centerfold of their reelection campaign and they are still discussing this, but as they continue to rollout new priorities, and new legislative agendas, the old one kinds of recycled,d of gets and right now the topic of the day is student loans. this is what we discussed earlier, making good legislative priorities, pushing their agenda forward. that is what the house and senate democrats are doing this week. didn't -- ron or ronald in pennsylvania, independent line. days to swapd 30 in benghazi and in snowden, they want to fire the nsa and get snowden -- so far the oversight committee hasn't done anything.

what is the status of that select committee and when will they meet? guest: with all the pomp and circumstance of this committee, they have to hire staffers and what i am hearing is that finding qualified staffers, who have the requisite security clearance is actually going to be a lot of work. they have to hire everyone and the democrats have not even announced their staff directory it. they are kind of in the process of gearing up and there are members of that committee that have already begun reviewing documents with oversight and 18 investigations into benghazi with the select committees, the documents and the work and the findings and now the members are slowly going through those but you should expect a couple of -- a lot of news out of that in the next couple of weeks. from jacksonville is

on the democrat line, welcome. caller: thank you, good morning. what i would like to talk to you about is the press briefing held every thursday, with the press. nancy pelosi will come out, i have seen her stand out there and she does most of the talking, but she takes any and all questions. and his group of six or eight people come out and all they do is give speeches about where are the jobs. and will take 2 questions question,llers last he will give three word answers. suggest we avoid his press conferences and still he starts taking more questions and giving answers. the palm of his

hand and he knows it. bob is asounds like very close watcher of c-span. differentout the styles, he talked about nancy pelosi and john boehner and his brief briefing. there are multiple briefings throughout the week, the republican leaders and the speaker of the house and the republican leadership is another. that one is generally a little bit longer than the one that you see with speaker john boehner. there are also conversations happening throughout the week, happening with the speaker and his staff and of course there's nancy pelosi. it is always a little bit funny. john boehner is known for having a very lighthearted attitude with the press so he will get a new haircut or a tie that you you will get a new haircut or a tie that you don't like, he will say something, and nancy pelosi will have your a sure hand and say,

ms. leader. she likes the faces that she knows. if you get a seat in the front -- make sure that you know -- she knows who you are if you have an important question. is it for you to get access to both of these leaders, and their staff? do they spend more time than a few minutes on camera? for the past leaders, those are people that i interact with on a daily basis, is because that is not really their style, for john boehner and cantor and pelosi -- you will boehner walking to the lobby a few times a week and he will say hi and he will answer questions, but the staff is very sociable. some of your best relationships are with the staffers and the leadership offices because they know what is going on, there is

support in place -- >> and most of what they give you is on or off the record? >> you go in speaking off the record but you can have a good you say, can i quote you on this? it is a constant conversation. >> we are in georgia with the independent line. go ahead. theer: my comment is on deplorable idea that at this point it is an achievement for president obama to take executive actions by making it easier for students to get loans. i am a college student and i can tell you that it is not an achievement. i have no idea why we are patting ourselves on the back by making it easier for students to get loans. pretty much all of my education would be free in most western industrialized nations. this is nott, taking congressional inaction into account but at this point,

something productive has to happen. isn't he, what is he proposing -- is it to make -- make it easier for people to pay off, they would not pay over 10%. guest: absolutely. it is not to make it easier to get student loans, it is to make it easier to repay a loan that you have, to ensure that students are not -- when students take out loans, especially students that are maybe first-time college students or don't have financial stability at home, they will often take out loans that, when they are thinking in the abstract, the repayment option seems like something that they can do but when they get their first job or pay rent, they might not be able to afford those repayments and the default issues are going to have to affect your credit in the long run. we see this happening with the repayment option, with the

process in washington which is very widespread, they come out and put congress slightly below cockroaches in terms of favorability. but the press is right under that. inaction, and of democrats, especially are very frustrated that the president action gone to executive because congress won't pass any of his legislative priorities. host: on that issue, the senate leaders, led by senator schumer onnew york announced a plan student loans. how does it look for them to come out to announce their plan, senate democrats, and for the president to take executive action? is her coronation between the two, -- is their coordination between the two? host: the senate has to recognize that whatever they pass -- if anything is going to , that on executive action

