and so if we don't do a better job of preparing more and more people to enter that workforce, you have to worry about where we will be in terms of our standing and status as an i think there is a second very profound issue we need to think about. like it or not higher education goodeen the ticket to a job and high quality of life. it used to be that way. there were plenty of good jobs decades ago for someone with a high school degree. that is not the case anymore. that is the world we live in. the difference in income between someone with a college degree and high school degree keeps widening. it is over $1 million now in a lifetime.

here is the troubling statistic. if you look at the lowest quartile of income, only about 8% of children in that category ever get a college degree. upper look at the quartile it is 85%. differentialomic between a college degree and not a college degree, we are at real risk if we have not moved far awn the path to creating caste system built on the economy. we are becoming more and more left andengland we fought the revolutionary war to defeat to build this land of opportunity, this upwardly mobile society. we are losing that. timeesponsibility of our is to expand educational opportunities to include more

low income students. yes we need more public support. we in higher education have to find the means of delivering high-quality education at a lower cost. theet's turn to one of first and most important issues we outlined with higher education, access. within 10 years the majority of high school graduates will be students of color. yet post secondary education has get to resolve the discrepancies in performance and achievement between these traditionally underserved students. research shows there is less emphasis on access and some higher education officials cede low performing students as more of a risk. >> you have spent the better part of your career advocating for access across all lines. how is your institution adjusted in support of students with low performing or first-generation students or adult learners?

>> one of the things we done is we set a goal to what we call the close the achievement gap. institutions -- to reduce the retention rate and between theate student body as a whole. it's amazing that if you establish a goal like that and start measuring results how much progress you can make. another thing in any number of initiatives or activities one should embrace, one of the things i feel most keenly about is the imperative for providing no more need-based aid.

time when we a should allow our institutions to bind students who can afford to go to college anyway. devote more and more of our resources, financial aid resources within our institutions and states to support students who have financial need. those are two things that have made a difference. it is a very important component of what we must do. pamela d.c. is the responsibility of higher government in improving access? we are such a fervent supporter of the great public universities of our country. let me give you a thumbnail

sketch of the university of california. it is 10 campuses, 230,000 students. nine of which have graduate professional schools. is onlyin san francisco postgraduate basic research and the medical nursing pharmacy and dental schools. schoolsthose of for were the number one recipient of nih grants in the country. they are always among the top three. these are very high quality institutions. california, for 20 years, has had a ban on state supported affirmative action. it has invested a lot of resources in how you comply with this typed make sure of university remains open. a ok job. have done

46% of our students who graduated or who are entering this coming year will be first-generation students. 42 percent of our students are grant eligible. if you come from a family that makes less than $80,000 per year in california you pay no tuition at the university of california. while thee done that legislature has slashed the budget? two things. they are related. one is tuition went up. it is still a great bargain. i hope we get to have a little debate about the things that have been said. i think for the kind of

university that you see is, it is a great bargain. it used to be a cheaper great bargain buy a lot. we have a very rate aggressive return to a policy. 30% of every tuition dollar goes back into student aid. it makes it a very perpetual loop that happens and that be an engine of social mobility. how are we doing on underrepresented groups? we are not doing as well. about one third of our student body would come from historically underrepresented groups. for the first time in the group admissions, latinos will exceed whites in california. that is the arc of history. that is coming.

between thee a gap percentage of latinos who graduate from high school and those that apply for and attend the university of california. that is what i am looking at. toofor too long we have had low a representation from our african-american young peoples in california. there are other reasons for that. but we are now looking for an doing a lot of things in terms of outreach. colleges andunity the community college transfer process to try to move that needle. never let me add real quickly. i want to offer my commendation and congratulations to the university of california. the university's record of serving low income students, the that as ayou gave benchmark that everybody should

aspire to achieve. california state has concentrated its efforts to support low income students. one of the top issues we hear a lot from different states is the governance and the changing nature of governance that the legislatures are considering along with some of the current governing boards and state. hear some of to your insights on governance and where you think that is transitioning over the next couple of years given the large amount of turnover we will see in governor's offices and state legislatures in the next two to four years. >> the issue of governance, i would answer that for at it in three different ways. the first way would be how do we coordinate what goes on from peter 20. preschool through college. even though 20 is probably 24 for a lot of places.

how do we coordinate that? how many of you participate in some sort of classroom or hybrid classroom using technology, online courses? i am looking for all the teachers out here. a significant amount. secondaryy 50% of all level classes will be available .nline henan many cases available for little to no cost. we are creating a generation of students that expect that of higher education yet we are not structuring our leadership to accommodate that into our institutions of higher it -- of higher education. we are not substantially changing it when they talk about the level of minority students in an institution. many of our institutions are getting that by simply limiting total enrollments so their proportions can be altered to

fit that model. nearly all of our students are low income minority first-generation or rural. and their families. and they are working full-time. and they're taking courses literally around-the-clock. governance of that kind of inactivity takes on a different tone because we have also just aggregated the functions that are typically associated with the university. the course preparation and the assessments. if you unbundle those, how does that change governance? i would say the governing boards , the sabine the second area of emphasis. the leadership comes from shared governance from the president, the faculty, and the trustees who are established their in some form and some mix. she and i were sitting on the stage at the university of wyoming one time. been thoughtful and she

turned to me and said how do we know that they know what we say they know. you know? north dakota and wyoming are doing well in terms of state support. that was the challenge back in the lap of these governing challengedare being to understand quality, how to ask the questions to demonstrate occurring, being able to take on the tough issues. governance is being challenged in many ways. governance is being redefined as we know it. it i chair the board for 1300 members and institutions. of we are looking at a governance and how that model needs to change with the

evolving nature of higher education. >> any comments? >> i share the view that the whole structure in higher education is under strong -- under some stress and challenge. and his colleagues for taking this issue on and studying it in some depth. are at some sort in higherion point education in our country in this moment. decisions the right about the path forward for us in higher education may be one of the most critical junctures in recent history. i think the relationship between

the faculty, the administration, and the board is something that needs considerable thought and study. i happen to be blessed to have a very supportive board that has learned from the materials of agb. i think they provide exactly the right kind of oversight and without getting into the day-to-day management of the institution. this is aspeaking huge issue for us at this particular time. i think the report that will hopefullyf that will provide some very strong guidance. >> i think that is right. i used to be on the board of western governors.

very respectful of the work it does. we are seeing is the proliferation of different models of higher education. i don't think there will be one answer. i do think technology used in different ways and different formats will be part of the answer, particularly going to the access part and the time to graduation art. however, that in these discussions or in this thinking about the different types of models of higher education, we should not overlook the faculties. today, in a sense, owned the root curriculum and the requirements to get the degree in large part. they do at the university of california.

these are very smart people who have invested their lives into educating the next generation. i wonder sometimes in washington dc and the state capitol, i was probably guilty of this myself. >> one of the issues that continues to be for higher -- the funding levels from the 1980's and 1990's are unlikely to come back for any state institution. a there is a growing concern that students were pricing out.

