this president or ad inif i nigh tum. i also have sponsored h.r. 2362, sprorgs for heroes. we have veterans who need to get to jobs, who need to get to the v.a., who cannot afford public transportation. i believe we need to make sure that they get the same opportunity to take a public transportation system to utilize it -- that persons who are senior citizens have and persons who are disabled have. we have to provide a means by which veterans can get to those place that is can be a benefit to them. we need to pass the burial with dig night for heroes -- dignity for heroes. those who died in poverty, who have family members who are in poverty, who cannot afford to send them to a tribal cemetery once they die in some place distant from a tribal cemetery or a state facility, if you can't send them, currently you

have to try to scrape the money up as best you can. i think that this country ought to be grateful enough to make sure these veterans cannot only get to these places to be buried but they should get there and have a casket or an urn. they should have the opportunity to be buried with dignity. no veteran should die in poverty and then find that they can't get a burial with dignity. i also believe that we should have our veterans who are hurt after they leave the military, they should be accorded the to rtunity to have places live so they can access them easily. that's why we filed the haven act, it would accord $20 million, by the way, that we don't have. i believe that if we can spend money we don't have to put them in harm's way, we can spend money we don't have to take

care of them when they get home. $20 million. $5 million a year. a pilot program to allow n.g.o.'s to match the $20 million and provide the type of facility to move efficaciously, to move and have a great degree of functionality within his or her home. this is the kind of thing that a grateful nation ought to do. this piece of legislation is currently in the senate, authorization for veterans -- the senate defense authorization bill and in that bill this legislation lies, plus there are some question whether or not it will survive a conference committee. i pray and i hope that this piece of legislation, $20 million over five years to modify homes for disabled veterans, those who are hurt after they have left the military, to help them. there's already a program for those that are hurt that are already in the military. this is not duplicative.

this helps veterans who need help. i believe we are the land of the free because we're the home of the brave. and i believe that if we are going to continue to be the land of the free, we must make sure we must protect those who are the brave. god bless you. i thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. vela, for five minutes. mr. la: thank you, speaker. last month, three of my constituents were murdered in northern mexico. erica salinas, angel alvaed ao ere visiting their father near month moreas by my home -- montamoros near my hometown of

brownsville. today i call on the united states state department to ensure that the mexican government thoroughly investigate these heinous crimes and those responsible be brought to justice and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. these cold-blooded murders demonstrate the brutal violence in northern mexico. in a tribal warning dated october, 2014, the state reynoso, warns, nuevo laredo, have had attacks with exexplosivive devices in the past year. rival elements and/or the police can occur during all times of the day. the number of those killed is the highest and the number of american citizens as being kidnapped, abducted unvoluntarily in the first half

of 2014 have also increased. for the last century and a half, residents of northern exico and south texas ep joy a bicultural experience, eating, shopping was a part of everyday life. this way of life has been ripped apart. we should demand that those whose criminal acts have destabilized mexico be held responsible. martin luther king said injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. our country must ensure that those who murdered erica, alex and jose be brought to justice. i yield the rest of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon today.

conference at noon eastern time. we have that for you this afternoon. house republicans elect in their leadership last week, reflecting john boehner the speaker, kevin mccarthy as majority leader. today, republicans are choosing members to chair their committee. one of the major chairmanships up for grabs is the house oversight committee. that is currently chaired by darrell issa. four republicans are in the running to replace him. republican leaders spoke to reporters this morning after their meeting in the capital focusing mainly on the keystone

xl pipeline. >> good morning, everyone. as we approach the thanksgiving taken, it's appropriate to a moment to reflect on the freedoms and opportunities we enjoy as americans. i find myself grateful for the group i get to work with in trying to make sure we continue to have great opportunities in this country moving forward. to the been listening american people, we have had hundreds of bills that will expand opportunities across this advancednd we have solutions to make peoples's lives better. what we need right now is to come together and unite around those policies that we can move forward on, focus on what unites us, rather than what divides us.

