if you stay the night, i'll spend the night. there is a camp run by mother teresa. we spent the night in a little hot. -- hut. it was a life-changing experience. i saw people persecuted for their faith. those two trips were like bookends. since that time -- thursday, we will take in american history tour of

various native american tribes. 10 a.m. eastern followingw." -- following "washington journal ." justices atcourt 8:30 p.m. eastern this thanksgiving week on c-span. for a complete schedule, go to c-span.org. michigan senator carl levin is retiring after serving six terms in the senate. he recently spoke about his political career in the current state of washington politics. this is a half hour. >> senator carl levin, chairman of the senate armed services committee, why are you retiring? >> a number of reasons. i didn't want to spend these two critical years out campaigning, raising money.

i just felt there was too much at stake now, and i have a responsibility for some of those things as chairman of the armed services committee. it is not the way i wanted to spend my time, basically. the wife and i have been married for 53 years, and now 42 of those years have been in public life. we felt it was time. i am also 80 years old now. i just felt it was time to go home, spend a little more time with the grandkids. the main thing was that these two years have gone by and they have been so important in terms of america being at war, but also in terms of recovering from a recession, or as chairman of the permanent subcommittee on investigations -- there are important investigations that need to go on. i wanted to not take time away from that for campaigning. also, the budget situation here, which led to a crazy sequestration, needs to be revamped, to get rid of that approach, the automatic, across-the-board cuts approach that we call sequestration.

needs to be revamped, to get rid of that approach, the automatic, across-the-board cuts approach that we call sequestration. to do that, it will require some additional revenue, as well as some modification in the entitlement area. we now need to focus on collecting the revenue which is lost because some of the most profitable corporations in america avoid paying taxes by shifting revenue to tax havens, by a bunch of tax avoidance gimmicks, which has happened in the last couple years. you put all that together, it is time not to run for reelection. >> you mentioned campaigning a couple times too. do you like campaigning? >> i like campaigning, i he's

raising money. raising money. >> why? >> i think there is such a huge role for money in campaigns. it is painful, frankly. to continually ask people for money, particularly if those people have matters in front of the congress. the amounts are not what they used to be. the amounts used to be much more manageable. you could ask people, an average person, for a lot of money. but it is not the unlimited

funds that are now available, because of terrible supreme court decisions. people and corporations can be asked for unlimited amounts of money. they can also be kept anonymous, those contributions. and that is a real tragedy, i believe. it has changed the nature of the game, so there is too much money in these campaigns. i didn't feel comfortable being out there, asking for money in this setting. >> what are you going to miss? >> the reporters. my friends in the senate, my staff. i have a fabulous staff and a lot of good friends. we will miss our house. we will miss capitol hill. we like living on capitol hill,

we are urban people. we live in the city of detroit, that has always been my home, but we have got a wonderful neighborhood here. we have a wonderful eastern market where we love to shop. there are some things here that i will miss. i won't miss the excessive partisanship. the unwillingness of some to compromise, ideological rigidity. i won't miss that. but i will miss my colleagues. it is a great job. i am not leaving because of the job, i love the job. i love every minute of it, even when there is too much bickering going on. i have got a fabulous job.

that is going to be hard to leave. >> legislatively, what sticks out in your mind? >> as much as we've accomplished and 36 years, i don't want to look back at that so much as to look forward to the next couple months. and the next couple months, there are a couple things i would like to do. one is get my defense authorization bill passed. it is a major effort involving hundreds of provisions that need to be first addressed by the senate, hopefully. then addressed in conference with the house. this is a massive annual job. we need to get that job. our troops deserve it, their

families deserve it. i also want to finish up some work on the subcommittee of investigations, looking at gimmicks which are used to avoid taxes. some gimmicks which are used to get people, particularly large banks, certain special advantages over the rest of the world. i have spent a lot of time looking at that. there is some work that needs to be done there, as well. the biggest part, which will probably be undone, or left undone, will be what i call the unjustified tax loopholes. everyone talks about tax reform.

everybody says they are for tax reform. when you start looking at what are the credits in the tax code, the deductions in the tax code, that should be closed, people then say -- wait a minute, that provision serves a useful purpose, this provision serves a useful purpose, that other provision serves a useful purpose. the truth of the matter is that most of the tax code serves a useful purpose. most of the tax code does things like give your child care credit, deductions or credit for charitable contributions, for mortgage expenses, for accelerated depreciation, for energy conservation. i favor those things, those are useful.

they serve an economic or social purpose. there is no economic purpose served when microsoft or apple are able to shift their revenue to puerto rico to avoid paying taxes. there is no economic purpose served when one of these new, intellectual property giants -- they produce good stuff, i am not quarreling with apple. they create wonderful products. my quarrel is the way they avoid paying taxes on those profits, and shifting profits and their intellectual property to themselves, to their own corporations and tax havens to avoid paying taxes. those are the loopholes that we need to close, and we need the revenue in order to avoid another round of sequestration, which is there's absolutely mindless way to budget, where everything gets cut, including the national institutes of

health. we are in the middle of an ebola problem. research has been cut at the national institute of health. because of this sequestration method of budgeting, which has an automatic, cookie-cutter approach. we have got to end that, and most of us -- not all of us -- not the tea party guys, the libertarian guys -- but most of us really want to end sequestration. from whatever perspective, whether it is domestic programs, infrastructure, roads, health care, so forth, or whether it is from the national security perspective. we need to close the unjustified tax loopholes that don't serve any economic purpose, in part to use that revenue in order to make sure we do what we need to do in important areas such as national security, education, and so forth. we probably can't finish that. a lot of republicans will join with me after the election, for those who really believe in what i am saying to do it before the election.