>> we saw a preliminary a port -- preliminary report that shows that over the last five years there has been a 25% decrease in the investment. that is a staggering number. in the presence of several of our legislators, maryland has been very well. we have seen a modest increase in funding over this. of time. -- over this period of time. speaking, this is a huge challenge for our nation right now. one who believes

there is a ray of hope out there. i feel we are coming into a period where developments are coalescing. one is the incredible amount of learning research that has been done in the cognitive sciences. we actually know what triggers the implanting of information on the brain cells now. of what is it that triggers people to learn something the of thes the power internet intelligence software, adaptive learning. we are not there yet. i genuinely believe we are on useverge of finding ways to cognitive science, technology, to enhance learning and drive

down the cost of delivery. of i'm not saying machines are going to replace teachers. we have involved some experiments with a partner we not-for-profita in new york city that uses information technology to advance higher education. funding from the gates foundation to do some side-by-side comparisons. can you use a moog is learning --tform in a traditionally at a university and improve the outcomes and hold down the cost? we have gotten some very interesting results from these tests. we aretelling people ofy seeing the first version

these new information technology driven internet driven teaching and learning platforms. when do we get to 3.0? i think if we can make the right investments and to the right kinds of experimentation come i think there is a real to drive downre the cost and improve the learning outcomes. the thing we must avoid is chasing the bad just because there is a whistle out there that hasn't been tested, people jump on the bandwagon too quickly. of i think we can actually do damage. i believe there is a real opportunity for higher education. >> i agree with you but the opportunity needs to be tied to education outcomes, how we

educate better and teach better, not how we necessary tried it it is not about cost. what i worry about is it gets reduced to how cheap can i get somebody a bachelors degree? i will so you might bachelors degree for $5,000. -- wrong debate and wrong feel to be on. we need to be doing exactly what you referenced in innovating how technology,w we use how different platforms can be put together with other platforms, how there are interesting arrangements that could be made among institutions of higher learning. these are the most valuable at this point. mentionjust want to higher ed -- higher quality

education at lower costs. of cost is not the only driver there. >> i wouldn't call it disagreement but i guess it is a challenge. if we take the premise it should not cost less or should be i say we haven't challenged ourselves yet. of there is so much technology available today. in it was called mastery the subject as you do it at the student's capabilities that is what we are doing. of the technology enables that. we haven't raised tuition in six years. you can get a degree of $50,000 or less. we have had students as young as 17 complete a college degree.

it is just an example. it is not the way we the majority of our students have college credits they can't get they have the competencies and the knowledge. we have the tools and assessment to do that today. we have to challenge ourselves. if we look at the rate of a college degree today 20% of americans have a degree. 10% of some other credential of post secretary. about 28%. population has at least some college credits with no degrees. pool waiting for access. we have to challenge ourselves to do more.

if we have the rates president obama called for by 2020, those are very high numbers. you would have to at least double the current statistic. cross talking where allegation is either limited or very increasing. we have to do something different if we are going to achieve those goals. it means we have to have something meaningful in terms of credential competency that actually gets you that societal engagement, that satisfied lifetime completion or engagement that says i did something good. i had to say it is not about cost and quality. you have to change higher education and is being offered today. we are not going to achieve the goals we talk about here. models that many will take the form of.

perhaps i approach it in a different way. you take the university of california as a public research university. it's supposed to mean something. how many of you have a cell phone? i can even search it now without a warrant. that's how ubiquitous it is. that was my prior life. steve jobs did a phenomenal thing in terms of the packaging and design. when you really break it down and what is in there. there are nine basic scientific engineering and other basic research things, technologies, that would develop. some at the university of

california. taken and then applied to create the smartphones. that is a different type of university education model. that has to be supported just as some of these access focused universities need to be supported. i guess the point i am trying to make is not to disagree but to say that our aperture has to be larger and we have to think about where the innovation economy is going to go and how higher education plays into that role. these are issues we want to -- in the interest of time i would like all three of you to give us what is the one change you think needs to be considered within a very short time period. we have a host of current concessions that are tackling some of these issues and more.

what is the one thing you think can be the best? >> i want to say how much i agree with what janet just said. of there isn't going to be one single approach. we have this great diversity of higher education institutions and different models will emerge. for many institutions this competency-based learning will to the wayortant they do their work. since we haven't touched upon it i will mention community college. i am a huge fan of community colleges. we should have it on our country.

i think we can build a much tighter alignment between the two-year and four-year -- for the two year and four year schools. it creates a pathway for students to get a four-year degree. we have a very highly articulated program at montgomery college community two years at the community college, two years at the four-year school. him i asked a budget officer if a student follows that path, what are they say? a four-year degree from the smith school of business at college park, the states say something like $15,000 and the there is ave $19,000

real opportunity for us across the country to create some lower-cost high quality pathways to four-year degrees. m if there is a short change we can make it would be to rethink how we are what we are delivering and the quality we expect. him if the faculty is the gatekeeper of the coursework and the credentials, how do we ask the questions? how do legislators acts -- how would do -- how do legislators ask the question? can you come up with the right question to where you get the information you need to make a policy decision? those are the things that have to change. him and then to rethink the types of organizations or even relationships we have between our institutions, i was reading about the middle east competent -- middle east country that is

rich on natural gas. him they have a unique approach with how they are providing higher education. northwestern is going to teach journalism. this is on a single campus in qatar. of what we did that among our institutions? can you imagine the wrangling that would on over articulation? if our goal is quality education, a student has a usable credential at the end and no matter how they got that, they got it at a lower cost of more and more motivation. we thought about different ways to do that. butt's not really a change one thing that could be most very closely

working with the u.s. department of education and united states congress on what higher education is, what is the value at, and what it is going to require if the united states is going to thrive in the 21st century. can you join me in thanking our panel for sharing their expertise today? [applause] >> thank you very much. >> thank you. we do is focusrk around everything across the spectrum. we have an enormous amount of research on the higher education side. i want to talk about some of the

work we have done recently utilized by leaders like you and what to take a moment to highlight gary holiday. i know he was supposed to be here. -- the chairnsel of the council and commissioner of education statement kentucky. he recently spoke at an event i was at. as i was moderating it he called out one of the reports we had just completed. 13 model state-level programs. he talked about how that dual enrollment is exactly what he needed to start helping more and more students get an opportunity for higher education certificate or degree. he knew he couldn't politically get it done by himself. chairs his report to the who have now drafted a letter asking for a task force that will start reviewing this and report back to the chairs by the