let's come together as a white house and congress, the publicans and democrats, senate and house, and let's get the job done. tot night, i was encouraged see the senate passed the bipartisan childcare options bill for low income families that will expand more opportunities for take a moment to reflect working families across this country. today we expect the senate to act on a longtime legislation that has broad support of republicans and democrats on the keystone pipeline, which again, means thousands of jobs for people across this country. these are bills that we need to get on the president desk. the time for leadership is now. this is not so much left versus right, as past versus future. what kind of future are we going to have? that isommitted to one full of opportunities for people that is doing what is good and right for america.

>> good morning, everyone. we are back to work this week, continuing to make the american people's priorities our priorities, and clearly that means a focus on jobs. with another bill to promote manufacturing in the house this week, there are job bills awaiting action in the senate. tonight, the senate has an important opportunity to send a bill to build in the keystone pipeline to the president desk. let's be clear about this. veto woulde pipeline send a signal that this president has no interest in listening to the american people. the tooling and overwhelmingly popular bill would be a clear indication that he does not care about the american people's priorities. it would be equivalent of calling the american people stupid. good morning.

i don't know if you all had a speaker saysh the happy birthday yesterday, but we sang to him in conference. [laughter] there is one message coming out of this election, the american people expect this new american congress to work in the best interest of america. opportunity for us to work together. if you look at the history of this country, in divided government we have achieved big things. ronald ragan had a divided congress and had tax reform. bill clinton had a divided congress and senate, reform the welfare and balanced the budget. we have a unique opportunity after this election. those in the senate that have been stopped about keystone pipeline had a unique, new opportunity. so we moved it in the house and hopefully in the senate.

i hope the president take the same advice as those other presidents of working together. a lot of you have seen the tape of jonathan gruber, one of the architects of obamacare, where he talks about a lack of transparency giving you the opportunity to fool the american public. the one thing in congress we always do is greater transparency. this week we will have three bills of dealing with transparency. chris stewart dealing with the epa advisory board, to make sure you have opinions from all sides. epa, if they use data to make a decision, that data has to be made public before any decision can be made. and then also our own majority whip, the bill on manufacturing. i am excited about what the new year brings. i am more excited about what a new american congress brings.

i am just disappointed about what i hear in the white house. i know the president, i know the democrats have their leadership race today. i saw that situation before when i came in in 2006. .he one thing i will say if the president had two years with the house and senate and did nothing on immigration but he will not allow this new congress to convene before we have an opportunity to do something about it, i think you should rethink that opportunity. this week, the house will continue our focus on creating jobs and getting the economy back on track. if you look at what we did last week, we took a quick action to continue to push the keystone pipeline to the president's desk. what was the president's response?

he issued a veto threat and then try to hide behind this concept that he needs to keep studying the issue. moreissue has been studied than maybe any pipeline in america's history. for six years, this administration has hidden behind studies where everyone that has looked at it should move forward. the american people are tired of the president hiding behind studies. those 40,000 jobs and increased energy security in our country. they do not want six more years of studies while china tries to take those jobs away from our country. issueday, the president veto threats on the bills that we are moving forward on this week. i will talk about the legislation i moved out of the energy and commerce committee to promote a manufacturing at. this bill would bring certain to to the regulatory process where agencies like the epa come out of rules where they have no way to be limited in the real world,

but they bring them out to continue some radical agenda that would kill jobs in america and increase people's household electricity cost. we say there should be increased transparency by the administration. before the bill has even moved through the legislative process, where an can be debated on the floor, the president issued a veto threat before he allow the process to finish, which is another example that he is not serious about hearing the message from the american people that they want him to work with congress. [indiscernible] he just sits behind in the oval office and issues veto threats on bills that have not passed. the president needs to engage and getting the economy moving again. keep our laser focus to get jobs moving in the country. it is time for the president to engage in that process as well. week, many of us spent time at home in our districts

