next month without action from both chambers of congress. this is an hour. >> our guest today has been in his post as the top u.s. transportation regulator for just over a year. since he assumed the job of u.s. transportation secretary, shipping oil by train has become a hot button issue. the u.s. suffered its first fatal commercial aviation crash in more than four years and the pot of money that pays for roads and bridges in this country found itself on the verge of running out of money. anthony foxx is the head of the u.s. department of transportation, which is sometimes overlooked, but which in recent months has been at the front and center of the news. when transportation runs smoothly, no one pays attention. but when bridges fall down, trains derail, or more people die in traffic crashes after years of decline, it's the transportation secretary who hears about it and has to try to

figure out a solution. foxx previously was the youngest mayor of charlotte, north carolina, elected in 2009 and serving a single term. when the city slipped into financial crisis shortly after he was elected, foxx looked at transportation to revive the local economy and he later brought thousands of visitors to the city when it hosted the 2012 democratic national convention. the father of two won a rare unanimous confirmation from the senate, and he keeps a reminder at home, a carolina panthers helmet in his office. please help me give a warm national press club welcome to u.s. transportation secretary anthony foxx. [ applause ] >> angela, thank you very much. i also want to thank your current president for welcoming me here and to thank all of you for taking time from your busy

schedules and days to be here at the national press club. you know, almost since i assumed the role of u.s. secretary of transportation, i have been ringing the alarm bell about the looming crisis with our highway trust fund. the federal source that is used to pay for highways and for transit. it is unfortunate that it has taken months of ringing this alarm bell. traveling the country in april on a bus tour, putting up a trust fund ticker on the d.o.t. website, meeting with dozens of governors and mayors across the count country, putting shoe leather on capitol hill. to get to the point where just last week u.s. house of

representatives passed a measure to avert the immediate crisis of our highway trust fund. and to pass in effect a ten-month patch on the system. later this week, the u.s. senate is expected to take up a similar measure. if this short-term patch passes, it will not be time to celebrate. it's hard to imagine that congress will not push the snooze button on this issue again. until crunch time. come may 2015, if we're not careful, we'll be right here again with the shot clock set to expire, looking for an easy solution to patches for a few more months, leaving the real conversation for another time. and i can hear folks on capitol

hill now, gosh, you know, this transportation thing is really important. but we just can't figure it out right now. so let's just do what we can and keep moving. well, today, and until congress passes a long-term bill, i'm urging the american people to say no more delays. no more gimmicks. no more short-term patches or band-aids. build our country. put us to work. and get america moving again. and help future generations move forward in the process. because folks, if we're only building for the present, we are building for the past. that's just the reality. it's a sad commentary that we're in effect managing a declining system, a system that is crumbling before our eyes, a system that is growing potholes.

a system that is creating longer commute times and a system that will cause us to lose jobs we have no business losing in america. why? you know, if this system were a patient, we would want to look at what the symptoms are and we would want to figure out what the underlying disease was. on the surface, our system suffers from chronic underinvestment. an old project delivery system that makes projects take too long and cost too much. and a set of priorities that are more like model ts, a set of policies that are more like model ts than steslas. beneath the surface, the american people are confused about who to hold accountable, even as they sit in longer and longer traffic jams.

even as those traffic jams are expected to get longer over time. what i am saying in effect is that america needs more than just an incremental adjustment. we need a transportation reset. and it's got to be big. so let me talk about the symptoms. first, our chronic underinvestment in transportation feels normal. you know, we treat it like it's just the way it is, the way it's supposed to be. when we talk about the infrastructure deficit as if it's the normal course of things, and every year, the cost of catching up grows farther and farther out of reach. the american society of civil engineers, for instance, estimates that at current spending levels, we will fall almost $850 billion short of