is the phone line that we heard from the state of the union, he knows that congress is not going to pass his agenda. legally, where he can, he will take executive action. they are doing their best to mess up the midterm elections but also try to work with republicans and that is not going to happen with student loans because the two sides are very far apart. to comeemocrats have out -- they are fighting tooth and knell to keep the house -- nail to keep the house. republicans are fairly certain they will take back the senate. anything that senate democrats do now has all of its eyes near the midterm election. host: this headline of the "new york times," veterans reach an accord -- senators reach accord

easing worries over veterans measure. be the favorite candidate, if there is a candidate, to take over the v.a.? >> that is -- guest: that is up in the air. cosgrove, and he announced over the weekend he would not take it. guest: this is a tough gig, because a lot of people are in the running but you will get hit over the head if you take over, like the irs commissioner. be, theyt was going to will take repeated hits from congress. so right now, this is a question that is actually up in the air. and 2is no real certainty of my colleagues did a story about that, this is a big question about who could take this over. this is still up in the air and the president is obviously

looking for someone intently, but there is no name leaking, this is going to be one of those things, one of those nominations that, when they find someone who will take over the job then they can pass with a majority in the senate, they will announce that but until then there will be a lot of crickets. host: and you say that there'll be legislation probably this week in the senate? guest: as long as this goes through, john mccain and john boehner should be able to pass all the procedural hurdles, but there are questions about the sanders --bernie really helpful for the senate, but they don't get in -- so they don't get into one of those fights they are so famous for. host: diane, welcome. caller: i would like to make three quick points. the first is about benghazi. i am sorry that the people lost their lives over there.

but that is all that congress has, they said jobs when they were elected and there are no jobs. and now they will not talk about the student loans. they will not do anything that they think will help the president. it is not going to help the president, it is helping our people, and we talk about the v.a. 2005, he wased in trying to see a specialist. in -- myrother died brother died in 2005 and the next week -- the next month in june, they signed his disability. this has been going on longer than obama. back in the bush administration they said they needed to look at things. those people who are suffering, we need to look at them too. host: peg writes -- this is more related to the bergdahl issue.

out a numberointed of members of congress have been calling for the release of v bergdahl, but the trade of five from guantanamo, they are now walking back the calls for his release. guest: john mccain is a good example, he said he would be in favor of a trade depending on the details. and now he has expressed in spurts over the weekend, he didn't want to do with these five members of the taliban. these are the five people the taliban requested and there are other detainees who are on track to be released that he would have rather seen the trade for or that the taliban had requested. this is not necessarily that bergdahldid not want ve

to come back, but they feel like they did not get proper notice and it is possible that the five members who are now under house ar, those numbers might be too dangerous. they might rejoin the fund-raising efforts for the taliban, and leadership facilities for the taliban and that is what you're definitely going to see come up in this briefing today, for the house numbers is what assurances that you have that these five taliban members will not rejoin the plot. >> this will be a closed-door meeting for house members, you mentioned this afternoon -- this is something that you will be waiting for outside, politico will be. guest: i will be there doing what i do best, stalking members. not really. i will follow them and ask what

what their sense of this was, are they convinced that this was a good swap and are they convinced of the health concerns and taking him out now and did the white house give them the assurances that they needed to convince them, convince the members that these five taliban members will not return to terrorism? host: you mentioned earlier in the discussion about the house obamacare,ures with this is the headline in the atlanta journal-constitution, the headline is -- they write --

so what are they seeking to do with this other legislation? guest: what you will see in the coming weeks is house republicans trying to figure out what is the best venue to reform obamacare and the president's health care law? you are right that there is not one plan, you have the republicans in the committee with their own plan, there is not a leadership plan out there but they are working with members and you have plans discussed with the ways and means committee on this, and the commerce committee so there are a lot of different ideas and they need to come together to create one plan, if they were going to vote on the obamacare repeal, that will bring every side of the republican party in. --y will not get, maybe them everything but the most formal -- vulnerable democrats, they could not lose any more than the

republicans -- they need to bring it all together. host: in doing this, do they want to ring this to the election and say that we have passed an alternative to obamacare? not what people are telling me is going to happen, there are more signs of a single plan and there are really hard questions, because there are so many different republicans in congress and they have voted 54 times to repeal or reform parts of the obamacare legislation. so what they are trying to do is come together and it seems a little bit less likely than it was a few months ago, when obamacare was commenting headlines, that a full appeal with a replacement mechanism will happen before the august recess. and as we know after the august recess they all hit the campaign trail. host: michael is in falls borough, new jersey. independent line. what may be a