honoring and paying tribute to our veterans. unfortunately, the bureau of labor statistics has reported that our young veterans, especially those of the 9/11 era , are struggling more with unemployment than the majority of our work force. that is why the house has been focused like a laser on helping people get back to work and helping this economy get back on firm, financial footing. passed the hire more heroes act over to the senate. we are calling on the senate to take up that piece of .egislation american veterans should not have to wait for a new said to be seated in january to receive some help. these veterans deserve an . americanopportunity. whether it is increasing their opportunities for better health care, better mental health, . accountable, or

getting a better job, we will help them with that. >> i appreciate you coming up for our first purse -- first press conference. i had a chance to drive out from wisconsin a couple of days ago with my son. we had a snowstorm. nothing changes. we had a lot of quality time. , today, i think about my son's future. as i look at jack, i know other parents are looking at their own kids graduating from high school, college, and they are looking at what opportunities exist for their next-generation. i think it looks pretty bleak right now. as they link to this town, they want us to work together. they want us to work on solutions that advance opportunities not only for them but for the next generation. to work together, that means we need republicans and democrats singing off the same sheet of music. we are willing to do that.

we are willing to work on ideas that will grow opportunities and jobs and allow people the pathway into a better paying job . we need a president to help us. we need the president to engage. inpoke to the president 2008. he said, turning the page on ugly partisanship in washington to bring democrats and republicans together to pass an agenda that works for the american people. bipartisanship does not just work when you have a democratically controlled senate and house. it works when you have a divided government. now more than ever when need the president to engage with us and work with us so we can grow opportunities and jobs. he should not be poking his finger in the eye of the congress before we have an opportunity to work its will. let's fight together for the american people. extendthe president will

his hand and we can join up and fight for the people. >> [inaudible] >> there are a lot of options we are considering. but we have something to announce, we will let you know. >> [inaudible] maybe. >> [laughter] [inaudible] >> [laughter]

i continue to purchase my expensive health-care coverage. >> [inaudible] soon. >> [inaudible] >> there are a lot of options on the table. are a lot of good ideas out there, and we're concerning all of them. thanks. >> remarks by republican leaders in the house. they will be back in session new eastern time. on the other side of the capital in the senate, setting up a vote to authorize construction of the keystone xl pipeline. six hours of debate is scheduled. the house passed a same version of the bill last week. if it passes the senate, it will be headed for the president's desk. coverage is underway now on

c-span two. while the house is in recess, we would check out the house transportation committee on reauthorization of the faa. this started just after 10:00 eastern time, we join his in progress. certainlykes time and cannot be anything that disrupts the function of what has worked well. mr. massey for five minutes. >> mr. baker, from your testimony, it's my understanding that you are saying the faa's approval process could be making general approval -- general aviation less safe. can you explain how that is? what needs to change about the approval process? does it take too long to get technological advancements integrated into the industry? idea that you have an aircraft that was 40 years old

is equivalent to having your car with an am radio. couldrtification process take years. , millions of dollars. the industry says it cost too much and takes too long, not willing to put those upgraded autos in aircraft. situational awareness is still the number one thing that leads to accidents. today, the ipad has added more situational awareness than almost anything else. if you were to install the equipment on an aircraft today, it would take millions in the industry and years. there should be an expedited process. the systems move very quickly and the faa has not moved in that process yet. particularly in the newer aircraft today. >> so they need to be moving quicker. this faaanything in reauthorization that we could do

in congress to encourage that? >> we think there could be an opportunity to put these legacy and try to get some of these things expedited. not changing the power plant or the wind, but putting in good panels. making it safer, easier for people to access the airspace. >> while you're on a topic of technological improvements, the adsb adoption in general aviation, what is the cost, what is the least costly entry point for someone in general aviation to become compliant with the 2020 standard? out, which does not give you any traffic or weather information, about $6,000 installed today. so over 20% of the cost. is it reasonable to except -- expect some of these will be and pilotsone yards