transportation needs nationally by 2020. but you don't have to just look at a big aggregate number like that. go to rhode island where i was just a couple weeks ago. and talk to governor chaffee and his d.o.t. director, and they can show you that at current levels, even if we get a patch, even if we get 50 more patches, at current levels, over the next 20 years, roads in rhode island are going to get worse. and rhode island is not by itself. just a few weeks ago, pieces of the brooklyn bridge fell to the underpass below, closing the underpass. and i could go to nashville and point to three bridges that are doing the same thing. this is happening all over america, and we have no shortage of high-profile bridge collapses in this country, including up in minnesota and washington state. and as the president says, we

have 100,000 bridges old enough to qualify for medicare. so we're piling up deferred maintenance, and it's not a surprise that our system is falling apart. so i characterize the first symptom as we have a big problem that we're treating like a little problem. that's the first symptom. second, we are understating the cumulative effect of the short-term measures on the system. over the last five years or so, we've had 27 short-term measures passed by congress. so we get into the 11th hour, congress shuffles around, tries to find an answer. we patch ourselves together for a few months.

everything is supposed to be okay. but it's not. you know, i used to go shopping as a kid, i would go with my grandmother a lot of times and she would take me. and i would get to a store and i would like a toy or something, and i'd say, let's get this. she'd say no, put it down. we're just browsing. well, i learned later what browsing meant. browsing meant we have no intention of coming back to get that toy. right? that's what congress is doing. every time they do another patch, they're just driving another nail into the idea that america is going to solve our long-term transportation problems. creating less confidence at the state and local levels. this is something i know a little bit about. i was a mayor. and i can tell you that when you're trying to put millions of dollars on the table just to

plan a project without knowing whether the federal government's support is going to be there, it gets harder and harder and harder to get those projects going. so instead of ramping up transportation construction, we're actually ramping down. and that has consequences. without planning, you can't design a project. you don't design it, you can't engineer it. you don't engineer it, it doesn't happen. it doesn't happen, there's no relief. it's a big looming problem in america. and that's the second symptom. which leads me to the third one. in addition to stockpiling a huge infrastructure deficit, chilling activity at the state and local levels through short-term measures and indecision, the circus mirror in

washington is started to make the most practical answers to these questions seem impractical. and the most impractical answers seem practical. it's like it's upside down. what's right is wrong, what's wrong is right. the american people are wise. when we explain the facts to them, they make the right choices. but, and i have talked to them. talked to many of them over the course of this past year. you give them a choice between a temporary imperfect, more expensive solution and a real, lasting, cheaper solution, they're going to take the latter just about every time. now, that's exactly what we've tried to do with the grow america act. i'm sure all of you have read it. if you haven't, i would

recommend it to you. it is a bill that we put forth in this administration to end the hand wringing on this issue and to put america on a long-term path to growth. let me describe the bill for you in summary fashion. it not only stablealizes the highway trust fund. it actually increases investment in the highway trust fund to the tune of 37%. $22 plus billion over a four year period of time going into our system, creating jobs, creating the kind of activity we need. it's substantially investing in critical repairs, it puts in place money to build a national freight network so we can capitalize on the growth in manufacturing activity we're seeing. it would help deal with the complaint that projects take too long by streamlining the federal permitting process and

incentivizing states to do the same. reducing costs and creating more value for the taxpayer dollar. it brings rail into the dedicated funding family along with highways and transit. it strengthens buy america and local hiring, and even helps by directing some dollars directly to state -- directly to local communities so they can get projects moving. and the kicker is that congress can pay for the grow america act without raising deficits or rates. by just doing some commonsense pro-growth business tax reforms like preventing companies from moving profits overseas. so this bill or something like it ought to be a layup. it ought to be easy. but when you talk to members, essentially the argument against it is, we can't do it because we can't.

ladies and gentlemen, the idea that congress can't pass a multi-year, forward thinking transportation bill is one of the biggest self-fulfilling prophecies in american politics today. and by the way, it is killing our transportation system softly. one of the building blocks of our economy. so here we are, we're on the eve of another patch, another short-term measure, another cloud of uncertainty that will certainly grow our infrastructure deficit and roll the drawbridge up just a little more on the next generation. meanwhile, our congress is running out of mattresses, out of child seats and rocks to look under to patches for just a little while longer. and that brings me to the disease. and it's congress, but it's deeper than that.