hopefully in a lame-duck session we can at least set the table to get tax reform done in the right way, not so that revenues can be used to reduce tax rates for people who don't need a tax rate reduction. in order to come up with a different approach to a budget so that we can do whatever deficit reduction we want to do on a much more logical way. >> senator, 1978, what made you run? >> a lot of things that. my wife whispered in my ear that i should run for senate. i have known a local official in detroit for years before it ran. i love my hometown. detroit has a lot of problems, and one of the problems that had

was 20,000 vacant houses owned by the government. they were open to trespass, used as dope dens and other things. we had a huge battle going on with the housing and urban development department. i wanted them to act and they wouldn't act to remove all those houses. this was a big issue and it still is. so, they said, they could not remove the houses. we can't tear the down the way we would tear down a privately owned house. i had a big battle, and i wanted to take that sentiment to washington, that i have to be a strong supporter of what they were trying to do, which was create housing.

i am a democrat, i believe there is a useful role for that. but i am also someone who has seen waste in government. i wanted congress to have the power to veto regulations of the bureaucracy. i didn't want to be told by my elected official, we can to do anything about it, go to some federal agency in chicago or something. i wanted my elected official to be accountable to me, as a citizen of detroit and an elected official. that was something i felt very keenly about, to take the spirit

to washington, that, yes, if we wanted to preserve what is really good and important about government, the opportunities of education that it can provide, the infrastructure that can provide, the health care which it should guarantee, the research on diseases which -- if we want to preserve that, we have got to take care of the wasteful part. the part that is frustrating to people because it is, at times, seeming so distant and rigid, one-size-fits-all. that is what i wanted to bring to washington. it was a major part of the campaign. it wasn't one thing which may be want to run for office here in

washington, but i would say my experience as a local official in detroit was a major part of it. >> was it a surprise that you won? >> not to my wife, not to me, not to a whole bunch of supporters. but it was always a close race, going in. it was something of an upset. it wasn't a total upset, but it was something of an upset. >> senator levin, how did you end up on the armed services committee? >> i felt that was kind of a gap in my life. i wanted to learn more about the military. i had always had respect for the military, at what had happened in vietnam. but what happened after vietnam was unfair to the troops. i wanted to learn more. right away, i went to the armed services committee.

the three committees i joined are the same three committees i am on. that was the main reason that i wanted -- i wanted to learn. it has been a great learning experience. it has really increased my appreciation and respect for what our men and women in uniform do for us. and not just military people, but the military leadership is so often so far advanced from civilian leaders in terms of war and life and death issues. there is a much greater caution on the part of military leaders to go to war than some of our civilian leaders. some of the civilian leaders, too ready to go to war without understanding complexities, the history that may have gotten various countries where they

are, the risks that are taken. so i have come not just for men and women in uniform but for the military leaders of our country. they think deeply about war and peace. they are also great diplomats, many are terrific diplomat. >> when it comes to the military spending issue, are we spending too much? it is sort of a macro question that you can break down -- but are we spending too much? too little? >> we spent too little in some areas. some of our modernization programs, on nuclear program -- too much money being spent. i don't think we need thousands of nuclear weapons. you can't use one, really.

they are useful to deter, that is about it. during the cold war, they were a deterrence. we spent a lot of money on our nuclear weapons. and we continue to reduce the number of nuclear weapons that we have. i think we are going to have to make some difficult reforms in terms of some of the costs that we have. it is not a black-and-white issue at all in terms of military spending, because there are some areas where we have cut too deep. we can hopefully remedy that, but at the same time, we have to

including acquisition reform. senator mccain and i were leading the way, at least in the senate, on acquisition reform, to make sure that the level of cost was brought down. it was much too much. we had done some of that with some success. there are some areas where you have stuff that we are spending too much money for. but in terms of the amount of competition that we have, we passed the competition in contracting act many years ago, which was very important. but also this acquisition reform act. we led the way in the senate on a bipartisan basis. it was a very important reform and we have to keep trying to get rid of the waste that exists in the pentagon, in an operation that size there will be raced

but you have to keep fighting it. >> when you want to go have dinner, who are some of your friends here? who do you call? >> i don't want to pick on anyone. i resist on that, totally. we don't go out to dinner very much with people. that part of our life seems to have dwindled. much more when we came here over the years, whatever the time pressure was, whatever the reason, there is less of that that goes on. i have too much respect for too many. and oh i will regret it and kick myself and say how could i have mentioned him without mentioning her. >> let's go to presidents, then. it was the president that you have enjoyed working with and haven't enjoyed working with? >> i've worked to a degree with all the presidents. i haven't had a bad relationship with any president, for starters. i think president obama is very, very thoughtful, very careful. does how to weigh pros and cons

and gets along very well. i thought president clinton was unusual in terms of his ability, not just a think through issues and he has got a heck of a great mind, but he also had the ability -- has the ability, still very vigorously -- to connect with people on a personal way. people will tell you, if you are in a room with 100 people and bill clinton and you go from person to person, you will think he is the only one in the room that is aware of you. that is the kind of unusual ability that he has to connect with people. he is sympathetic in a very genuine way, the underdog, which i have always liked and admired in him.

he has a sensitivity to people and their basic needs. again, i have gotten along with all the presidents to varying degrees. i don't want to say anything negative. i disagreed with the second president bush more than anyone. i disagreed very strongly on the iraq war. it was a policy issue, not a personal issue. i voted against going to war because i thought it was based on misrepresentations, particularly by vice president cheney, these allegations which were untrue at the time, known to be untrue by the intelligence committee. there was some connection

between al qaeda and saddam hussein. that allegation was not true, and it was repeated over and over again, particularly by vice president cheney. that, i thought, was really wrong. they created some real tension between us. i won't say it was physical, particularly, but i have been very critical and very hard on vice president cheney. i think you really was the main leader that got us into that war. it wasn't the weapons of mass destruction issue, because i thought saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction. you don't attack people because they have weapons of mass destruction, or else we would have attacked the soviet union or they would have attacked us,

for pakistan, or india. just because we had a -- we thought he had weapons doesn't give us the reason to attack him. it is only if he is threatening to use them or has used them against you that he would then say, ok. what was presented to the american people before the iraq war, which gave them the greatest heartburn in a second bush administration, was representations to the american people, including at the u.n. unwittingly, by general powell, who tried to get rid of the stuff. it was not supportable. he still ended up with statements in their which were not accurate. but at least he made an effort before he made his presentation