who are flying that will be flying this. what is your organization doing to promote this lower cost solution? we are working with groups to see if there is another portable device that can be recognized. the ipad was not invented when the adsb came out. is there another device like our out phone that is pinging at an adequate level for these airplanes. >> in general, while the on the subject of technology, the faa seems to be behind on issuing uav's intodrones and the airspace. how far are they into that right now? >> they are behind the mandate

established by congress in the last reauthorization from 2012. >> when we write this authorization, we should say we really mean it this time. >> [laughter] absolutely. it would certainly help everybody if the agency listened. faa was slow in designating its test sites. six of them. they were finally designated. first we went through congressional authorization, mandate. that the agency's plans to develop the data and to that from the results accrue from operations at these test sites have not been prepared to the agency's satisfaction and certainly not to the needs of the burgeoning industry. as well, to gathering safety user is currently in the system and from the

department of defense, faa has a lot to learn. they were here to defend themselves or give me an answer to the next question. in your estimation, when do you think they will give us some rules? i sent a letter to the faa on behalf of a constituent, asking hem to point me to the rules. i have not gotten a response. when do you think they will, with the rules? uas rule-called small has been promised by the end of the year. i'm not sure what kind of uas they are ages did in operating in, but if it is a small one, i would say stay tuned, see what faa can produce by the end of the year. it sounds like mr. baker hinted on the idea that drones could help us with accuracy, maybe we could relax some of the rules for accuracy. >> there is one point that is

being missed here. , to keepcial aviation it safe, to keep our passengers safe, we need to know where all of the planes are. i'm confident, working with mark can achieveat we that. but on the points that are made down here, i could not disagree more with the analysis. we have to be using the same principles, a certification of -- aircraft, the rowboat remote piloted aircraft, the drone, and the people operating them, so that we have the same safety. >> my time has expired but the media agree with you. benefito rule does not the air traffic controllers, the commercial pilots, everyone is put at risk when there are no rules because the rest of the world is leaving us behind and you have commercial entities that are being encouraged to

break the rules that do not exist and you hear anecdotal stories of near collisions. it is incumbent upon us to get these rules so that everybody benefits. thank you, my time has expired. >> i recognize mr. difazio. >> a few things i would like the panel to think about. the biggest problem relates to budgets, money, sequestration. faa year, 83% of all acquisitions are being paid for out of the trust fund. you could look at it and say we have a 70% problem. if the trust fund can cover 100%, we make it mandatory spending, then we are not going to have these stupid issues of shutdowns and sequestration and all those sorts of things in the future. secondly, i want people to recommend faa procurement.

that? we fix always a moving target. we never get them to end up at a point where they can make change orders. i want people to think about that. we have a dispute over adsb. we have a ground system, we have a mandate. europe has a mandate but no ground system. why can't we harmonize those two say europe and the united states ought to move together? we have moved on electronics. my not moving the schedule for adoption so there are real benefits to people in europe and the united states of america? i don't know why. i would love to hear more about that. on air traffic control, i say ee united states ought to move had granted a lot of my information is somewhat dated, but i went through vigorous debate when i was writing on aviation. did not find that there was a safer system in the world. just before we had that debate,

we had a midair collision that killed people in europe because they were understaffed. the one person that was on duty was off doing something. is an issue. secondly, when i looked at the productivity issues, they were virtually identical with canada. changesaking major there is a steep slope but i'm willing to have a thoughtful discussion about that. now i would get to a question, which will be directed principally to mr. rinaldi. you know we have to staff up, we have a lot of retirements, other policies are forcing more people to consider early out. this is a question, what is with the faa? why do you take people that have just graduated from the academy and send them to the highest level facility and basically engender a high failure rate? what could the advantage be, and

do you really think we could have more retention and better controllers if we changed that? >> great question. the simple answer is yes, we --ld have a better system [inaudible] >> i have power. is a great question and yes, we could retain more controllers, if we send them to the lower-level facilities and let them develop and hone their skills, rather than sending them tree can't we have. they are struggling with anffing because it has been