i said this before, but i really believe abraham lincoln was right. when he said that the american people, when given access to facts, will do the right thing. i'm paraphrasing. but when they don't have the facts, they can get stuck. well, on this issue, the american people need the facts. now, in reality, they know something is wrong because they're stuck in traffic. they have been patiently awaiting the new biprasz or the new bridge or the new transit project or the new rail passenger service for years and years and years. and unfortunately for them, they can't put a finger on who to hold accountable. there's not like a sign on the freeway that says your commute would be shorter if congress just took action. the dots aren't connected. and it gets even more confusing. frankly, when you hear -- when

they hear that congress passed a bipartisan measure to keep highway funding going, because it sounds like something that ought to happen. but they're not told to read the fine print. in the fine print, it says this fix is temporary. it's not really going to fix what's broken and it's not really going to do what we need it to do. if they knew these facts, if it were put squarely in front of the american people, they would demand a solution. clearly, we need a moment of clarity and a moment of political courage. and that will not happen without the american people raising their voices. now, the good news here is it's starting to happen. we've got governors, 30 of them, who are republican, by the way, who are asking for a bill that allows them to plan more than ten months out.

they are not alone. last week, 62 associations including the national association of manufacturers joined together, calling on congress for a long-term proposal. they are not alone. 11 of my predecessors and i are joining to push for a long-term solution. secretaries lahood, peters, and mineta, slater, pena, skinner, card, burnly, dole, coleman, and boyd, taking together, the 12 of us have served 35 years standing watch over our nation's roadways and railways and transit systems. five of us served under democratic presidents, seven of us served under republican presidents. and while i'm sure there are issues on which we may not all agree, there is one issue on which we are united.

and that is for america to reach her potential, we have to have a long-term transportation investment plan, and we need it as soon as possible. and so today, we're releasing an open letter to congress, calling on congress to do just that. if the 12 of us can stand together, congress can stand together and get something done. but we won't stop there. i won't stop there. i'm not going to stop inside the beltway, pushing this issue. i'm going to do everything possible until this gets acted on to make sure the american people know they are in charge. we're going to convene leaders in all 50 states and make the case for ending gridlock on this issue. right now, washington is dictating outcomes to the american people. but in our democracy, it should work the other way. so we're going to let the american people decide whether

their futures are worth fighting for. as a department, we recognize the trends and challenges that are coming around the corner in america. and we're going to work hard to make sure these trends and challenges are more clear to the american public and to policymakers. we have to look past our noses, and to do that, one of the tools we're going to use is a 30-year transportation vision that's going to look at the trends and challenges and by the end of the year, we'll have that available to the american people. so we've got a plan for the future. and the american people, i believe, are on our side, particularly when they have access to the information that is so critical to this issue. and that's why i believe we're going to get progress on this long-term plan. i think the moment is in front of us. why do i believe it? i believe it partly because from

lincoln's continental railroad to eisenhower's highway system, we are a yes country, not a no country. because we're not a country that looks backwards, we're a country that looks forward. because we're a country that is not stuck in our past. we're a country that is ever focused on the future. and with that, i want to thank all of you, and i look forward to your questions. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you, mr. secretary. as you can imagine, we have a lot of questions on a lot of topics. starting on the topic of surface transportation funding, are you confident that the $10.8 billion patch that's now moving will keep the highway trust fund adequately funded through next may as it's supposed to do? >> um, i think from a funding

standpoint, the answer is yes. but again, i want to reemphasize that the system we have is really a system that depends on certainty. and while there is a patch potentially that congress passes, that's not going to really help the certainty issue. we have a big project that takes multiple years to get done and you're in the middle of a planning process, do you go for the longer term or don't you? you know, with a ten-month patch, you don't know what's on the other end of that ten months. that's the problem we have on our surface system right now. >> you're releasing the letter today, the bipartisan letter with hopes that will spur congressional action. do you see any signs that this congress will work to pass a longer term transportation bill? or any signs that the congress likely to be elected in november would do so? >> well, let me say it this way.