end of this year for the 20 15th session. it is an example of the kind of work to help you move policy and the senate and house numbers have asked to be there to help give the national perspective on what is happening in dual enrollment. these are the areas you should be asking asleep in help us in many ways as well. we invite you to call us anytime you have a question and engage with us because it is important for the next step. the next steps for tonight are relatively simple. the you will see there are six of them. him this is how we do it every time we have our breaks. we urge you to find one that will be the most meaningful for you. we also wanted not to miss the chairs reception, which be taking place at 5:30 p.m. this evening. be on the other side of the hotel. him we will start at 7 a.m. with breakfast. help was urge you to

the best you can when you arrive to move toward that side of the ballroom as we have a capacity tomorrow. you so much for your help and your engagement date. we look forward to a fun evening with you tonight. >> the chamber of commerce's office week for the july force -- july 4 recess. taking a look at what some of the members are up to. some tweets and frank lobiondo tweeting, -- c-span within the members of congress list.

we will take you live to the pentagon to hear from john kirby. that will be live here on c-span. tonight, a look at the technological advances and consumer drones and their applications with both business and everyday use. it includes innovators and developers, including remarks by chris anderson. >> three projects launched, one kickstart her. things where these you are biking or skiing or running or whatever and the drone just stays 30 feedback and keeps the camera focused on you and gets that perfect cinematic hollywood feel. that is exactly what the two generation wants. it is incredibly complex artificial intelligence using

recognition and then creatively trying to figure out what the ipo angle is looking at the sun and shadows. it was science fiction a few years ago. him this was the droid you were looking for. him this was just this weekend. one of them just raised a half million dollars in a day. that was just today. him tomorrow, this mapping function we are talking about, it is this notion of construction given construction is arguably the number two industry in the world. agriculture is number one. $300 copter can do is it does circles around a construction site, takes pictures, gets sent to the cloud

, and increases the 3-d model. the that then gets snapped onto the model the engineering company was already doing. then you get what is happening every day in an automated fashion thanks to the recharging stations. him now you are the client. you want to know what is going on in the construction sites. you can watch your building snapped onto the very model you approved. watch it build up digitally. there is no bs. that is a $300 copter that is doing that. imagine what will happen in another five years. discussion on consumer drones tonight at 8:00 eastern. it is book tv in prime time. taking a look at three best sellers this year. the book on james madison. and mallory factor's book the

big tent, the story of the conservative revolution. that is tonight on c-span two. secretaryortation anthony foxx spoke to reporters about a number of issues, including the solvency of the highway trust fund. and the commercial use and consumer use of drones. he spoke at the christian science monitor breakfast series. this is an hour. >> our guest is anthony foxx. first visit. we thank him for coming to you he earned his bachelor's degree at davidson college where he is the first african-american student body president. after law school he spent a month in new orleans playing trumpet and becoming friends -- he- after becoming later served on the staff of the house judiciary committee. him outguess returned to charlotte in 2001 and got

elected to the charlotte city council in 2005 and reelected in 2007 he was elected the city's mayor in 2009, the youngest person to ever hold that job. that confirmedd as the 17th transportation secretary. popular populist portion of our program. partner ink my monitor breakfast land for the past couple of years. him today as her last breakfast. jerod gillmer just graduated from the school of journalism in northwestern and will be taking over. as those of you who don't let her know, she works great under pressure. thank you, kaitlyn. now to the more mundane process matters. as always we are on the record here.

even breakfast is underway to give us time to listen to what our guest says. there is no embargo when the session ends. would like to ask a question, send me a subtle nonthreatening signal created i will call upon one and all in the time we have available. we will move to questions from around the table. a >> thank you. i hope this is a very thunderous sendoff for you and ends up being the very best one. i would like to introduce a colleague of mine who is with me today in the sylvia garcia, who is the cfo in our department. why i havederstand

asked her to be with me this morning. the department of transportation is warning the highway trust fund is running out. inhave been doing this several ways over the past several months. we began with a ticker on our website that basically gave the public and up to the minute of theof how to try -- how highway trust fund is performing. we predicted the highway trust as early asun dry august of this year. in april we took a tour of the 12ntry, a state to work in cities large and small across america to raise the urgency of this issue to make sure the public understands what is at stake if the highway trust fund

runs out. are importantly, to promote piece of legislation the ,resident and i have put forth which would not only get the highway trust fund stabilized but do what we think should be done in this country. it is a time of investment, time of growth, time of stability. as we predicted back in january, the time is almost up. this morning i sent letters to the state department of into transitn agencies outlining steps when highway trust funds approach zero. normally states receive annual enlightenment. during the first week of august the highway trust fund will drop below a crucial point.

-- we will start stop reimbursing states for each one that comes in and instead implement a new process of cash management to help us move through this unfortunate period of time. state is entitled to a certain percentage of the highway trust fund taste on an annual formula. percentages will determine how much each state receives of what ever is left. they will be paid every two weeks as money from the gas tax comes in. him we believe this promote equitable approach. options whengood we are talking about a trust schiphol -- running running short on supply of dollars.

having been at the local level, the mostl you that devastating part of this situation is that many communities would depend on the federal government for significant dollars to get federal projects done. him no matter how much we estimate the infrastructure we have in the country, it is growing by the day because the confidence level has dropped at the state and local levels. projects will reduce congestion. projects will include -- will increase quality of life, projects that will enable congress to remove -- commerce to move efficiently. and it is going to be made worse by this crisis unless congress acts. which brings me to the good news. a congress can still act. we have proposed an answer to this question.

thatink it is a good bill meets the standards and the tests that many members have made clear to us. we also have expressed we are willing to listen to other ideas that have emerged. this is a crisis that can be avoided. him i want to urge congress to attack -- to act. i look forward to your questions. >> i will do one or two myself. let me follow up a little bit on the highway trust fund. we had a visit last week from the chairman of the judiciary committee of the house, basically saying the chances of getting any immigration legislation of congress were not wonderful. saying congress could act. do you expect them to act?

wouldn't they be pretty minimal? >> i think the american public expects congress to act. if you had been on the bus tour with me back in april, you go out these communities and see the long list of things they want to get done. the burning desire these theunities have to fix crumbling in nashville or to see mortgages -- seymour bridges like the one that had been created on the kentucky indiana border or to see transit systems come back to life in parts of atlanta that had not seen it before or even the investments that make possible jobs in alabama, a company that is building transit buses that are being sold all over the country in this small little town, putting people to work. him i think this is the place the american public expects our transportation system to be first rate.