to the u.n. i am not as critical of general powell as i am of vice president cheney. >> is it tough to understand what members of the house have to deal with? it gets pretty complex. >> oh, yeah. you have staff to help you through it. i get involved with banks and tax codes and wall street because of the permanent subcommittee on investigations. there are a lot of issues and the defense area which i can't expect too many of my colleagues to really know in-depth. they are involved in energy issues or other issues which are technical that would be a mystery to me which i have to get up to snuff on when the staff comes to say there is a vote tomorrow. yeah, i would say 70% of the things around here are things you are not in the middle of, that you have to become familiar with and take a position on. that is where the fabulous staff

comes in. you really rely on staff, heavily. caller: >> it been helpful to have your brother in the house? >> he is my lifelong best buddy. he has been my best buddy for 53 years. an amazing brother, an amazing member of the house of representatives. and boy, his colleagues just raise about him and love his demeanor, is reaching out to his colleagues on both sides of the

aisle. he is a really nice guy. a nice, thoughtful guy. best brother anybody ever had. >> come january, what is your advice to the new senator from michigan? >> its gary peters. i don't think i have to give him too much advice on the house of representatives. he knows where the traps are. it would mainly be, i think, to remember that this is the house of representatives. majority doesn't rule in the senate. of minority rights which exist here, for a good reason, can also be abused. they can be abused by some of the filibuster threats some of our team party members are using in order to get their way on something where they shouldn't

have their way. it needs to be protected. the rights of the minority also need to be used with some discretion so that the majority doesn't react by trying to restrict the rights of the minority. that is what is the problem here, that because there were some abuses, excesses, by some of the republicans, just some, he had to do what he did in ways which created problems. this is not the house. whoever the minority is next year, to raise issues, debate issues at length, to bring it to public attention. >> senator, moving back to your apartment in detroit -- what are your retirement years? what is your plan?

where are all your personal papers going? >> they are going to michigan. we don't know what i will be doing. there are a lot of opportunities, and we are not focusing at all on that now. i have got to and a half months i have three kids and six grandkids. >> senator carl levin retiring after six terms. what's ralph hall is the oldest member of congress and has been in office for 33 years. runoff in may.ry he set down for an interview and talked about his career. this is 35 minutes.

>> can congressman ralph hall, you've been in the house of representatives since january of 1981,aged you'd hoped to be here for one last term. the voters thought otherwise. how are you processing your departure? >> well, everything that i checked on during that that i was 10 to 12 points ahead. it told me one thing, don't listen to people who tell you you're ahead and you're not. i really thought i had it won. come back that night at 3:00 in the morning, i had to think as i was driving back out to my house how it happened. when i got home i pulled out old elections and checked to see how i did there. looked at robert's rule. i figured it out finally. the guy got more votes than i did. i got beat. that's all there is to me.

it didn't bother me but it hurt me because it hurt some of my friends. >> how are you feeling about leaving? >> well, when i wanted a doughnut this morning, i went down and get it. i've been a member of congress for 34 years and to finally get beat, if i was a manager for a be able or football team and i had 34-1, i'd be in the hall of fame, so doesn't bother me. and really it didn't bother me to get beat, because i wasn't just set on going.

i had 18 co-chairman who were chairman of my 18 counties in my district that were supporting me and wanted me to run, and i did. it's -- better judgment was it -- it's hard toe get elected if you are 90 or 91-year-old and they don't tell people that you run two miles every morning, that you vote 99 plus percent of the time. there's a difference between that and old people. that wasn't brought up by the dallas morning news because they're not in my favor. >> what's your secret, how are you running two miles a day? >> i was told once, i was in the cattle building, if one of your he was has a bull calf.

go out there and lift the bull calf every day over the fence, day after day after day until he's a full-grown bull. then when you can still lift him over the fence and throw him over the fence, you can throw the bull enough, you can run for congress. that's what they told me. so that's how i got into the congress, i left the cattle business and came here. >> well, you've switched parties during your time here. you've seen the parties change so many times. what's your handicap, let's start with the democrats what do you see when you look at the democratic party? >> well, the democrat party was a two-party party, democrats and liberal democrats. i wasn't really liked any better by the republicans than the democrats, because i voted in my district. i had the sam rayburn district. go up there and do a job and tell them you're doing a good job. i'm not a golfer. i don't hunt. i don't fish. i campaign when i have a day.

i go walk a building out or something. i've campaigned all my life. i think that's the way i stayed elected ed. >> staying with the democrats, today is it still split between the liberals and the conservatives >> oh. yeah. there's three or four conservatives over there now. >> that's it? >> yeah. >> so it's changed. >> they'll slowly become republicans, probably. of course it would make sam rayburn if he were alive. he was our kind of democrat. because when he looked back over his shoulder as he went to bonham texas to die, he left a balanced budgets, so he was a conservative. >> when you look at the republican party, your challenger was a tea party member. is the republican party -- >> i don't know if he's a tea party member or not. you can't direct mail them. we don't know who they are or where they are. i always tell them to look at my record. >> are you seeing the party

split the same way you described the democrats between fiscal conservatives and -- >> well, we have different types of conservatives as republicans. we have those that are hell for leather, republicans, you know, and it's got to be a republican if you're right. you have to be a conservative if you're right, and that's what we're beginning to learn, i think. >> other members that we've talked to have talked about how the congress has changed in the past during your tenure to an institution where people used to do things together off hours, which played out in more compromise. do you find that the place has changed in that regard and, if so, why? >> well, pretty much. when i got here i was a conservative democrat. i didn't really fit. republicans really didn't want me and the democrats didn't like me. for example, the bushes were dear friends of mine. i flew with the old bush. he flew torpedo bombers.