we really don't have a choice. i mean, honestly, the gimmicks and smoke and mirrors and the things that have been used in the past just to patch us along, we're starting to run out of those options. and we're reaching a point where, you know, we're going to have to do something big or we're going to have to fold the tent. you know, knowing this country the way i know it, we don't fold the tent. we don't stop building bridges. we don't stop repairing what we've got because it was given to us by previous generations. they paid for it. and they bequeathed it to us, and we need to bequeath it to another generation following us. otherwise, our kids are going to be stuck. and not only as the transportation secretary, i'm duty bound to fight for this, but i'm a father, and i'm a concerned citizen, too. and we've just -- we cannot

allow our politics to screw up a system that was given to us in good faith by previous generations. >> one of the things you didn't mention and that president obama has made clear he will not support is raising the gas tax. why has the obama administration been so adamantly opposed to raising fuel taxes for the highway trust fund in the long term when the other solutions aren't getting passed either? >> well, what you've heard me say about this is that number one, we have a proposal that we believe is a 21st century bill. that is paid for through pro-growth business tax reform and can be done by congress without raising rates, without increasing deficits. we've also said that we're open to other ideas that emerge from congress. and have been very clear not to rule anything out. but let me say this, too.

the gas tax itself has some challenges. no matter where you set the level, the curve of the gas tax is actually downward facing. and that's because vehicles are becoming more efficient, good reasons. but that is a structural challenge with the gas tax. secondly, historically, there's been an 80/20 split between transit and highways using the gas tax. and as we reach into the 21st century, it's becoming increasingly clear that this idea that surface transportation is just highways, just transit, without rail, is a question that i think we need to grapple with as a country. and that's one of the reasons why the grow america act actually folds rail into a trust fund. but the way we get there is that

we use a different source of revenue and we add money to the pot, so to speak, so that we're not robbing peter to pay paul to get the system going. that's, i think, a conversation that needs to be had, and frankly, even our stakeholders sometimes get mired in the system we've had and aren't focused as much as i would like to see them focused on the system we need in the future. >> shortly after ray lahood stepped down as secretary, he called for raising the tax gas, which of course he hadn't done as secretary. will we some day see a former secretary, anthony foxx, doing the same thing? >> i didn't hear the question. i really didn't. [ laughter ] >> oh, look. i'm going to say this a different way. when our system was built in

1956, there was only growth in the foreseeable future, in our revenue stream. we now know that that growth is actually changing because of the increased efficiency and so forth in our vehicles. and we're at a pivotal point where our transportation needs are here and our revenue is there. so our proposal introduces the idea of a new way to pay for our transportation system on a long-term basis, but i think we'll continue to have these questions about how to do it long-term, and there are many ideas out there in academia and even pilots happening around the country that are interesting, but they're not ready for primetime yet. so i think -- i don't know what i'll say. i'm sure i'll say a lot of things when i'm not here anymore. >> what about vehicle miles, travel tax? as you said, vehicle efficiency is increasing, therefore gas tax

collection is declining, but the amount of driving is not plummeting. would that be a viable option or at least something to consider for this administration? >> i think the crisis that we're in right now is one that has to get dealt with as soon as possible. and i think, you know, on the scale of solutions that seem more likely or less likely, i think vmt is something that is not very likely. but at the same time, you know, there are pilots out in oregon and other places, and you know, i'm sure that in the future these things will be looked at. but right now, we need an answer. and we've got one that we think is tailor made for this congress to pass, and we want to see congress do it. >> moving on to the malaysia air downing. are there other areas of the world, given what happened last week with flight 17, where the