faa way to take someone fresh out of academy and then send them to atlanta, new york, chicago, and within eight months they are unsuccessful and they send them to lower-level facilities. we tried working with the agency for about two years to develop a real process to move controllers that are lower-level facilities where they are developing their skills so they can maintain the ability to do it at a high level like at new york or atlanta or chicago. we are not there yet. we call it faa speed. we should've been done with this a year ago. the new hires -- >> what is so hard about it? >> you will have to ask them. we have had some ideas. it is a drawnout process. we thought we had a good plan. it is just taking a very long time. when you take somebody straight

out of academy and send them to a busy location, they do not have the training program to teach them -- >> i have sat there and watched the screens. i could not even begin to think that i could do it. do you want to respond to the idea of one of having itemization in terms of the ,chedule with europe on adsb would that element it can some concerned with the airlines? >> it would not eliminate all of our concerns. this is a classic case of the faa embracing a standard before they have reviewed the cost-benefit of it and made the business case. as i said earlier, we have made a lot of investments. we have equipment on airplanes that we cannot use now. now it is mandated that we get more equipment but we do not know how it'll work, whether the equipment will change. harmonization is one part of it and actually making sure there is a business case to be made for it is critical. if you go back through all of

overruns, all of the failures, that is consistently one of the problems. it has to be part of the process of how you get to where you are and you say use this equipment. >> back to temperature been issued, as i understand adsb, do you think it is critical we have updates in real-time as opposed to every eight seconds? you already have transponders. >> more accurate information and more timely information, especially in the in-route environment where you can get constant updates of airplanes moving at very high speeds, is very valuable. at the lower-level activity, i'm not sure there really is a bank for a book there, so to speak. >> thank you. i time had expired. >> mr. gray is recognized for five minutes. >> first question is for general

scoble. in your recent adsb audit report, how many commercial and general aviation aircraft will be affected by -- with the update? count, and it's an estimate, 220,000 general aviation aircraft are subject to the mandate. about 18,000 commercial aircraft as well. >> does that include the existing fleet? >> virtually, yes, sir. >> do you anticipate the numbers changing? >> certainly. they will move up and down. we believe that, between now and 2020, those numbers will hold generally firm in that range. that some ofroblem my fellow witnesses had spoken to, the ability of the manufacturing industry to produce the equipment. it's the ability of the faa to get it certified.

it is simply time and space for aircraft owners to get their planes into repair facilities, repair stations, so that those boxes can be installed on aircraft. it is a tough row to hoe between now and 2020. >> my next question is probably for mr. run all day. i also want to hear from the airlines. -- mr. rinaldi. one thing that we are always promised is lower cost, it will save money in the long run, we can eliminate the outdated system. too, with adsb [inaudible] you can go in visible if you want to, if you pull the circuit breaker with adsb, and then you

have no way of tracking that plane. then you can make the system permit so it is never shut off. you do in an airplane not want a system that cannot be disabled if you have an electrical failure or whatever may be the case. what worries me in the situation is ultimately we will be operating two systems. we will not achieve any cost savings. i would be curious what you think, captain, and probably nick. i would like mr. baker as well. go ahead. and weave a problem here will be able to work through it on the adsb implementation and mandates, but let's be clear. adsb is revolutionary. it's what we need. we probably needed it five years ago. separation, you can fly curved approaches. at 600 miles per hour you can go a long way in seven seconds. this is where we should be going.

it is going to help aviation tremendously. on --w things we disagree what we need to do is work together to address them. cost is one of them. airlines,od for the good for a air traffic, good for our customers, it is good all the way around. we just have to not let those hiccups define the problem. >> i'd like to address the safety aspects of it further. are we going to operate two systems? >> we always do that. it is a transition phase. vor, to the to the military folks, we normally have two systems. it is really that you can have a light switch on this. that is part of this transformative issue. it is not one day but over a piece of time. and you will have cost savings when you fully implement. >> mr. baker.