i think what is becoming clear to people as we have seen as we have seen travel times increasing around the country, congestion increasing, the public will demand action. saying you need 1.8 billion. can you say where it is now and how long before it runs dry? >> the numbers are actually bigger than 1.8 billion. we estimated the highway trust fund will run short of $860 million. that is for the rest of the year. i have said this and i will keep saying it, as a country we need to stop things small ball with transportation.

china and i just saw a study a couple of weeks ago that china has poured more concrete in the last three years than we have in 100 feet of that is emblematic of this race to create efficient reliable safe transportation systems around the world to attract commerce and to improve mobility. we have been first rate as a country historically. are beginning to run faster than we are. we cannot take for granted what has been given to us. >> that is about general motors. as you know they were announced to recall another 8.5 million cars. the loss to journal points out the number is greater to combine sales from the year two -- from the year 20 -- from the year 2005 22013.

how much of the telly about how the department has been protecting motors and what changes does it cause you to make in terms of the pop -- in terms of the auto safety activities? >> let's keep in mind the timeframe in which this issue should have come to light was exactly the same time as the set of issues that gave rise to concerns with toyota. we learned an awful lot from the toyota example as part of an ig report that was done and some protocols that are now put into place to help us improve going forward. we're taking a look at the situation to see what we can .earn from it the point i would make is the is emblematic of the coursework of our transportation department.

the factor of seen this is in part to the fact that we have a different penalty than we have ever levied against a company. i would actually take the position that what has happened here is actually a result of an awareness that we are going to take action if we see violations happening. isthe second and final point that we use data to evaluate the and thef automobiles reason we have a timeliness requirement is because sometimes automakers are in a better position than we are of problems with the vehicle. that is why there is a penalty if there is a five day delay in providing that information. we will always have to be

working with industry on these issues to promote safety. pointed out it is far more expensive for a company to go through a situation like this and then have to fix it then it would be to catch it on the front end. that is what we always endeavor to do. >> and emergency order is being shipped by rail. is likely toit emerge from this rulemaking progress -- process as a result of instructions that continue to shift and significantly higher prices? -- >> this is a question about a rulemaking that is currently under review. whether our rulemaking is going to create a higher expense in disruption in the movement of crude oil.

we are seeing exponential port in the transport of crude ale -- of crude oil. that is a huge increase in the amount of this particular crude oil movement. it requires us to step up our level of safety as a nation. rulemakingh to the is something i can't talk about in specific. in this industry is a strong desire to have certainty and clarity over which way the federal government is going to go here. once aession is that rule is actually finalized and put out there, industry will adjust. it will be able to do this much more safely.

striking the balance between safety and crude oil. >>, august -- come august can you give me a ballpark estimate on how many projects will be considered soft nationwide. how and when will drivers and real people start seeing the effectiveness of this? >> it is a great question. it is difficult to know exactly which projects will be impacted. the reason why is because the states her -- the states are basically drawn on the funds available from the federal government. the governors in the state department of transportation are going to have to make judgments based on more limited availability and dollars, how are they going to actually manage that? in some states the project may be slow down.

in some states there may be projects stopped altogether. in some others they may have available cash to advance the dollars, basically putting ious in place for the federal government for future withdrawal. i think the challenge is who are you going to tell that the project is not going to happen? the other complicating factor is there is a limited window for actually doing construction work. even if a state could slow down a project financially in some cases it is impractical because they cannot actually get the project advance in this season of construction. is no matter how you slice and dice it it will be bad. your second question was --

how did people feel the impact of this? >> i think people are feeling the impact of the tumor to of ability of the country to chart a path long-term already. whether it is potholes, whether times, ther travel pipeline of projects in this country that we need is so great and the dollars we are spending pale in comparison to what we need. him i think this is going to create a massive gulf in that pipeline. the design and engineering of projects will need to happen at the state and local levels.

of their projects affecting people the next year, the year after, that aren't going to happen or happen as quickly because of what happened. i think people will see it in traffic. of i think they'll see it and the lack of our ability to fix our bridges and put the new capacity in place. it is going to be a longer-term crisis if we go over this cliff. these projects take years to get done. if we take more years to get them done it will get worse. >> i have an aviation question. i guess norwegian air international has applied to serve the u.s. as a low-cost carrier pinna they complain their application has been pending for four times longer than the average european education. what is taking so long?

there is a proposal to increase the cap on passengers. and there are disputes about whether that should go up, the airlines do not like the i idea of raising those fees. prospects of raising that this year? i think our aviation sector is one that is undergoing rapid change. there has been consolidation activity in the industry itself among commercial carriers. are very bullish on the work that is involved in in bringingion and in our airspace from world war ii radar technology to 21st century gps technology. we think it will make the airspace more efficient. it will make the airspace cleaner that way.

what is interesting is over the next year hopefully once we get over this issue with the highway trust fund the next big issue in transportation is going to be a reauthorization bill. i think there are some issues in aviation that are on the table about how we structure, how we finance and set the aviation sector up to compete in the 21st century economy, that we will have a chance to work with other stakeholders to help resolve. i think that is going to allow all these issues to be laid bare in a much different dynamic than just in the budget season. i am looking forward having those conversations. the conversation is going to be more complicated if we're still dealing with highways and transit this year. to get this done so we can clear the space to focus on aviation.

>> i was surprised to hear you say automakers are in a better position to know about their cars and federal government. >> my point was in some cases they are in a better position to access information that would be material to our human evaluation. not as a blanket matter. given the crisis nature of the gm recall, is there any sense that the administration, that this does require a more respect -- more robust response from government to be more proactive when these type of safety issues resulting talked -- result in fatalities? >> there was data that was reviewed by nitsa. as i've said before, had there

been anecdotal information sa that gm hadt the kind of concerns we now know they had that were being brushed aside internally, that would have been material to the review we were were making. . sometimes is a combination of data and anecdotal information for creates conditions stepping up activity on something. look at thisck and ourselves. wes not just external folks, will look at ourselves and figuring out whether there is something we can do. after toyota, one of the things that happened was we worked with ibm to implement a system that actually analyzes the data much more rigorously than it had for