faa should restrict flights by u.s. carriers? >> um, let me say this. we are constant ly in touch wit our intelligence community, with our national security team on these issues. and when they're issued by faa, they're not coming out of a vacuum. they're coming out of credible information that is gleaned from sources that we trust. and there are no tams in other parts of the world that are active right now. and we continue to monitor the international situation to insure that u.s. commercial carriers are given the best guidance possible. >> when the u.s. banned commercial flights over crimea, why didn't it extend the restrictions at that time to other hostile areas in ukraine

and at this point, do you regret that the u.s. did not do that? >> this is a point at which i figured you were going to ask me some of these questions about malaysia. and let me just say to your question that even when the no tam was issued back in april, there was also general guidance that urged caution among u.s. carriers. but more generally, on these questions, let me just say a few words about it. the president spoke this morning and made clear that this is an evolving situation, but that time is of the essence. and our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. at usdot, safety is our top priority, and we're working closely with our partners in the u.s. intelligence agencies and law enforcement communities on a continuous basis to monitor and

analyze intelligence. when the agency receives specific and credible actionable intelligence of a threat to the national air space system, the u.s. civil aviation and its passengers, the agency provides guidance to carriers and/or institutes, flight restrictions, including notice to airmen or no tams or special aviation regulations or svars. in april, the no tam warned about the hostilities generally and urged carriers to take extra caution, as i said. a number of operators chose voluntarily to alter their routes other than restrictions in the crimean peninsula. we also altered it to follow the eastern ukraine. my comments are confined to what i just said. so you can keep asking, but that's what i have to say.

>> u.s. criminal investigators as well as transportation safety investigators through the ntsb have been sent to ukraine to lend assistance. is there a role for d.o.t. in the response and investigation as well? >> we stand ready to help, and i stand on what i just said. >> in the 2000s, the faa in partnership with dhs spent millions of dollars studying the possibility of equipping commercial planes with counter man ped systems. what is the status of that effort and would these measures have been effective against the missile fired last week? >> this is obviously as the president has already said, a very fluid situation. there's a lot that we still need to know. the international community needs to be access to the -- to the site of this horrible crash,

and you know, any kind of steps beyond that, i'm not going to comment on at this time. >> what about studying in general of the equipping planes with anti-missile technology? was that project ended in the previous decade or is that still ongoing, absent this particular incident? >> i can't speak to a decade ago. but i can tell you that we continue to monitor the situation, and any statement of what we will do or not will do would be premature. >> questioner asks, when will a u.s. aircraft be mandated to be equipped with gps srs so they e located at all times worldwide? >> well, this is an area that sort of gets into our next gen

effort domestically. we continue to make progress on next gen. i was in houston just a few months ago, weeks ago, and we just rolled out about 60 or so new functions that are next gen oriented functions that move us closer to the performance based navigation system you're talking about. even if we get it deployed in the u.s., there's still a lot of work to be done around the world to see this technology advanced and deployed, but we are very bullish on this technology and look forward to working with the international community to see more of it get deployed worldwide. >> speaking of next gen, we heard the president mention air traffic control as a source of jobs if the system is modernized, is that a message we're likely to continue hearing out of the administration? >> it is, because we think next gen is really the cutting edge

of transptation. the intersection of technology and the way our airplanes move hold a lot of promise to not only make the air space move more efficiently, make airplanes move more efficiently in air space, rather, but it has strong environmental benefits, and also huge fuel savings for our carriers which hopefully would reduce costs and maybe some of those costs get passed on to passengers, too. the statistics i have seen show that next gen will reduce airplane delays for passengers by greater than 40%. but it is dependent upon getting us off of a world war ii radar system and into a 21st century kind of gps technology. >> moving from the air to cars. general motors has, of course, recalled 25.7 cars in the u.s. this year and the auto industry

has recalled a record 40 million vehicles. should drivers feel safe, and are regulators doing enough? >> well, look, on the latter question, i have to say that the nhtsa has done an incredible amount of work over the last several years. i think over the last ten years, there have been about 1200 plus recalls affecting 95 million vehicles. that's not counting some of the more recent recalls. that's pretty significant. and our toolbox has actually improved over that time, in the wake of the toyota situation a few years ago, we developed, along with ibm, some analytics that allow us to be more predictive in identifying issues before they emerge, and we continue to look to build a better mouse trap, so i think that when it's all said and done, nhtsa has done an