he was of a famous family. he didn't know me until after the war was over. i knew those people and add mired them. i had good luck with the bushes and good luck with reagan. i have a picture on my wall made with reagan, looking at our boots at camp david. the first six months he was there, i thought i'm going to be at camp david for the rest of my life. that was 30 or 40 years ago. i haven't been back. i don't know if i participated correctly out there. i asked him some questions about marilyn monroe. he was a good guy and easy to talk to. ronald reagan came here when a man, one person could make a difference. i doubt that they can today. >> why so ? >> i don't know. he came here accepted as a conservative democrat or republican, but he'd been a democrat like all the rest of us, so he was in between -- he was a in-between deal there. somehow we felt like you could trust him. i got called the first 30 days he was here, because when he hit here, he hit here with a plan to

increase pay for the military and yet cut the budget. that was his goal, and he had enough folks to get it, do it. when he got here about 19 or 20 of his fellow republicans came to him and said, if you don't hang the way you're voting on funs and on abortion, we're not going to support your bill. of course, you know what they told them, to go jump. but then he had to have some help out of the democratic party i was a democrat there. billy townsend was a democrat. we had some strength over there. jim baker could tell the president, call one of those guys and they'll help you. they said, well, i know ralph hall better an i know any of them. we'll have the president call him and maybe he'll pick up those votes that he lost. they needed about 10 votes. they told me he was going to call me.

so i was ready for him. he called and said, this is ronald reagan. i said, yeah, i believe that. martha, come over here. he thinks i'm reagan now, but -- i want you to hear him. he said, no, i really am. another guy came over and no, it's really him. that's the funny type things that you don't forget. >> sure. >> when i knocked on the door he told me to come over there. i need some time. i had a program like he did. i always wanted to put a president on hold. i put him on hold about two minutes and i said, well, i can come over there today, tomorrow, or the next 30 minutes.

what you want me to do? he told me to get my you-know-what over there. i knocked on the door. he said one question, what is it going to take for you to help me pay for the budget? i had an answer for him. >> as you look across the president's ha you've served under, served with, which of them have been the best at working congress to get their legislative -- >> i'd probably have to say reagan. he was so believable, and he had been a democrat, you know, pretty much, but the two bushes were easy for me to work with because i knew them. during world war ii, i had flown -- been at the same base a time or two with the old bush. he was a famous father. i knew who he was. he didn't have any idea who i was. i supported him for some statewide race. i think he got beat the first time. but bushes have always been favorites of mine. because i knew little george when he was nine or 10 or 12 years old. i knew he was never going to be president. but that's what a good woman can do for you. she changed him.

you can have me or you can have jack daniels and he made the right choice. that woman probably saved the guy. >> ronald reagan was the best at working congress many >> i think so. >> yeah. >> i think he handled them better. he even went over and tear down that wall and brought cheers rather than jeers. he knew what to say and when to say it. he came when one person could make a difference. i don't think one person can make a difference now.

>> a person that you have on your wall. lyndon johnson. what was your impression of him? >> he landed a helicopter many our football field and i got to know him then. i went to work for him and i think they were paying me $3 a day to put up his placards, but what i had to do, i had to bring them three placards of the guy they were hiring me against. they really were hiring me to tear the other guy's placards down. i got to application later because he was a good -- politics later. >> you left politics for a while and worked in private industry but decided to come back and make your bid for national elected office. who drew you back in after your time in private life ? >> i was in business and i was buying and selling land.

i was -- rockwall county's the smallest county in texas, 254 counties and my little county is the smallest. dallas spills over on us and as they spilled over on us, it increased the value of our land and the counties next to us. i bought a lot of land and bought it and sold it at that time right time. during the 80's when every hit bottom, i was running for offers and i was trying to come up here. if i had been doing what i'd been doing, i'd have been broke. but i wasn't. all through the 1980's i was trying to stay -- keep my head above water because i knew i was coming to congress. >> why did you want to come to congress? >> well, sam rayburn and my mother were schoolmates at mayo college, a little college before east texas teachers state college at commerce, texas. now it's texas a&m at commerce. they elected a good friend. she wrote a letter to sam rayburn when world war ii broke out and asked me to help me get an officer, get officers

training school. he didn't call her back or write her back. he came to her breakfast table. he said i can't hire him because of his grades. i graduated in a class of 38 but i graduated number 38. i always have been able to make it some way. somebody's been good to me. >> was it sam rayburn that made you want to come to congress? >> yeah. because my mother spoke to highly of me. a bunch of republicans came to me one time when i was a county judge in rockwall and was going to put up money for me to run

against sam rayburn. my mother asked me, if you do that, where are you going to get breakfast, you know? i wasn't going to run against sam rayburn. he was a great man. i think sam rayburn could still be speaker of this house or could be -- i think, oh, joe dimaggio could still hit the fastball, the pitchers of today. i think those old guys could still operate the way they did, because, you know, when -- like i said, when ray burn looks back over his shoulder, he left a nation here that had a plan for it and had a balanced budget and had had one for 10 years when he was there. >> your office is in the ray burn building. did you do that intentionally? >> no. i always wanted to get here. the first year i was here, we drew for offices. there were 9 of us and i drew up in 9 . >> last again? >>, the last again -- >> i drew number 630 when there was 62 votes. so i stayed where i was.

finally, i stayed here so-long had my choice and i picked this place. this is the best office on the hill. >> why is that? >> you're closer to the elevator, the views, and you think about that when you're an old guy, rest r5078s. got everything an old guy wants. >> you're surrounded by lots of photographs. >> so proud of all these people. they're all friends of mine. i don't know what i'm going to do with all these pictures. i have neil armstrong who came to my home and supported me when it looked like i might get beat. he came and worked for me. he was a good guy. buzz aldrin's been to my home several times, and in rockwall, you know, they weren't sure who buzz aldrin was, but they knew he was somebody. and of course i took him to the schools. you know, seniors vote. this guy, neil armstrong and buzz aldrin came on one of my election action -- elections.