solution to any funding problems the v.a. may encounter, taking time to spend $10 billion out of all the war profiteering corporations, because in the warsthese dirty illegal were orchestrated to benefit them in the first place. a headline report on this, the interim report on the v.a., with hospital scheduling -- the final report comes out today in another rare, evening house hearing, the veterans committee hearing tonight. 7:30 tonight and there'll be the acting director of the v.a., and the government accountability office and there will be a number of hearings, this is just the first this week, where they will talk about will talk about

how to fix the problems at the v.a.. before he resigned, eric shinseki put in place a few with bonuses for and hisng wait times, report encouraged health officials to falsify or mislead on those reports -- you will hear a discussion of these new reforms, and you will hear a discussion of the white house review, president obama sent one of his top deputies to the v.a. to do a review and that report is due back this week. you will hear a discussion of those reforms and a discussion responsibility, because of the fact that eric shinseki is gone, house republicans really -- really do want more responsibility taken for this. two, ionight on c-span

can't tell you about c-span radio but this is at 7:30, this is a rare monday night time hearing of the veterans affairs committee. let's go to michigan, debbie. caller: thank you for taking my call. about the wondering irs and the supreme court hearing, discussing fee payments and how this would affect the affordable care act. if they decide that this is illegal for them to change the wording and then allow the 36 days -- when they did hold it as rot for them-- caret to set up their own exchanges. when do you think that that ruling will come out? that, weyou don't know

will talk about that in the next segment. we are talking about the exchanges and medicaid. if you don't want to pass on the answer -- guest: the supreme court will talk about subsidy issues and whether or not they have the legal ability to offer subsidies, for people who may not be able to afford insurance, to take -- to abide the obama care plan, that ruling has been heard, and the supreme court does not really put on the schedule that this is what -- when we are going to rule on this. at the end ofends june and it is possible it comes out before then, it may roll over into the next session. we are hearing about the subsidies that may be incorrectly calculated, there are 2 million obamacare in rowley's who provided it -- and

accuracies to the subsidies may have been miscalculated. the obamacare ruling could change the game if it can, -- the supreme court is winding down their term so we expect the number of rulings coming down, on monday and tuesday during june. we will look forward to that. houseick reminder, the veterans affairs committee will be on c-span two, and also on c-span radio. texas. kurt in waco, republican line. caller: good morning from the heart of texas. a couple of comments and questions. is being graded on the legislation that they have don't want to great people they have done but rather their performance, what people can see. grade the need to

congress on the issues they have aaevented, around here the dc with all the defense contractors, i am sure that they do audits. does anyone review these order do they simply ignore them? if we would look at the findings, i think it would probably prevent things overall, nationwide, rather than play whack-a-mole but we seem to be doing right now, what do you think? defense contractors are reviewed and there are inspector general's, and each one of them in the department of defense reviews the contracting process as well as the bidding process, and there have been intense criticisms about the way that the procurement process goes, about overspending, on unnecessary items, and that is part of the overall discussion in congress. that hassequestration

been a little bit rolled back now, but talking about less goods,o buy contractor and also having the top quality machines and armor, and the tanks that the military does need -- this is an ongoing discussion but when it comes down to it, there are criticisms that more money is spent procuring items that the military does not necessarily need or want, especially with the war winding down. host: for the viewers, this is the direction of "cq weekly." -- e headline, their headline -- a couple more calls here, this is huntsville, alabama, democratic caller. caller: good morning, c-span.

normally when i call and i am cut off, but i noticed that the young lady is covering a lot of issues with politico. all, they are concerned about the republican party, they are bipartisan. i work for the u.s. government for over 30 years and i retired in 2008. the head of the organization's nose about what is going on with the organizations -- the business that is under them. that with they veterans administration's issues, that the head would have known what was going on if management did not tell them. management can keep away from the president and anyone else they want to, all of the bad issues going on in the organization without them ever knowing about it, keeping it

away from them. i know you are covering a lot of issues but the republicans were reelected to create jobs and they have not created jobs, and i want to say this to the american people, if you do not november for in the parties that are concerned about people, you are going to lose out because of the fact that they are trying to win the house and senate, the republicans are. virginia, i will let you go there with your question particular, what are republicans doing? >> i feel that the priority for house republicans is about training high skilled workers, this is something they have been acting on this month according to eric cantor, the house majority leader. asking forrking on job creations, and then, when it