-- than it had before to predict issues before they emerge. that has been very successful we will continue to build a better mousetrap of this nitsa an instance where was not looking at this. i think this was an issue of not having all the information that would have been material to its review. fund,the highway trust the gas tax is a touchy political subject. is the issue of raising the gas tax something we can expect to have after the midterm elections or after a presidential election? let me put it this way -- areome sense, what you asking is a political question. that this issue

is one that is important enough to put legislation in place. we have also talked about the use of tro business tax reform to pay for this. the reason we talk about program business tax reform --pro-growth tax reform, i have had plenty of conversations with republicans and democrats on the house and senate side. one of the messages i have gotten loud and clear is that many of them don't want to raise rates and many of them don't want to increase deficits. us way as a way to help accomplish substantially more investment in transportation without running against those two principles. with aress comes up different combination, another formulation, to get there, we have said we will listen to what they have to say. but they have to speak with one

voice. that is where i see a challenge. we have conversations going on about short-term. the senate has had a lot more public discussion about this. i have concerns that we have not heard as much from the house although i know there are folks over there thinking about this and working on it. coming -- cliff is coming and i think we may find ourselves running over it. over the weekend, there was a truck crash in delaware where the driver fell asleep. ofs crash did not get a lot attention but comes a couple of weeks after a crash in which celebrity tracy morgan was injured in that crash got a lot of attention. 4000 truckbout

related totality's per year -- fatalities per year. in the grow america act, the administration put in a specific provision that is designed to change the way truck drivers are paid. addition to their normal pay or being paid by the for, they would get paid time when they are at the loading dock waiting for their loads. aboutyou talk a little how big a priority it is for the administration to kind of change this economic system we have where it seems by design that we have a lot of drivers on the road who are working really long hours and 50 has been shown to be a factor in a number of fatal crashes. >> it's an important question.

whether you're talking about --cks or airplanes or rail in metro-north in the new york area, we saw that. tired driving is bad driving. it is a risk not only to the driver but also to other folks on the roadway or the railway or the airspace. at this very moment, there is a serious discussion going on in about relaxing some of our hours of service requirement that are designed to prevent drivers from driving while tired. agency, we are strongly -- i cannot emphasize how strongly opposed we are to relaxing these research-based rules that have

been promulgated to protect the traveling public. this is a real issue. it's an issue that is particularly challenging in the trucking industry where the economics are aligned to promote more hours on the road. to helprt is to try asked wage some of that -- assuage some of that. our job is safety, that's what we're here to do. that's the central mission of our agency. and we will always take the side of her mouthing the public interest and the public safety even if the economics prove more challenging. >> let me do a time check. we are about 9:28 a.m. if nitsa did not spot the

ignition problem because gm did not turn over everything it knew, what are we going to do to say we don't have the rubble mcgann and we don't have to count on companies that have that management and bad culture? when can we rely on government to have a good shot at spotting the rubble before they go years and years and kill a bunch of people? over the last 10 years, nitsa has record -- has issued over 1200 recalls affecting 95 million vehicles. that does not even count the latest round of recalls that have occurred.

i don't want to give you the impression that the way this works is 100% of the time, nitsa is responding to a time limits warning from a car company and then going back and trying to look at the data to figure out whether a recall will happen. it happens all over the map. recallss we issue before an automaker has identified a problem. that happens. can we do better? of coarse we endeavor to always do better and that's what i have asked our ig to take a look at the circumstances of this particular incident to see if there's other protocols we can adopt that will improve our ability to handle the next problem. sense, the loss of life here is highly, highly, regrettable.

our thoughts and prayers are with all the families that have been affected by these situations. recalls -- iabout would rather have a recall that allows us to get something corrected than to have a sleeping problem that nobody knows about. we are working hard to make that happen. gm has recalled about 15 million vehicles. the latest recall has reports of three deaths. look at these to new recalls to see if gm did not meet the five day requirement to report these in a timely fashion? >> as a standard practice, we will take a look at the recall. decision as to a whether this stems from the same nucleus of fact as the previous

ones. that determination will have to be done by nitsa but we will take a very careful look. gm on aork with resolution to the initial problem, we have been able to extract from gm unprecedented commitments to fix things going forward. we will keep putting the screws on this until he gets right. you are now investigating chrysler vehicles for ignition problems. how big a problem is this across the industry? >> we are taking a look. where we see problems, we will address them. seen but it'sbe something we're definitely taking a look at. and a roster of great governors of the 20th century

the democrats were noncompetitive in the tar heel state. in 2008.reakthrough since then, the state has absolutely turned hard right, deeper right. what happened than what went wrong? virginia is all of a sudden more purple if not read that is north carolina, what happened? i think several things -- there may have been a little more optimistic after the 2008 election about turning the corner. redistrictinghat fight a heavy role. in 2010, for the first time in more than 100 years, north carolina did not have a state

house or senate that was democratic-controlled. in gerrymandering both the state house and state senate and u.s. congressional districts. i will point out that the president subsequent to that in his real action campaign lost north carolina by less than 100,000 votes. reasons why ithe atll think north carolina its essence is still the state everyone thought it was before. it will take another tidal wave to prove that. we will see what happens in the future with great folks who are down there who i think will be running for things in the future. are you confident in kay hagan is real action? >> she has done a great job and

i have a lot of hope that she will prevail. back in january, the mayor in washington proposed a fee i'm going through cities to make up for the hazardous waste they carry. at the time, you are on the fence on it. have you moved towards accepting it? what's the latest that mayor emanuel wants from you? what was the best of vice that ray lahodd gave to you when he turned over the shop to you? >> he learned a lot of things from a. [laughter] i'm sorry, mayor emanuel -- on the issue of a fee for

hazardous material moving through a community -- i think that is something that probably should be looked at. takes a america act position that there is more that we need to know. about the material itself. there is more we need to know pieces of theous safety ecosystem that need to happen. we have worked going on with role making but one of the situationfound is the is that we have several different agencies with equities within dot and sometimes you need resources to do field testing and the agency right on the front line has a very small budget for testing. then you have to go to fra to figure if they've got some

resources. a $40 million flexible funds to give us the ability to be mental and develop a plan over two years to dramatically increase our efforts on the safety front of their as we are still working on our rulemaking and as we have taken more than two dozen steps to try to increase safety. --r last question was >> it's running late. >> i think of something that needs to be explored. comerms of things that with a sequence of what we need to push this rulemaking and try to get that done. we need to have the resources as an agency to articulate an even broader set of steps. those steps may include a fee. it's something i would like to look at because i think it sounds like a good idea and

there he but i want to take a look at it. >> [no audio] [inaudible] >> it evolves. on the trust fund, can you give us a specific date you're anticipating the trust fund will hit zero? with that the august? -- would that be august? >> this is something that changes daily. the way the trust fund works as it works on a reimbursement basis. --can tell you >> we are projecting the end of august right now. august 1 is what we put in the letter that went out today in actual balance is the end of august, beginning of september. we historically have laid a

marker down around the $4 billion mark. that is basically the kind of cash cushion you need to meet the obligations of the states. at the beginning of august, we will run before the ford billion dollar mark. at the end of august, we will be at zero. >> you spoke about how you have not seen a proposal that you could weigh in on. there is a bipartisan bill in the senate to raise the gas tax. the chamber of commerce wants to raise the gas tax. democrats in the house want to raise the gas tax. ray lahood wants to raise the gas tax. why is this administration

dragging its feet on something that so many people support and think is a logical solution? that if, we have said congress acts on something, we will keep an open mind. that has been my position all along. -- whyson why proposed we propose what we propose we heard from members of congress that they don't want to raise rates which a gas tax increase would require. there has not been a vote on that. >> you will only comment on after they both? >> we are open to what congress has to say but we have a proposal that we would like to present as well. >>0 i want to nail it down. >> i have said that many times. >> i want to ask you about oil trains. it has been a year since the last accident and you have is very important rulemaking going on. there are a lot of economic interests interested in that.