have withcern that we the general aviation airplanes is the cost related to the benefit. this is just to get adsb out. we believe adsb-in would be a benefit in having traffic inside the cockpit. we see that benefit long-term. it is simply what is the time to get to that benefit? i think you are right, mr. graves, that we will be operating two systems. part of the cost benefit for the government. >> i should've stated early on that we believe adsb is a cornerstone of nexgen. there are issues that i have that we need to work or with the faa. the call to action meeting they had earlier, last month, was a good start. there are still issues that have to be resolved in order to

achieve any cost savings and increase safety down the line. in terms of two systems, yes, we always do, but once we get past that, we will have a much better system, assuming we can work out the problems. >> i know my time has expired, but i'd like to hear from you. >> you will always have two systems. today we're going to shut down the radar system in this country after the events of 9/11, and then somebody will be able to transponder adsb and then we will not be able to track airplanes. but shows tremendous value, we need to have a necessary redundancy of a radar system also. >> gentlemen, i am about to get on a plane for the fifth time in nine days. i want to make sure it is safe. we are good? >> yes, and thank you.

>> yes, we are paying for it. i don't think i have heard anything i disagree with as far as where we want to go. we have a good system, we have to make it better. that is natural, that is good progress. i get a little problem though. everything i know that i want to make better about myself and my family, cost money. somebody has to pay for it. i think i heard everybody in agreement that we are short on funds. but i'm not sure i heard anyone say where we should get those funds. so does anybody have any suggestions? i would like to hear them. >> i have one thing i want to say. we do need to give the faa, or encourage or structure the faa, to be able to use private enterprise business vegetables when they are putting in an

infrastructure program like this. to have them doing what they are doing with one arm tied behind their back -- >> i understand that and i prescient that -- >> that saves money and reduces the funding gap -- >> i need more of a nation. i love the generic terms that business can do everything better than anyone else, and they really fit on a bumper sticker, and they are in clinical commercials, but i'm not sure what you mean by that. i agree with the governor's testimony. at&t improve their business model. it cost them a fortune to do it. it costs a lot of money to go from an old tape system to a new 4g system. somebody had to pay for it. in at&t's case, it was some shareholders but mostly expanding their business footprint and charging me more. that is fine, that is america and that is how it works.

how are we going to expand our footprint with more people flying, and how we are we going to -- how are we going to keep them flying? even private businesses have to make money. if you are telling me that it there is that much waste in the faa, i want to hear where. i'm not saying there is not, but i need numbers. >> we are happy to provide it for you, working with organizations, but stabilized funding in a funding shortfall is different. you cannot be working up and then all of a sudden have all funds shut down -- >> i agree with you. i voted against the sequester. you are talking to the wrong guy. there are some other people that you should talk to. >> i did not mean it like that. occasionally, some of these cell phones, not to drop any names, still dropped calls, despite infrastructure. >> and as they improve it is costing them money. all of the things we are talking

about, somebody has to pay for it. it is either going to be taxpayers directly or it will be people that use their planes, the customer. who else is going to do it? if it is the customer, let's not pretend that by the government saying we are going to expend the money and simply have somebody else charge them for it, that that is not a test. i am not against that. but i'm not kidding myself. if government takes action and costs somebody money, that is either a direct in or out tax. call it what you want. that includes if you raise the cost of my ticket because a private company is now running it. this? is going to pay for i am all for it. by the way, it is appropriate i am on the far left of the panel. i am not afraid of that. but for me, honesty is more important than anything else. if we're going to keep up and

improve, someone has to pay for it. sayany of you willing to that somebody should pay for it? i'm particularly interested in hearing you say somebody other than yourself. are you willing to help pay for it? >> let me take a shot at it. a little bit of clarity on this from the perspective of some of our ceos. , i believee buildout the federal government should cap the budget process. that is something that pretty much every state has. big capexu do a project, which is what nexgen is, we have already used the system for a lot of years. get the bond issue, you money there, and then you carefully invest that money.