comes down to their training, there is the transportation infrastructure and it is an ongoing conversation, really, but with both sides being so rooted in their position there is not much that anyone can really do to pass legislation between the house democrats and republicans so right now it is much more of a messaging tactic for the november elections andeen speaker boehner other members of the republican leadership asking about, where are the jobs? there are 36 jobs bills stuck in the senate, but this is more of a november message and campaign because that is what everyone in washington is focused on. host: let's get one more call on the agenda -- this is raymond, on the republican line in washington. a question about the extended unemployment benefits. i am 52 years old, i have worked

for 2 mailing companies and we have them the political mailings and everything and right now i am taking care of my 86-year-old mother. i was single before i started taking care of her and i spent a lot of tax dollars and people who are unemployed are really hurting badly. my mother might be on the streets and i am wondering if she knew anything because she seems very intelligent. the status of long-term unemployment insurance? guest: the senate passed an itension for that, and now is kind of back to the drawing board in the senate. they are working with dean to draftho is trying something for the republicans in the senate but that would have to go from the cement back to the house. house republicans leadership has said that house democrats have

to propose job creation notrnatives to pass necessarily offsets but job growth mechanisms. how they aresee going to -- how the white house is going to be focused on creating jobs. the white house has a congressional responsibility so it has kind of stalled in congress. after thex months emergency extension expired. host: >> members of the house of spoke about the u.s.-taliban prisoner exchange. among those speaking to reporters was broke mckeon. you hear from a member of the intelligence committee.

>> we just concluded a briefing with the members of congress. we have members, five or six of them from all different departments. mostly from the dod. lots of questions and comments. people have a lot of opinions about this. ishink what i come away with that there are still lots of questions to be answered. hearinghave a committee wednesday with the secretary of defense. i'm sure we will get a lot of our questions answered. i talk to him before coming over here and he is going to send us some of the classified material. i think we have to be very careful. you don't hear me talking about sergeant bergdahl. i am concerned with the administration telling 80 or 90 people within the administration and not one member of congress

about this. that, to me, is not following the law. it is not good practice. sets up threeon bodies of government. it is not that i personally have my feelings hurt, but i think we should have a mutual understanding that there are three equal bodies in congress. if they don't want to talk to republicans, there's a chairman of the armed services committee in the senate that is a democrat. there is a chairman of the intelligence committee in the senate that is a democrat and they were not told. at least, they called and apologized to senator feinstein. nk everybody isi happy that the sergeant is back in our custody and that he will be treated accordingly.

they will get him back to his health and then we will move forward on that issue. the five taliban that were released were all very dangerous people. i hope that we don't have a year from now a hearing on people that were killed because of these five that were released. that is the thing that i'm going to be most looking at and concern about. several of your colleagues have said the same thing. do you have a sense of who they were and what agencies? how much they actually knew about the whole picture? whether they knew the specifics. >> i know know -- don't know. that is also serving -- disturbing. if they are so concerned about a leak, they ought to know every single person. they shouldn't say it is between 80 or 90.

they should be able to give us a specific number. say there was a leak. how do they go back and close it off or find out who leaked it? disturbing on many different levels. i think they better do something to get their act together on this. >> will you have your committee investigate this? >> we will be starting an investigation with the hearing wednesday. we will have further hearings and briefings as we see other questions that need to be answered. >> are you saying that you are ondering whether bergdahl's release was worth -- >> i thought i was very clear that we are happy that sergeant bergdahl has been returned to the army. is we ought tog look at the price. of two different things.