incredible job over the entire trendline. in terms of the autos and whether they're safe, you know, look, we have through our work on the gm issue, if you're asking about gm specifically, we issued the most stringent penalty the agency has ever issued. and if grow america passes, we would be able to pass even more stringent penalties because we would lift the cap from $35 million to $300 million. in addition to that, we were able to force gm into settling with us, with some additional requirements that allow us to focus them on changing the culture at gm and fixing some of the things that were broken, that a penalty or a fine won't solve. and so i have high confidence in our time's ability to make this work. and we'll keep working not only with gm but also with other

automakers to insure that our system is as safe as possible. >> gm, as you noted, has come under harsh criticism for the recalls, and so far, 15 people have lost their jobs. has anyone at nhtsa been fired or reassigned for the agency's role in not connecting the dots? and if not, how do you respond to lawmaker whose last week called the agency's inactions the, quote, nhtsa shrug? >> well, i think you could sort of cite my previous answer to this, but also, i would add that, you know, we and i are willing to check our own math here. i mean, i've asked our inspector general to go through and do an after action on this gm situation to see if there's anything that we didn't do that we should have done, or did that may have been done better. and we will learn from that report.

and until that time, we have our team intact and we're continuing to not only focus on gm but the massive other automobiles out there that need our attention. >> the "new york times" reported last week that gm failed to assess the root cause of several deadly chevy cobalt and saturn ion crashes in its correspondence with nhtsa. why did nhtsa accept what essentially was a no comment on the cause of the crashes? >> well, that's actually -- i disagree with the premise of the question because there was -- there was activity ongoing at nhtsa to see if there was a data-driven reason to step up the level of scrutiny. and as i have said publicly before, had we been given a t e

timely heads-up by gm, that would have coupled with what we were already doing, triggered a heightened level of investigation at the beginning. i have no doubts about that. so i don't agree that nhtsa just took the answer for granted. they were looking for data to suggest that there was a problem, and had they had the information from gm, it would have been material to the outcome. >> this questioner asks, does d.o.t. and nehtsa now consider stalling to be a safety issue for vehicles? if it does, what prompted the change? if it doesn't, why not? >> clearly, it's an issue. and it's one that we -- that our recent experiences giving us even more information on which to look across the industry to insure that these issues are

being addressed across the system. so it's absolutely something that we're focused on. >> the pace of technological change in the automotive industry is getting faster. model life cycles are shorter, they're significant in the areas of safety. how does nhtsa remain relevant as a standard setting and driver of safety standards in this new automotive environment? >> i think nhtsa is actually really focused on this. and let me add another footnote to that. this whole idea that vehicles in the future will communicate with each other is a really big deal. it's a big deal for safety. and it's a big deal to our team, because it's an opportunity to engage the automobile in the work of insuring collision

avoidance, not only between automobiles, potentially, but also with pedestrians, and there's even technology that allows the automobile to communicate with the infrastructure around it. a few months ago, we announced that we're going to be doing a rule making on vehicle-to-vehicle technology, and we think this will be pace setting in terms of rule making because it will basically provide the ground rules on which industry will then enter in and do what they do best, which is to innovate. so this is not an issue that we, you know, we think there are lots of opportunities for our nhtsa team to engage in, not only following the trends in the industry but also setting the pace and setting the bar high for safety in the future. >> in terms of that rule making, you have said you would like to issue it by the end of president

obama's term. is that still the plan in terms of the timeline? and what needs to happen to make that rule making possible? >> i would like to issue it tomorrow. but you know, the process is what it is. we're on pace, and i feel like we'll keep working as hard as we can. if we can beat it, we'll do it. >> at nhtsa, are you concerned about the perception of a revolving door where top officials have left jobs at the agency to go work for the automakers that they were regulating? do you think there should be a ban on that practice or at least a cooling off period? >> we have fairly strict ethical requirements in this administration that really put a silencer on folks coming back into the agency and trying to influence outcomes immediately after they leave.