you cannot stop and start. >> i am a former mayor. >> i have some money because i want to do a better job spending my money on the project. we heard the testimony about mr. defazio talked about acquisitions. we can do that better. bottom line, as you heard, there is also an array of multiple taxes being collected. we suggest there is a way among the stakeholders to look at that , look at what other nations have done. are there ways to make that [indiscernible] of course you have to pay for it. as the flying public, members of congress, you fly more than the public. can we do, and as the dollar you are paying to get a dollars worth of value and not $.85? but in thefor that,

final analysis, we will need more money to keep up. when we are finished with nexgen, there will be something else. i know that at some point drones will be delivering my chinese food. i know that. but i also know the captain and his people need to see them and we had to come up with a system that will allow you to do it, and that costs money, too. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for holding this important hearing on reauthorization. having been through several of of my mainbly one concerns is our lack of progress on nexgen. the first bill -- i helped to it.or -- we worked on unfortunately, i think, nexgen is either in the stall or in

reverse, and that is not acceptable. inspector general scoville, is the lack of funding the major problem in not move forward with nexgen? >> from our work, we do not think a lack of funding has been a problem. certainly, the timing hats of that funding, the daddy stream of funding. what that is different from a lack of funding. in the past, congress has been therous, even exceeding administration's request specifically for nexgen. is the case.at somehow, faa is not getting it together. thing, in order for next 10 to be implemented, everybody here has to have some benefit. the airlines have to have a calio?, right, mr.

>> clearly. >> mr. baker? the pilots? >> nexgen is the future, we need to keep moving forward. do you know anything in business aviation that does not look for benefit to a new system or expenditures, as they are called? >> absolutely. >> so somehow there is a disconnect. we are headed in the right direction. we have to turn this around. everybody who is at the table -- i did not get to you, paul, mr. ronald e. air traffic controllers who use the system, it has to benefit them, too. >> absolutely. >> i saw the late and great textingrector mr. thune

back there, which i told him not to do during the hearing. he and i remember leaving aviation. we both sort of what our for heads, once i left the chairman, we had a sigh of relief that there had been no major passenger aircraft -- this is in large aircraft -- where we have had a disaster, like the one we had in november 2001 after 9/11. we did have small commuter and regional aircraft. worked to do commuter safety. we have done good there. but i'm telling you, the clock is ticking.

it can be an air traffic controller or pilot error. there is no reason the united states should not have the most advanced air traffic control system in the world, and we do not have it. mr. rinaldi, have you been to canada? >> i have. >> canada is about one/10 -- 1/10 of our size and they have a , that, they are placing have satellite capacity. we should be ahead of the game on this thing. maybe it is going to take a disaster to wake people up to this. we cannot backslide on nexgen. that is one point. you want to comment? >> yes, sir. i also represent the pilots of canada. although that is a system that we should be looking at, i want to point out, i have also had to represent pilots that have had

major aircraft accidents up there. in this pay to play mode from a we have to be mindful that some of their airports in the northern part, under that system, do not have the most advanced systems, but they are adopting to that faster than we are, and will soon have the placed from a satellite rather than a radar-based system. that is my point. we have to stay ahead of that. take anythingt to that is outmoded as a technology. what you want in place is technology that gives us the best coverage. testified, we will probably always have to the backup systems. we have had an want to maintain the safest. need'm telling you, we all to get together again -- maybe not mr. scoville -- but this group can make it happen.