-- we havehave never had a policy of never negotiating with terrorists. we have a policy of never swapping people, terrorists from sludges. -- for hostages. i think the administration -- i just heard the last question was who made this decision? the indicated secretary eagle. saying that secretary hagel made this decision or was this the president of the united states? it was the president who came out with the bergdahls and took all the credit. and now there is pushed back, he is moving away from it. i don't think so. i think this is the president's decision. i think he was in europe that is a good chance

they would return to the fight. speaking of the five taliban. >> who made the decision? and the answer was secretary hagel? >> that is what i said. there was a whole bunch of people looking at it. the president made this decision. >> some have argued that the taliban would've had the release anyway once we were no longer in hostility with taliban. do you buy that argument/ ? negotiated and we are pulling all of our troops out except for residual forces that will be left behind. 9800 troops that will help frame the afghans to be able to provide their own security. we will still have people there. another 5000 nato forces.

we will have people there. they will be in greater jeopardy now than they were a couple of weeks ago. that is my opinion. i hope i am wrong. >> did you get any clarity under what conditions the taliban will be monitoring when they are in qatar? yet.have not seen that i hope to see that shortly. we have not seen that yet. the secretary said he will make that available. thank you very much. >> my reaction -- i am so grateful to this administration for following through on what we all believe that we leave no soldier behind. this is someone who was held in conditions that were not even aware of yet. now finallyrs and released. to me, the fact that we did a

prisoner exchange, one that we are likely to have had to do, to release these members of the taliban who were in charge of the government at the time they were taken. this as 2001, 2002. they were released at the end of the conflict. i am completely mystified and quite frankly disgusted that there has been a demonization of the soldier. every american deserves to be considered innocent until proven guilty. demonization of this administration for doing what is clearly in the tradition and the constitution of the united states of america. looking for ways to discredit somehow what i think was e of thely -- on

issues that was brought up is that this exchange, the releasing sergeant bergdahl had been discussed for a number of years with members of congress. that this was something that was in the public domain. nothing was hidden except for a very sensitive operation that resulted, i think, in the perfect solution -- bring home a soldier who had been captured. >> do you think members of his platoon were demonizing sergeant bergdahl? >> i think republicans too. saying this was no hero. we don't make the judgment about that when someone is captured or left on the battlefield. was he braver wasn't he brave? should we bring him home or not? no, we bring home everyone.

i think the implication is that some out this individual was not really deserving of making any kind of agreements to bring him home. >> are you saying they were wrong? >> i think that members of congress have embraced this notion and i think they are wrong for doing so. >> are you saying the taliban guys released would've been released anyway? >> it is likely at the end of the conflict the those -- that those individuals -- there was no specific charges against them. it was very possible, very likely that at the end of the conflict, those individuals would've had to be released. nothing.ht have gotten the reason that this operation took place when it did is that there was reason to believe apparently that sergeant

bergdahl's life was in danger. we got something for that exchange. i am just -- seriously, i don't understand. bym mystified and disgusted the fact that this kind of successful operation now is being criticized. >> wasn't mentioned in the briefing that they might be released at the end of the conflict? >> that was also in the public domain as well. >> do you have any evidence? >> no. it was discussed -- i think it was mentioned -- adam smith brought that up. anything else? thank you. "sundays a new book t 8" includes kenneth feinberg. >> from the perspective of the victims, i do not see any distinction.

if you try to justify my program on the basis of the victims lost, i cannot convincingly explain why. 9/11, yes. 93 world trade center, no. i think the only way you justify this program as a special carve out is from the perspective of the nation. was,ognition that 9/11 along with the american civil war, pearl harbor, may be the assassination of president kennedy, and 911. its impact on the american people was such that this was really a response from america to demonstrate the solidarity and cohesiveness of the american people towards these victims. >> read more about this conversation with kenneth feinberg and other featured interviews from our book notes

and q&a programs in c-span's now availableght" as a father's day gift at your favorite bookseller. >> the house veterans affairs committee continue to look at delays in veteran health care. the records by some of ba facilities to hide those delays. the first part of the hearing a little more than 2.5 hours. >> good evening. a have set aside time for business meeting tonight to talk about a subpoena that we thought we were going to need to issue. we asked for some information from the department almost a year and a half ago. miraculously, it appeared today. gates the need for us to move forward with a subpoena on

that particular issue so we will not be having the business meeting that we originally had talked to everybody. i appreciate it. a lot to welcome you again to tonight's hearing entitled oversight hearing on the data midst -- and manipulation and access to health care, testimony from gao, the ig and from v.a. address we are going to ongoing issues of systematic manipulation that occurs throughout the veterans health administration and negatively impacts of the veterans that we serve in the health care they should be provided. the wait times have been subject of numerous investigations by the committee for many years. we have many outstanding requests for information and have held hearings to to the problems with in v.a.