and i think that's an effective way of dealing with the problem you're identifying because if the concern is undue influence over the agency itself, we have ethical requirements that really guard against that. >> moving over to rail, rail executives have expressed concern about an upcoming crude by rail rule making that is rumored to include speed limit restrictions as low as 30 miles per hour. is that provision included, and given the rising volume of crude sent by rail, how do you meet the needs of commercial shippers with the need for increased safety? >> are you asking me to comment on a rule before the rule is issued? >> yes. >> okay. look. i think it is undeniable that we are in a country that has a chance to build a new economy on our energy production.

it's really one of the drivers of our economic growth today. and really will probably be so for the near future. but one of the things we recognized as an agency and had my full attention since i came in is that in order to realize that future, we've also got to step up our game on the safety front. without getting into details, i can tell you that what i know about this issue is that it has to be dealt with comprehensively. it can't be dealt with, you know, so many folks out there are saying, well, just figure out what the tank car would look like. that's one piece of it, but you know, speed is an issue, and you know, there are several other components of this that matter. and we're working as hard as we can in promulgating a proposed rule so the public can comment on it.

and i hope we get that done very soon. >> as part of the rule making, will you require that producers of oil from the balkan region take steps to stabilize their product before it is shipped? >> i'm not going to comment on what the rule says or doesn't say. i will say that what we're finding in places like the bakken, unlike in parts of texas, let's say, where there's an industry built up around oil production, refining, separating material, using all the pieces of the material that are separated. we basically have infrastructure in north dakota that's excavating this material. and so the question of stabilization is an issue that is at the forefront of my mind, but i'm not going to comment on

what our approach is going to be on that yet, but it is an issue that i'm very well aware of, and that we as an agency are very well aware of. >> how is the oil industry responding to d.o.t.'s request for more information on the chemical properties of the bakken crude, and has d.o.t. been satisfied with the response and the amount of chemical data that is available? >> well, the information that we've received from industry has gotten a little better. we've gotten some information that is consistent with what we've -- what we've seen in our own studies. we've seen some information that is entirely inconsistent and isn't apples to apples, the same type of study that we would have undertaken ourselves. there is a fair amount of

confusion, i think, that's generated when the industry says, well this is just the same type of stuff that's being pulled out of some other part of the country, because there are a couple things that are different. number one, you pointed out in some parts of the country, there's more stabilization that occurs before it's actually transported. secondly, there's also the fact that these trains are moving in huge units. sometimes 100 at a time, and so the sheer scale of the impact of these trains can be a bit of a challenge. so we are very focused on this. we're pushing as hard as we can. everybody in the administration is working hard on this. and i look forward to getting something out very soon. >> on biking, this questioner asks, how do we make american cities more like copenhagen for biking, and do you think that is a worthy goal?

>> um, okay, so true confession. i have been trying for the entire year to figure out how to bike to work. and i finally got it figured out so like two weeks ago, i finally biked into work. i was very proud of myself, and i just wanted you all to know how proud i am of myself. [ applause ] thank you. thank you. let me say this. when you have 100 million more people to move around over the next, i don't know, 35 years, we're going to see more congestion if we're not careful. a lot of that population is concentrating in metro areas, which usually has a city in the middle and suburban rings and

rural areas around it, but i really believe that this -- bicycling is part of the transportation ecosystem that we're going to need. part of th transportati transportation we're going to need this. if you look at folks younger pan me when will aring this communities and many are trying to locate in central areas so they can use bicycles more. i was with the republican mater from indianapolis. his city is is boole oit. he was invited to speak to portland, oregon's community. one of the things the mayor said

to me, i think is instructive. he said there was a company that insisted on being near the bike path. you will find out that it's happening more and more. i think it's happening. that's one of the things i'd like to dos secretary is help with the growth this but also ensuring that folks are as safe as we want them in other modalities to be. >> a recent report said the faa won't be able to incorporate the use of unmanned air vehicles into air space by the 20 -- 2015