it's a concern about how it will affect them and what it will cost them. on the other hand, you have these areas of the country where these trains go through, albany, chicago, seattle area, that are concerned about their safety. what kind of guarantee can you give the people in those communities that are worried about their safety that you will not water down safety in this rulemaking to satisfy these big economic interests? before, we have taken more than two dozen measures, very few of which have been popular within the industry. we have done that because our northstar is safety. rule is a work that is organized around what is to theest approach movement of this crude oil particularly given the volumes in which is moving around the country. thatve these unit trains

are stacking in some cases 100 or more trains together. that is a different caliber of problem than we have seen in the past. if that is the way it's going to be, what is the right way to structure a rule to make it as safe as possible? there are a lot of variables. there is the tank car itself. there is also speed. there is also track quality. there is also any number of things. we want to strike the right balance but the balance we are trying to strike is a balance around safety. our will continue to be goal. mentioned the gas tax, is a contingencyre

plan if it is not authorized? >> for? >> if you get to september and the gas tax is not been reauthorized -- >> if we get there to the end of august and has not been a funding solution and a reauthorization extension, we will not be able to spend money even if we had it. that's another part of the crisis. in response to both these questions on the gas tax -- nothing i am saying is meant to understate the work that many people are doing. -- senator boxer has worked with her committee and proposed a bill. representative dave camp from the house ways and means committee on the very day we announced our framework action of february, he came forward with a framework that was similar. work of senators murphy and corker -- many people

are trying to weigh in. the constitutional fact is that until congress does something elective late, we are stuck. and the country will be stuck and gridlock in washington is really going to translate into gridlock at home. the dot ig said last week the meet the likely not september 15 deadline crafting drum legislation. to that. to get back what we have tried to do over the last few months has been to really step up the work on this. that's why we have four of the six test sites that stood up. we have worked to put forth some have tot we obviously work on this other rule as well.

i would like to get a more contained response that will be direct to your question. did you read this series in the newspaper talking about 49 large military drones crashing in the states, 15 cases where drones were flying close to planes? theyi read that, i thought don't take too long to come up with a rule. >> let's be clear that is notial use of drones authorized unless the faa says so. >> a rule widely ignored? >> where we find violators, we will go after them. the reason why is because the andhas a lot of experience in many cases sets the world standard for managing your space. as we look at this bold new

world of unmanned aircraft, into thetegrating that airspace cannot be done overnight and has to be trial tested and stress tested in many ways and that's why we are doing the test sites to learn from examples around the country in targeted cases. justll not allow folks to treat this like a wild west and just do whatever they want. we think there will be safety implications for that, obviously. --two unrelated questions government officials right around in gm cars. comfortable in gm cars? do you get any complaints from others? dnc a former mayor of a

convention city, do you have any advice for what it takes to win? of my feelings, i have said this before, folks need to follow it's recommended with any recall activity. if they do that, we feel like justwill be fine and follow up with the manufacturer or go to the dealership and get checked out and keep it moving. i don't have concerns about writing in the gym car that i am writing in. i can only say, that i am looking forward to going as a visitor. [laughter] have any great i advice on that. i think there are a lot of great

cities in the running. all of them would be fantastic. i am looking forward to hopefully going just as a passive visitor. you have said why you chose [inaudible] that thisncerned would move as a user fee system as opposed to the gas tax? >> no, for several reasons. the ditch we are trying to dig out of is so substantial that we need to have an inflection point. we need to have a moment where we are knowing from fights over whether we can fund at the same level we did last year to a discussion about how to get more investment infrastructure. our proposal would help us do

that. the second thing is that the current user fee system is ,roken and it's broken because frankly for good reasons. our vehicles are becoming more efficient and folks are using less fuel and where ever you set the gas tax, the curve is still downward facing. that means at some point in the future, we could reach the same pont we are reaching today. what our proposal enables is a moment in time where we start to think differently about how we support our infrastructure system. we put additional funding in place and we have not talked about many of the policies that we think are important right now that focus on getting projects done faster and focus on changing some of the dynamics between the federal government,

state and local governments and giving more local control to local communities to determine how they want to move forward. all those things are really important. there will always be a user fee component to have transportation gets funded. i don't want to say that is not the case but we need to be thinking differently about it. also public-private partnerships should be part of the conversation. >> you are willing to abandon this notion that the transportation system should be funded solely through user fees? >> i think there are a lot of.options dope it options out there. i don't pick it will stop the passage of our bill but our bill provides an answer that is thetically feasible given

congress we have right now. it gives us four years of certainty and gives us time to breathe so that we can actually have this discussion without the next crisis around the corner. if the gas tax rich as the president, will he sign it into law? >> we have said we are open but all i can tell you is that we have a proposal that we think is politically acceptable that actually works for our transportation system, that we think is the best solution right now. i'm not going to speculate on that. i will tell you that we expressed openness and that's where we are. >> the maryland gas tax went up again today. it went up last july 1.

15 or 20 states have passed gas tax increases. the public is not as opposed to this as some might think. instead of waiting for congress to speak, why won't the administration take a lead position on raising the gas tax when there is across-the-board support from the business and labor community? >> i think that's unfair. has put astration comprehensive bill together. the time working on this thing. it's a good bill. thate taking the position this is not just a question of funding. that is critically important question. it's also question of if there are other ways to create more

capacity within the system by getting projects to move faster? other ways to engage outlook-private partnerships. we have chileans of dollars of money sitting on the sidelines. -- we have trillions of dollars of money sitting on the sidelines. we have not taken a backseat on this. for that we think is affected. >> whether it is a gas tax or corporate tax, these are short-term plans. what is the administration's vision once and for all solving the nation's funding issues? is it moving away from a dedicated system and funding the general fund or is a national vnt or is it a combination with public-rabbit partnerships -- public -- private partnerships. >> i don't think many

stakeholders understand how severe this crisis is. the average person is paying about $100 into the highway system are now. in most states, the american society estimates that people are paying $200 or so in additional wear and tear on your vehicles because of potholes or what have you. in reality, people are paying for this problem. they are paying for it. those costs in some cases are disaggregated from what they pay at the pump. is a host of questions involved here on what we do going forward. what we need right now is we need long-term stability in the system. that is what our bill is trying to get. >> last question -- >> how much will the bill rely

on privatization? in dallas, they have invested more than 10 or $15 million. -- 15 billion dollars in infrastructure in the metro area and it has come from privatization. the legislature and congress has not put more money in so people are paying out of their pockets. cities?a plan for other >> we have essentially up tro it llsion -- a prohibition of tooll at the federal level. that is not how we pay our bills. our bill does lift that ban and offers to governors who wish to

look at tolling as an option to apply to dot and request the ability to toll. that would have to be looked at by dot. i tend to think that if there is a commitment to doing maintenance on the facility, it would be tolls or to invest in congestion relieving systems. there may be acceptable ways to see that happen in the country more. our bill is not paid for by tolling we just recognize that there is a need to create a little more flexibility at the state level for folks to be enterprising and figure out how to get things done. thresholds? -- are there any thresholds?