office of the v.a. about substandard practices. oig asrous reports, v.a. noted that medical facilities did not have effective electronic waiting list procedures. their outpatient scheduling procedures needed improvement nationwide. their data was often unreliable and they overstated their success regarding patient wait times. 2012, gao found that v.a.'s reported wait times remained unreliable. the policy continued to be implemented inconsistently across v.a. schedulers lacked robert training and vha appointment scheduling system was outdated. despite these repeated warnings

that had come from congress, from the gao, and even from bas own investigative body, issues with patient wait times and scheduling remained a pervasive problem today. last year, this committee requested that gao conduct a separate investigation to confirm the extent of problems regarding the fvha ongoing issues with patient wait times and consult the latest. gao will testify as to its findings tonight. the committee received whistleblower complaints regarding the phoenix v.a. health care system that explained how the facility was keeping numerous weightless to to give -- wait lists the impression the wait times were less than they were. as of the secret wait lists, many as 40 patients may have died while they were waiting care. after the committee was able to

confirm these allegations, we made the issue public during our april 9, 2014 hearing. at that hearing, i asked that oig look into those allegations which prompted the investigation. the results of that investigation were released on may 28 of 2014. in that report, the oig substantiated a number of problems at the phoenix facility but also noted how it has planned to open investigations into 42 different v.a. medical facilities. the oig found that it phoenix at least 1700 patients who were waiting for primary care appointments were not on the electric -- like tronic waitlist -- electronic waitlist. found that the phoenix leadership considerably underestimated new patient wait times which it noted is its

metric used to consider bonuses and salary increases for employees. that an appropriate scheduling practices like those found in phoenix are systemic across the veterans health administration. finally, we were notified earlier last week that v.a. would provide the findings of its internal audit of appointment wait times by last friday. v.a. provided us with those findings earlier this afternoon. i look forward to hearing what v.a. he has to say about its audit, how it plans to repair the damage it has caused by tampering with veterans access to care. with that, now yield to the ranking member for any opening statement he may have. >> thank you, mr. chairman. there is nothing more important than the welfare of the men and women web server this country with honor and distinction. ism pleased the committee

continuing to move quickly and in a bipartisan manner to investigate the many serious shortcomings within the v.a., especially those regarding access to health care. now is the time for us to identify the problems so we can move forward and implement changes. that means working together on oversight and legislative solutions. franko means having very conversations with veterans about their personal experiences. so we know what -- how we can improve the system. over the years, this committee has identified and helped fix many of the problems within the v.a. facing ais clearly crisis, crisis that is now being addressed by the media. in this environment, it is especially important that we are fair in our oversight and measured in our responses. above all, we must never fall short of doing what we need to accessthat veterans have

to the health care system that they have earned and deserve. it is important for us to work together to achieve the v.a. we envisioned. we must work together across the aisle and across the branches of government to fix these problems and ensure the v.a. is caring for our veterans. when we work together, this committee works best. must ensurework we that the v.a. is receiving the necessary assistance that they need to do what they have to. as i see it, there is critical questions that should be asked by this committee. questions that get to the root causes of the problems. questions related to broad, strategic changes needed at v.a. changes in the leadership climate. encouragement with other agencies like the o'dea and hhs. increased utilization of the private sector and long-term resource planning.

winning to ask the hard questions. what should the department look like in the future? these are not easy questions nor do they have easy simple answers. today, more than ever, we must ask this question and come up with these answers. --elieve thought for thoughtful sound policy is needed today. the answers need to be comprehensive. for example, when holding leaders accountable, we need to not only focus on executive members, but also the doctors and nurses who occupy administrative or executive leadership positions. 99 i mentioned earlier, hr-43 closes the gap in the current package of legislation being considered by the house and the senate. mr. chairman, i have been always been proud of the bipartisan nature in which this committee has operated. my hope is that we will continue

that spirit. working together to identify the problems and working towards the solution. no single individual has a monopoly on the answers. no single individual or institution has all the answers. the workup at of us will be hard us to work all of together in that regard. the veterans service organization, the department, this committee, the senate, and the white house. mr. chairman, i want to thank you once again for your robust advocacy for our veterans in holding all these hearings we are having for the oversight and it is my hope that when the committee asks for information from the department of veterans affairs that they provide that information in a timely manner so that we will not have to issue a subpoena to get the information we need so we can do our oversight hearings. that is our responsibility that we expect the department to help