he called me from new york. i have tickets, you come pick me up. he said the dallas morning news is knocking around. first thing i learned is you don't fight people. he came here and it helped me. they helped me through the campaign. i've had good luck and all kinds of help. to be in politics and stay, you have to have some ability but you have to have a little luck every now and then. i've always had that and had people who helped me. the regulation -- when people were going to run against me, the regulation were republicans and they'd tell the people in my district that they weren't going to get any republican money, the

money would go with me. wasn't too good be some of the real hard wing left democrats up there but they're still my friends. >> what are you going to do with your pictures and papers? are they going to a university somewhere? >> i'm told they're going to take all the pictures to texas a&m, reproduce them and give these back to me. i hope they do. >> your papers are going to texas a&m? >> yes. everything i have are going to texas a&m at commerce. my grandson went to school there. my wife, when i was in the office here started school there and went all the way through and got her degree from there. so we're east texas state teachers college people. didn't know there was another school anywhere. >> many of these pictures and

memorabilia are from the space program. will you talk about what you think your legacy of the space program has been? >> well, when i came up here, when i was first elected to congress, kim wright was the speaker. he'd been in my home and he and i were good friends. i'd referee a fistfight that he had with a guy that's one of his best friends even today. i knew people who later were somebody. he called me in and said what do you want to be on. i said i want to be on something with energy texas is an energy state. i want to be something with that space station. i've gone to some of the liftoffs with some of the older members. i think i belong on some kind of space program. he put me on both of them. it would take you 10 years to get on either one of them now days. i got lucky. i have friends in high spaces. >> what are you proudest of? >> well, i'm proudest that we -- i was that one street we name

and kept them from killing the space station. they came down to one vote on that. and i got dr. debakey to walk the floors with me. we had that same vote and we won by a hundred votes. later they tried to take space out of science and technology. i was a one-man army that taught them to leave space where it was because that's where it belonged? >> why? >> going to the moon? is that transportation? i think that's a little licked. but it is space, you know, and it's been space forever. why change something like that? what benefit would it be? >> what do you think of this state's commitment to the space program today? >> well, we're hurting. we're in trouble. and it's a lack of money. i have a book over here was written by -- what is his name? he's been before all the committees saying how bad we

need the space program. i've asked them to give money and it took too much money for them. they wouldn't do it. so we're at russia's good will by -- we started out giving them $50 million for a seat to go to our own space station. we need to keep going back and forth to that station. we made a mistake when we didn't put up the amount of money that it would have taken, because the space program is just not even 1% of the overall budget. and space is so important. every youngster in the world would be affected if we lost the space station. we'd lose all our international partners if we didn't do our part in keeping the space station open and available to

them. it's just important. we may have to defend the next war out of space. who knows? i told dr. debakey himself, if you ever leave that space station, we'll lose the cure for cancer. and what's more important than a cure for cancer? it's important. >> i want to go back to your military service. fewer and fewer members of congress have served in the military. does it make a difference, considering that members have to make that important vote about -- >> yes, it does and it made a lot of difference that i was a veteran when i came here. sonny montgomery was the only general i knew that i could call sonny, but that was his real name. if he lost four votes in the entire congress he'd go grab them by the tie. what do you mean voting against space, what do you mean voting

against my bill? he was strong and it was a strong push that day and time and still should be. >> what about members of congress with military service when you have to vote on things like sending people to war? how important is that? does it matter? >> it matters if you've been side by side with someone or you've gone to your buddy's funeral or you have a grave named after you. as a joke i always kid and say when i die, do i want them to say he was a good man or he really was a good to his family or he was a good member of congress. no that's not what i want to hear them say. i want to they're them say "i thought i saw him move." so i'm 91 years old. i don't hurt anywhere. i'm not on anybody's wait list or anything like that. i still run a couple miles a day.

i vote 99% of the time. i do most everything everybody else can do. i run two miles every day. i don't run it every day but there's never three days goes that i don't run it. i ran this morning. >> one thing that's changed is media coverage of congress. you mentioned ink by the barrelful. the people working in ink are hurting nowadays. it's all the internet and social media. how do you think that's affected things? the social media and the press? >> there's been some good and some bad. i've popped off and said things to people but i've said things i wished to hell i hadn't said, you know. i think we're more aware when we talk to you folks of what we're saying that, it could be in the paper in san diego tomorrow or in tv. i think you stop and think a little bit more so than we used to, you know. a lot of these politicians, they

shoot at everything that's that flies and claim at anything that falls. they'll be fruit their knees sooner or later you got to have some common sense and have some view of the future and remember what happened in the past before you pop offer here and stake take a stand on anything. >> do you have any allies in the senate? >> we have two good senators? i've always liked the senators over there. got along with them fine. never wanted to run for the senate. i was in the texas senate 10 years. >> you wouldn't you want to go over there? >> anybody would like to be in the senate, i always thought if somebody dies over there, they'd appoint me to finish the senate term and if that never happens, i think -- he's still got it. he won't run against anybody. so i'd be standing there.

i'd be -- lot of times i've been lucky just because i was standing there. >> so the senate itself, though, and the house of representatives, what can you do here that you can't get done in the senate? >> pass a bill and you have to really have the votes over there. and you have to raise so much money. the cost of running for office is a major issue up here. it's why i could never run for senate. i couldn't raise that much money. >> you've had to raise increasing amounts of money to run for the house. what do you think about - >> i've been here so long, it came easier for me. finally, this last time i ran but i was spending money on surveys. they were telling me i was 10, 12% ahead when probably i

wasn't. and i -- i guess i thought i was, but it was -- it didn't turn out right, but it didn't hurt me but it hurt my people so much. i had grown people crying there. i had one guy that's 6'8" that drives me places i go. i felt water hitting my head and i looked up, this old guy was crying. i said come on, you're 6'8", you're a grown man. it's nothing to cry about. it hurt my friends and folks more than i could -- more than it hurt me. i could seat it coming. i'm ok. i think i'm pretty lucky to be 91 years old. i got a job until december 31st now. how many guys have that? very few. >> what are you going to do with your time after? >> i will keep working, i have to. i have expensive grandchildren. i'm going to teach them -- i'm a texas guy but i'm an aggie now. they kiss me on the face, every kiss costs me a hundred dollars. they were kissing me good-bye

and i had a girl who worked for me before. she was strange. not unattractive but never had any boyfriends. she was going to open the door for them. i said are you going to kiss me? she said, no. i said why not? she said, well, when you were 19 or 20, would you want to kiss a 90-year-old women? i said that's the greatest thing i've ever heard. i think that's something people ought to hear. >> if you were asked to tell a story from your service here, the best -- helps people understand what it's like to be a member of congress, whether it's a funny story or a story of power or whatever, what would that story be? oh, i don't know. john connolly was by far the greatest politician i ever knew.