>> and he proposal would have to come through the apartment and be looked at independently. >> here comes the last ceremonial softball. post"ld "the washington but if you could get one person from the private sector to help you, it would be eric schmidt of google. have you reached out to any high-tech private sector people for help? absolutely, i have actually talked to eric schmidt. not surprisingly. he's got a lot of ideas. things i am fascinated by is the way analytics can be used to improve performance. where there is room for us at dot to do that. when a project comes in the door

and needs permitting, historically, it has come by mail. from stack of documents go one place to another within government and it takes in some cases years for projects to begin moving. we are looking to digitize that process. we are looking from going to go from departments to sequential doingws to concurrent reviews. understanding what our baseline is today and how we can improve performance going forward is something we think is a useful exercise at dot. we hope to do more with that going forward. >> thank for coming, we appreciate it. >> thank you. thanks, everybody. .

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] several questions today about the transportation infrastructure in the u.s. -- president obama will be talking about that at the key bridge in which comes out of georgetown and washington, d.c. and he will talk about infrastructure and calling on congress to renew the highway trust fund which is set to expire at the end of august if congress does not act. you can follow the president, to live at 2:20 p.m. eastern on c-span.org.

secretary fox address the use of consumer drones and tonight we will take an in-depth look at the domestic drum industry and their applications for business and everyday use. industry developers and innovators will take part in the discussion hosted by the churchill club of california tonight at 8:00 eastern. coming up in just over 20 minutes, we will take you live to the pentagon for a briefing with spokesman john kirby. that is coming up that 2 p.m. eastern. more about the decision from the supreme court in the hobby lobby case. -- associated press said we talked about the decision in

this morning's washington journal and we'll show you that conversation or as much as we can until the pentagon briefing gets underway at 2 p.m. eastern. >> we are back in two in thank you both for being here. -- inwe begin with you your opinion, what is the impact of the decision yesterday? one impact is that this decision is an important victory for religious liberty. it's a victory that all americans should celebrate. it's a profound declaration that congress meant what it said when it passed the freedom of religion act in 1993 and government needs to have a good burden the exercise of

religious liberty. it's a very important victory in a huge defeat for the obama administration which has been forcing the hhs mandate an extreme form with no exemptions at all. gave some time exempt some the court has said you need more and see what you can do to provide these benefits without objecting employers in the process. may say that the obama administration can entirely achieve its goal of providing access to these contraceptives. there's no question about that. conscriptingso by these employers to -- who have religiously-based objections to some of the drugs and devices. >> how do you see it? >> if the court issued a victory for the religious liberty of people or churches or other houses of worship, i would celebrate the ruling.

instead, the court ruled for the very first time that for profit ofporations have the benefit free exercise rights under the laws of our country and i agree with justice ginsburg who said this is a decision of startling breadth and something that takes us out of step with our constitutional traditions and our nations history. i think it's troubling that under this ruling you could have some corporate employers through the artificial entities of the corporations impose their religious beliefs on employees. they may have very different beliefs and their employers and may have different views on how to live their lives. and this decision, the court not only took some precedent steps recognizing corporate religious exercise rights but in the process, it disallowed women

employees of these companies from accessing important health benefits to which they are legally entitled under the affordable care act. . >> do you see this as broad? do you think more corporations like hobby lobby will say we don't want to follow these other mandates? >> i don't think that will happen. what's startling is justice ginsburg's dissent. only one other justice joined her. the notion that for-profit corporations, very small ones even, are categorically excluded from religious liberty protections is an extreme notion. it would mean that a kosher deli could be provided to provide -- nonkosher food. it is remarkable to me that justice ginsburg and get brace that -- embrace that proposition. justice kagan and breyer distanced themselves from that. they made it clear it was way too far for them to go. there's nothing surprising about the proposition.

haveofit corporations religious liberty rights of so do for-profit corporations. hobby lobby and conestoga would have religious objections and their rights have been indicated. >> samuel alito wrote the majority opinion -- the court tried to limit its ruling to publicly held corporations, they actually did not limit the overall opinion that for-profit privately owned theseations can exercise rights. they said it is unlikely or improbable that publicly traded companies will be able to bring these claims. theydo not rule out that

had these free enterprise interest in the first place. with respect to covertly held operations, it does not mean small. some of the largest companies that are privately held employee hundreds of thousands of employees in this country. going tothat this is be some very small mom and pop corporation just is not a reflection of reality. on the point about whether all of the justices in dissent joined justice ginsburg on this point, justices kagan and breyer said that because hobby lobby and conestoga would lose on the merits of the claim, that they would not be able to show they are substantially burdened by the affordable care act and the government program was not restrictive, that they did not have to reach that issue. it's not as if they disagreed, they did not reach the issue. >> we will get to phone calls and we encourage you to start dialing in now.

we have the chief counsel at the constitutional accountability center and ed whelan, president of the ethics and policy center. let me go back to you and point to what the court pointed to which is this 1993 religious freedom restoration act. it says it was designed to prevent government from substantially burdening religious exercise without first showing a compelling justification. it was approved overwhelmingly by the congress and president clinton signed it into law. how do you read it? >> the religious freedom restoration act which also goes by rfra, refers to her sons exercise of religion. the dictionary act which is a thing says when you are

interpreting the word person, you include a corporation and other entities as well is a natural person except when the ext would suggest a more narrow interpretation. when you look at what a person's exercise of religion has meant over our 200 years of protection for religious freedom exercises, you see that going back to the -- for-profit corporations were never included in them understanding. it was something that was a right of conscience, deeply personal to individuals. religiousches and incorporated entities could enjoy that protection as well, the courts and the founders never understood for-profit corporations organized for financial gain, artificial corporate entities exist because of the state share those protections. >> how do you see it? elizabeth is staking out the

ground only to justices went with. there was a majority of justices who recognize there was religious liberty interests at stake. beyond that, justice alito compellingly explains that you cannot say person includes nonprofit corporations and say it does not include for-profit corporations. unless theary says context is otherwise. nonprofit corporations are included and nonprofit and for-profit makes no sense at all. >> louisville, kentucky, independent caller -- the language pertaining to contraceptives was not in the original bill when it was passed. added by kathleen sebelius. this represents a danger.