deadline. what will you do to make sure the faa reach reaches its deadline. >> as i understand it wur on track to meet our 2015 deadline. we will keep work towards that. it's a convergence of technology and we got to figure out thousand do it safely and that's what we're working towards. >> passenger rail. any comment on amtrak removing them from high speed next gen procurement. >> that's an interesting question. i would have to get more clarification on that question because that's mixing rail and

air speed to me. that's an interest convergence. >> we're almost out of time. before asking the last question i got a couple of house keeping matters to take care of. i would ask the audience remains seated before the program conclud concludes. second, i'd like to remind you about upcoming speakers about the national, we have the doctor at the center for disease control who will address key disease issues. we will have the press of congo who will discuss peace, security, and oil investments in his country. on august fourth we le have his

excellencive jacob zuma, president of south africa. >> i would like to present our guest with the traditional national press secretary mug. it can go in your office right next to the panthers helmet. finally, one last question. i understand that your daughter is kwie the constructive krit ri, critic when it comes to transportation. i'd like to here what useful ideas she's given you lately. >> very interesting question. so my daughter is ten. i brought her to work one day and she went off into another part of the office while i went and did meetings and she came back and she said, daddy, you

know, do you think that you can a bill? . she knows this because she's seen the school house rock stuff on how bills get made. i see maybe, i don't know. she said well, i have some ideas for you. >> we had just come back from a vacation in baton rouge. she said here is my bill. number one, airplanes should not have first class the everybody should should big seats. number two, the bathrooms need to be cleaner. three, when you land they need to come up with a technology that prevents your ears from

popping. that's the advice she has given me. thank you very much. it's been great to be with you. [ applause ] >> thank you mr. secretary. we are adjourned. >> next, a senate hearing with epa administrator gina mccarthy on regulation for power plants. after that, a discussion on the terror group known as isis. then a forum on policy in the middle east. >> in government, you are dealing with the daily tyranny

of the inbox, focused on the crisis of the day. part of my responsibilities as under secretary of defense was representing the secretary of defense on the so-called to produce committee, which is sort of the senior-level group that working to the issues, developing options for the principals in the president. a lot crisis management focus. a think tank,n your real utility is not trying to second-guess the policymaker on the issues of the day, but help them look over the horizon to see what issues they will confront a year from now, five years from now, 10 years from now and how to think more strategically about america's role in the world. >> former undersecretary of defense and cofounder of the center for national american urnoy,ty, michele flo sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's "q&a."

>> 40 years ago, the watergate scandal led to the only resignation of an american president. american history tv revisits 1974 and the final weeks of the nixon administration. this weekend, the house judiciary committee as it considers impeachment of the president and the charge of abuse of power. >> what you have here are questions about what the framers had in mind, questions about whether the activities that had been found out by the committee and by the senate watergate to many were indeed impeachable, and third, can we prove that richard nixon knew about them and even authorized them? >> watergate, 40 years later, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on american history tv on c-span3. >> a senate committee held an oversight hearing wednesday on the epa's proposed carbon

dioxide regulations for existing power plants. epa administrator jenna mccarthy testified on the clean power plant, which aims to cut carbon pollution with a state federal partnership and requires fossil fuel burning plants to identify the best and cheapest ways they can reduce pollution. according to the epa, carbon dioxide accounted for 82% of u.s. greenhouse gas emissions in 2012. this is just over two and a half hours. >> good morning everybody. this oversight hearing will

address the critical steps the obama administration is taking to address climate change by reducing carbon pollution. today, we'll focus on the president's new proposal to reduce carbon pollution from the biggest doors, power plants. this last week, when i welcomed the miners, it's my pleasure to welcome the moms clean air force. we are glad to see you here. power plants account for nearly 40% of all carbon pollution released into the air. which could worsen respiratory illnesses like asthma, increased air pollutants from wildfires and more he related an flood