he was governor of texas. should have been president but they only had one delegate and couple million dollars wasn't nearly enough. i've had so many things that people helped me because i was a democrat and then when they helped me because i was republican. but i've always got along with -- neither one of them were many love with me but neither one of them really hated me. >> did it give you some bargaining advantage that you -- >> i think so. i've had to knock on the door of the white house and imply -- one time, i said that i think the president wanted me to vote a certain way, and i said, well, i got a brother that always

wanted to be a federal judge. he turned and the guy who was standing there, he said hall, this isn't a place to ask him for this. i said hell, he's asking me for something, i said i'll ask him for something. he turned and asked them if he could get confirmed. i said wait a minute, mr. president. he's not a lawyer. that brought a big laugh. every time i saw him after that, he laughed because he liked him because he wasn't a lawyer. those are some of the things you remember. those are things you remember. >> any regrets? .> not really , -- theys a democrat would get into a race. . have had help i just stumbled into it because

i got along with everyone. i don't think i have been enemy in the entire congress. enemies.ave any the oldest member of congress in the history is to stand the floor and cast a vote. maybe out to have more money. maybe i would have to run for reelection. >> you made into the history books. >> i'm there. -- theystion to him was

haven't asked me over there since. you -- yourtion for great friendship with the bushes -- when you lost your bid, did you hear from them? >> sure did. >> was a george senior or george w.? >> he said i was a good man. a great man. i have been honored ever since. entities. about 10 i would have quit long time ago. >> i don't believe that. [laughter] >> i don't really have any enemies.

i never did make enemies. i didn't have any girlfriends. i've always been fortunate to be in the right place at the right spot. save jobs at exit canada. -- texacana. i got to know him.

that is a good feeling. i see some difference in the way people treat me. it is a hard, old fact. i'm going to be with my grandkids. i haven't been hunting and so long. i'll do some things i haven't done before.

>> thank you for spending time with c-span. it was good to romanesque with you over your career with congress. >> thank you. it has been an honor. >> our series of interviews continues to my night at 8 p.m. eastern when they talk to congressman frank wolf of virginia who is leaving office after 18 terms. here is a review. >> what will you miss the most? >> of the people. the people -- has made great friendship on both sides of the aisle. i think i will miss the staff.

the people. >> see the rest of the interview with congressman frank wolf tomorrow night at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> according to aaa drowsy driving is responsible for 400,000 traffic accidents each year. the national transportation safety board hosted a meeting. this is just over an hour. >> good morning. welcome to the board room of the national transportation safety board.

it's a wake -- awake, alert, alive. i am board member and it is my privilege to reside over the meeting today. my thanks to all of the panelists who will be provided their perspectives and considerable expertise today. we are calling this forum awake, alert, alive because every driver must be awake and alert to operate a vehicle safely. sufficient, good-quality sleep is approximately to alertness and human performance and yet so

many americans are on the road dangerously impaired by lack of sleep. we know this is a serious problem. the current estimates may only point to the tip of the iceberg. driver fatigue may directly contribute to over 1200,000 roadway crashes annually. these are only police-reported crashes. there's some estimates that put the number of drowsing driver crashes at over a million a year. conservative estimates suggest a thousand people are killed annually in these crashes while other data indicate that the 7500 lives are lost every year. the number of crashes and fatalities attributed to fatigue is grossly underestimated. there is no roadway test. we do not have a fatigue-alyzer as we do a breathalyzer. state reporting practices are inconsistent and there's little or no police training in determining sleepy driving.

self reporting is unreliable. any resulting loss of life is tragedy, needless and preventable. a drowsy driver can be a deadly driver. even one night losing two hours of sleep is sufficient to significantly impair our built, attention, reaction time, decision making can all be significantly reduced by 20% to 50% and driving many this condition, that could mean not reacting to the brake lights in front of us or not see the traffic light turning red. fatigue alone can be deadly. it also multiplies the adverse effects of other forms of impairment. drugs, alcohol and distraction. every other form of i am parent may be exacerbated when we don't get enough sleep. we've identified sleep as causal, contribute over or finding. the agency has issued more than 200 safety recommendations in such diverse areas as research,

vehicle technologies, the treatment of sleep orders and hours of scheduling policies for commercial and bus drivers. most people drive cars. they operate personal vehicles. for most of us, there are no hours of service or rest rules. we have to rely on our own experience for knowledge of fatigue and its affects. unfortunately, our personal experience especially as it relates to self-diagnosing fatigue is typically inaccurate. in january 2013, the ntsb investigated a collision involving three passenger vehicles. the collision happened at about 8:30 in the morning.