his president and people are making up law as it goes along. that is ridiculous. get ado -- and we president in there does not like fair housing, what are you going to do them? >> this was a rule put in place by hhs after the affordable care act was passed. we showed the rule to our viewers earlier but let me read some of it. >> it's in an important point. nancy pelosi famously said after obamacare was enacted that it would -- that we would have to agree to find out what is in it. there's a massive delegation of authority of bureaucrats to define obligations of americans and this is a system that is

guaranteed to be a huge failure. the hhs mandate is one part of this broader system of command and control that i think will be very dangerous for this nation. it's part of the broader alliance on government regulatory supposedly and. it is taken to the extreme at that point. this is the sort of issue in which you want congress to legislate broadly and what congress said in the affordable care act was that insurance plans should cover certain preventive screenings and health services and delegate it to the medical experts, the u.s. preventative services tax for us -- tax -- task force, what medically in their opinion was the source of inventive screens and services that would best

promote women's health in this instance. that's what congress should be doing when it delegates expert agencies to come up with regulations based on expert opinion delegated explicitly by congress in through the affordable care act. this group of experts said that providing the full range of fda approved contraceptives was important to preventing unintended pregnancies which is incredibly important as a public health interest. providing the full range of contraception would allow a woman and her doctor to choose the safest and most effective form for her and her family instead of having that decision driven by what she can afford which might not be the optimum choice for hermetically. >> if you're a woman and you worked at one of these companies, what does it mean for you? , quincyt to more calls massachusetts, democratic caller. >> i think they are whooshing -- they are pushing us into but they sharia law

cannot see it in themselves. they see it in the muslims and they are not electing normal people to run for congress. they are represented by a christian zealots. . needed?ere any response i don't think vindication of the religious freedom restoration act reflects a threat of christian theocracy. it was signed by president clinton. the caller has an aggressively anti-religious perspective. >> was go to kentucky, republican caller. know why would like to something this big was not approved for the vote by the people. >> why do you say that>? what do you mean? shoving itthey are

down everyone's throat and many people cannot afford it and some people can't get it. i got to children that can even buy it. >> what do you think? guest: the affordable care act whether you supported or not was passed by the people's representative in congress. it did go through the constitutionally prescribed process for bills becoming a law and signed by the president. it's not mean that people have to necessarily like it. that's the way democracy works. people are running and many others are running on the many benefits it provides. more and more people are seeing the benefits as its and lamented. host: a number of headlines: a blow to the affordable care act, another blow. how do you view it? guest: it's important to note that in this case as opposed to the obamacare case two years at

ago, they did not know whether this situation would survive or whether certain companies could get exemptions based on religious beliefs. it allows some holes to be poked in the contraception coverage division -- provision and provisions that promote women sell and many health advocates around the country are nervous as we wait to see whether lobbyies will join hobby and conestoga would with respect to contraception coverage or with respect to other health services. host: do you see it is a blow to the affordable care act? a blownot really, it's to the particular way the obama administration has went about implementing this law. what the court has said is you can pursue your objectives.

there are plenty of ways of providing these drugs and devices. what you cannot do is dragooned the objecting religious employers. offdn't america be better if hobby lobby stopped providing health insurance to its employees and they had to decide whether to spend their money to try to get health insurance in these dysfunctional exchanges? what theays, th supreme court has done will help the administration get things right and implement the law in a way that does not infringe people's religious liberty interests. closely held corporations and individual owners were the plaintiffs. justice ginsburg said neither the individuals nor the closely held corporations of any rights at all. whoe are individuals here

are running these corporations. they have rights as well. host: talk about the other company involved. guest: there were three companies come a hobby lobby has a sister company, mardell that is a christian bookstore. conestoga would is a cabinetmaking company run by mennonites who have similar objections to some of these drugs and devices. ae case came up through different route, through the third circuit. it now has this important victory. . >> from twitter -- let's go to belton, missouri, independent caller. caller: thank you for c-span. very much ait is war on women. we never talk about the men who sit around and produce babies.

some of these mens have six or seven or 10 babies at a time and i don't take care of them. you cannot force them through the law to take care of their children. i believe that it is a war on women. host: let's take that point. women of thek nation would be better off if secular for profit corporations follow law and provided them with the health benefits they are entitled to. i think a lot of women are going to read this ruling and think that the five justices in the majority do not consider providing for their preventive health services as something that is important as other parts of the generally applicable law which the majority mentions later as being really compelling interests that the federal

government has and can with --ong -- and can with don and can withstand religious objection. there are individuals who own this company. not just the corporate entities. no one is disputing that those individuals as individuals have free exercise rights. in a way, it was unnecessary for the conservative majority to say we have to imbue the corporate entity they own with religious rights. the people behind it have free exercise rights. they would not have been able to avail on their own in this case onthe affordable care act is the corporate entity and not on the individuals. until this ruling, we have set an artificial corporate entity has distinct rights and privileges from the individuals who own it. we did not intermix them the way the court did in the decision and hobby lobby. i think that is dangerous for

fundamental corporate law and it gets at the idea that you have corporate personhood that is unsettling to a lot of people. >> i want you to respond to the caller's accusations that this is a war on women. here is a statement -- there are women who are the owners of these companies. this war on women rhetoric is politically charged but it's meritless here. what the majority says is the interests of women can be served directly by the government. there is no reason to dragooned these employers. lots of people i'm sure will try to misread the opinion and say otherwise but there's nothing here that supports that rhetoric. i agree with the caller when she

talks about the problems with en that hasle m nothing to do with this ruling. let me show you this e-mail -- if you're a woman that works at one of these companies, what does this decision mean for you? --st: it's important to note many people upset they are only objecting to four forms of contraception and other forms are available. i think that e-mail makes a good point about why that's important. one of the challenge forms of contraception is the iud and

that is something that is used in many cases by women who have already had children and may need it for other reasons or it's simply the safest and lists -- means for family planning and that form of contraception if it is not provided in this at can-free manner, th cost up to a full month's pay for someone who is working a minimum wage job. that means the decision of what form of contraception to use will likely be made by what she and her family can afford and not between her and her doctor as to what is the safest and most guest: that is simply not true. iuds are available today as they were years ago. says, what the government can do and shou