we have to pay for it. /20has mostly been an 80 proposition. i don't think there should be a war between airlines and airports. we need the facilities. our airports need to be expanded across the country to be able to accommodate aircraft we have .oming into play one last thing. do you know who our representatives are? who is the ambassador? >> [inaudible] >> international civil aviation agency in montréal. they control the rules, the international rules. there should never be a passenger aircraft that takes in the united states, or anywhere

in the world -- this sets the world standard -- that we do not know where it is. what happened with malaysia air 370 should never happen. we should know where every aircraft is. it is the united states responsibility to take the lead. i want all of you to write the ambassador and say we need to its in icao, a rule that no passenger aircraft should ever be lost. that is one of the larger pictures. this should never happen again. time?ut of thank you. nice and not embarrass anyone, i will submit the rest of the questions later. i did want mr. baker to address singleling number of piston powered aircraft, the number of pilots -- >> i believe you did that in his

testimony. we have that on record. ms. norton is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. forgive me, i have a cold. i agree with mr. mica. in the current environment, it may take a catastrophe to move this along. it is a good thing this hearing was not called progress on nexgen icad we have had nothing but setbacks. it is time you were candid with the public and with this committee. fly people are trying to and you have to be more and more cautious. that is what we need to tell the american people. i had high hopes for nexgen because of the economic effects in our own country and what it means for our place in the world. within anperated you had to where whereajor nexgen programs

the environment of 20,000-plus furloughs, half $1 billion cuts in operations, hiring freezes. somebody needs to be candid here. they need to tell the public think, the gravity of your testimony is here. the captain to proceed cautiously. if we are proceeding at all. proceed cautiously to a new system. 2020 date that was set some time ago is a fiction. thated to tell the public we are going to be living with this present system for the foreseeable future. you are an inspector general. you are supposed to tell the truth here.

isn't that, in effect, what the testimony amounts to today, and what the present lack of progress has meant? >> there are some very tight with is to be run between now and 2020. in other words, for industry and faa -- >> i'm talking on the public side. >> i'm sorry, i misunderstood. >> i am talking on the public side. it has to be a partner to whatever wickets the private side is trying to run. and by public if you mean the faa and what it must do in order to provide these enhanced air traffic control services to our national airspace, absolutely. gothis is a system that you to do what i'm asking you to do is to make the system we have got as safe as you can because you really cannot sit there with a straight face and tell me and the american public that the way

we are going to get out of this is to move to a new system, the system with high hopes, less delays, less environmental impact -- because we are not going to do that anytime soon. case i gave the wrong our system for our customers and our pilots, crew members come is the safest in the world -- >> i'm not questioning your safety. fly the even have to way that my colleagues do. , i see what isly happening. i cannot imagine what they see. it is murder. more and more people want to fly in more and more crowded rise -- guys. i believe we have ac system. i know it. -- a safe system. nexgen is not defined by the

2020 mandate, not defined by adsb. is a work in progress. many of the benefits of nexgen have already come online. i think that is being missed. or nobody year is willing to give us a target date we have madean say the transition and are moving to nexgen. isn't that the case? most programs in our country, we at least have a target date. if you don't have a target date, then it does not seem that your goals should be that to keep the system we have for my which we have had for some time. mr. colville did not object to that characterization. to keep it as safe as we can come up with whatever slowdowns, telling the public, yes, there will be slowdowns, but you have to understand, these slowdowns are to keep you safe.

it is better to have that kind of candor that do have people being angry at the airports when you tell them that they cannot get someplace when we were supposed to. i am not chastising the private sector. i know who is to blame here. but i am saying that now we know what the atmosphere is like, be candid with the public so the public does not expect anything but slowdowns for the foreseeable future. if anybody objects to that, speak now, or forever hold your peace. standannot let that because the on-time records, the improvements, the safety -- that is not a characteristic of our u.s. aviation system. it is never going to be a finite date that everything is done because it will because of the improving all along. the nuance problem we are working through, we will always work through them. i would say it was a mischaracterization of the u.s. airline industry. >> the ladies time had expired.

>> the house hearing will continue online. we are streaming it live at www.c-span.org. we are going live to the floor of the house. members are about to work on epa legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain from catholic information center in washington, d.c. the chaplain: heavenly father, ord of life and death, in this season as days grow dark and cold, as leaves fall in the sad autumnil