a nurse was driving home after more than 13 hours on duty. she depart her lane, crossed over the median and entered a northbound lane traveling against the flow of traffic. her car then struck another vehicle, pushing it into one lane over. this vehicle was struck again from behind by another car. one driver was fatally injured and the 234urs was transported to a hospital where she was treated for her injuries. she had fallen asleep. she'd worked night shifts for nine years and was familiar with the challenges of her schedule and yet her inverted work schedule along with her extended time awakening contributed to her falling asleep at the wheel. today's forum offers us an opportunity to focus on the dangers of drowsy driving and on the countermeasures that can mitigate. we'll identify what we know and what we don't. only the most robust data on drowsy driving can lead to the most effective countermeasures. we'll look another sleep disorders. we will hear about the challenges faced by young novice drivers. we will discuss irregular work schedules and how the same

people we depend on for our 24-7 lifestyle are vulnerable to taking to the road in a too tired state. we will hear about in-vehicle and on-road countermeasures and other strategies to reduce the risk of drowsy driving cashes. perhaps just as importantly, we will provide a public setting to exam the dangers of drowsy driving. for awake and alert driving to become the expected norm, we must play a prominent preventive role. this for all of us is for nurses, doctors, law enforcement officers and security guards driving home after their shift. it's for the utility worker driving home after fixing the powerlines after a storm. it is for any of us who have ever driven with too little sleep. a crash can happen literally in the blink of an eye. it is our hope that this forum is one step toward a national waking about the safety risk of

drowsy driving. now i will turn to dr. janay price who has done an outstanding job in organizing this forum. dr. price. >> thank you. for safety purposes, please note the emergency exits. you can use the rear doors that you came through. to enter the conference center, there's also a set of emergency doors up front. if you haven't done so, please silence your electronic devices. today's forum has been designed to get to several topics relative to drowsy driving. we will begin with an introduction and the scope of the problem. this morning we will have panels addressing workplace factors. concerns as novice drivers. a group from the national

organization for youth safety will join us during the novice driver panel. after lunch we will have panel discussions. the final panel of the day will address countermeasures and future directions. each panel will open with presentations by panelists followed by a facilitated question and answer period led by our ntsb technical chairs. our staffer and panelist bios as well as the agenda are available on the forum website www.needs/drug. presentations provided by our speakers and a video archive of the webcast will be available on our website. attendees or others who wish to submit written comments for inclusion in the forms may do so until november 7.

submissions should address one or more of the topic areas and should be submitted electronically to ntsb.gov. there are a variety of lunch options. take the escalators up one floor and walk straight ahead. you'll find restaurants as well as a food court. handouts are available in the lobby and on the website. we appreciate your cooperation in helping us keep on schedule during panels and breaks. one note to our presenters about breaks. we will have panel photos in the morning. panels -- for the importantly panels during the morning break and for the afternoon panels in the afternoon break. we'll meet right here. i now turn to our first technical chair, mr. dennis collins to introduce the first

panel. mr. collins. >> thank you, dr. price. presenters, when speaking, please push the button on the microphone. a green light indicates the microphone is on. please bring your microphone close and press the button to turn it off when you're done speaking. the first panel covers an introduction and the scope of the problem. our panelists are dr. david, chief of the division of sleep and director of the unit for experimental psychiatry at that time university of pennsylvania's perlman school of medicine and brian teft of the aaa foundation for safety. dr. dinges. >> good morning. thank you for inviting me to speak at this important meeting. i'm going to begin by setting the stage for the biological effects of drowsiness that make it so terrifically dangerous when we drive. next slide, please. the first thing to remind those

listening and looking at these slides are that as near as we know right now, all animals need to sleep, and humans are no exception. sleep an essential part of our health and survival. we have to do it on a daily basis. we have to achieve healthy sleep and we need sleep that is of adequate duration to ensure that we don't have uncontrolled drowsiness and sleepiness during the daytime. this slide is just a reminder that when we don't receive adequate sleep, we tend to fall asleep very rapidly. the graph going down on the left shows that the longer we're

awake, the more rapidly we will fall asleep and the more rapidly we will transition into a stage of sleep where we cannot recover even if we're alerted. the graph on the right reminds us that the depth and intensity of that sleep is an inherent part of the sleep system attempting to recover the brain from the terrific need for sleep and to give it the sleep that is essential, and other speakers will talk about what happens to drowsiness and waking functions when you don't receive that depth of sleep. next slide. why don't people obtain enough sleep? this is the only -- the only thing i'll say here is what we now know in our modern lifestyle is that substantial portions of the population shown here in the

yellow bars on the left do not achieve even seven hours sleep a night. the bulk of the evidence in the sleep field points to the fact that once large segments of the population are sleeping less than seven hours, we get an increase in -- excessive sleepiness, accident-related sleepiness as well as obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular problems. so there are significant safety and health consequences to chronically undersleeping. yet we have large segment of the population undersleeping. the graph on the right reminds us that part of that, a major part of why people do not get adequate sleep is work and travel. they spend extra time at work, extra time getting up early to get to work, and while those may seem like normal routine

activities, they've become so problematic that they're eating up the time that one would -- should spend sleeping and they force us to compress our sleep down into a shorter and shorter period during the workweek, then people make a desperate effort to recover on the weekend but that recovery is usually inadequate. two days of extra sleep usually will not repair us. chronic sleep restriction is an inherent part of modern lifestyle and jobs for many people and that is where -- where one of the source offs problems are. you'll hear other speakers talk about sleep disorders, etc. now, we know that this is occurring in the brain. many people think it's all right to drive drowsy because it's a willful event that somehow it hasn't got anything to do with

biology and you can just will yourself to overcome it. slapping yourself in the face or turning up the radio will not prevent this from occurring. if it does prevent it, it is no more than a second or two. it will have a lasting benefit. it's not the same as sleep. the brain needs sleep. obviously, you can't sleep and drive at the same time. would you just click on this video? one of the hallmark features of the -- the sleep -- falling asleep driving is that the eyelids will close. we all know this. but we don't understand that muscles 0f our eyelids that are losing tone due to the pressure

of sleep. sleep and drowsiness not only makes our brain blink on and off and not pay attention but it also causes muscle relaxation, including the eyelids. the eyelids will come down. this is a simulator. this is not a real driving experience. we're not putting this young lady at risk. you'll see in this virginia tech film, she's falling asleep and the head dips back and the eyelids close because there's loss of muscle tone. when the eyelid the eye rolls back. you can see she almost ran off the road in the simulator. this is what we all know drowsy driving is. so many people have done it many their lives that we don't enter any -- have any trouble recognizing yes, that's what's occurring but we don't appreciate how staggeringly dangerous this is. on the left side in yellow, this young lady is working on a

vigilance task but she's been sleep deprived. on the right side she's working on the task and she isn't sleep deprived. the graphs below show you that over time, the graph on the left says that initially she works ok. as soon as we sleep deprive her halfway along that graph, up goes her lapses of attention and up go the frequency of her eyelids drooping. on the right-hand side she may be bored but she can work for hours on end without falling asleep. people who think that drowsy driving's due to just being bored when you're driving or bad scenery are wrong. it's due to you not sleeping enough. boredom is -- driving when you're not interested in what you're looking at. sleepiness and drowsiness is the pressure of the brain is trying to work. we know among all the tests that have looked at, attention in

particular and alertness are the number one affects of sleep loss. by 235r, they occur more frequently and more profoundly than the effects on memory, reasoning and many other areas. and that's best illustrated by this somewhat complicated slide. listen to these heart beats. these are actually reaction times of people when they're fully alert and pressing a button so each quick heartbeat is a fast reaction time. there's nothing wrong. we're explaining this heartbeat just to give you the point that the brain is dead as you go here. click on that top one again and shut it off and we'll click on the bottom one. ok. now, here's the drowsy driver equivalent. they start out and they're fine. as they drive along, they start to have he's lapse, that's one. that's your eyelids down.

you're not responding. you're not responding. you're not monitoring. now you're back again. no, now you're going to go again. this is the hallmark feature of sleep loss. click on than and look to the right. we know where in the brain that is. in the brain you can see the response times in the sleepy driver whereas the alert driver is steady as you go. this is that fighting sleepiness that people experience driving down the road. by the time you're doing that, you are at grave risk, you really shouldn't be behind the wheel. you should pull off. you should get some sleep, get some rest. you should have slept adequately before you drive and you're going to hear me and other speakers say that. this is the grave risk of driving.

just because you get away with it for a mile or two doesn't mean you won't van uncontrolled sleep attack in the next hour. they'll be come more and more repeated and more and more severe. they're completely unpredictable. if you can predict the moment you're going to fall asleep, you might argue, ok, i'll do something to correct it. but you can't do that. the brain does this against your will at a time when you realize, oh, my god, i realize i just slept this last period of time. you can't be operating a motor vehicle when that happens. you're begging for a crash. in fact, it takes no more than a two-second lapse of attention at 60 miles an hour with a four-degree angle of drift that's just enough loss of steering control, just relax your muscles on the steering

wheel, close your eyes for two seconds, you can completely be out of lane and off the road in four seconds. you can see how it takes very little of these lapses, these microsleeps to put you in grave danger. not to mention if you're in close traffic. one of my messages is this isn't just highway phenomena. drowsy driving, slowed reaction times are occurring in people who haven't had adequate sleep in the city. they're occurring in density traffic. the studies done by the federal government have shown that in the washington, d.c. area, they find drowsy driving occurring all over the metro area. we know there's high-risk events occurring even in traffic. this is just an illustration of the dynamics of this drowsiness. what you see in the upper graph that you don't have any of these lapses from drowsiness when you're getting normal sleep at

night on the left. as you go a night without sleep, those lapses increase. you went actually a second night without sleep, they'd go even higher. the same thing happens if you're only getting, say, four or five or even six hours a sleep a night. they get progressively worse day after day. down below you actually can see that segment of the night from midnight to 8:00 or y9 a.m. and you can see the high rate of motor vehicle crashes related to falling asleep at that time. you can see they ramp up at that time.

it doesn't mean you're safe in the middle of the day if you haven't slept the night before. you can absolutely have a drowsy driving crash at any time of day, but this shows the dynamic from one study done in north carolina of people falling asleep and you're at a particularly high danger risk through the night and especially in the morning often in the morning after the sun is up. people think they are safe because the sun is. like is not powerfully enough to override this danger. they are not the only group in society that have these crashes. young adult males up to mid 40's have a high rate. next slide, please. the study -- left, the less sleep you get, the more lapses you have every day. they are going up. on the right are how people felt about their sleepiness. click on that. what you see in the middle graph is at the bottom graph is

performance is getting worse across time. our sense of how we are doing is changing. this means you cannot actually tell how dangerous you are driving. you need to pay attention to can you do that safely? the best way to go is prevention. this makes the point that, when , we are tryingt to get eight hours in the day time and stay awake at night.

we are at risk for greater lapses of attention and it puts enormous attention -- pressure on the brain. you are at risk when you do not get adequate sleep and whenever you are awake at night. >> the functions are important to recall. . you'll see how performance deteriorates and on the left or on the middle. pilot flyingirline at night, you have a lower level of performance and you deteriorate rapidly. if you get treated for you fly during the daytime, you perform better.

it is these functions that are dangerous. you could rapidly deteriorate. you can rapidly deteriorate. you could rapidly deteriorate. just be fully alert within minutes. people cannot understand how that is. the praying -- brain cannot do an immediate task when it hasn't had enough sleep. these tasks are dangerous. a mortality rate nearly that of alcohol. very serious injuries. you fall asleep. you're no longer monitoring. you exit the roadway here and you don't engage in corrective actions to avoid hitting the pole or truck or tree. as a result, a high degree of bodily injury and mentality. almost equivalent to high blood alcohol levels. here's the good news. this is a study from walter reed. restrict people to three hours a

night in the laboratory to look at what happens. one group got seven hours. another got 10 hours. the more you sleep ahead of time, the better you can tolerate the effects of any restriction that is on your sleep period when forced to get up in the middle of the night to check on a baby or go to work. you have to get your sleep. you have to treat sleep as a high-priority item every day to prevent these its relative debts oppose these risk for drowsy driving. next slide. the brain is the organ of behavior. the brain needs help with adequate daily duration. no question about it. thousands of studies support the statement.

it is unequivocal. we know that you got to penetrate this message to the public. whether professionally or just driving to pick up children or whatever. and sleep is inadequate, the brain has a slower response and lapses into micro sleep that result in the waxing and waning of attention slowed reaction times and pose a serious crest risk. as sleepiness increases, lapses get more frequent and longer in duration. there is loss of muscle tone. contributes to a greater driving risk. want to start having this comment it won't get any better unless you get off the road. get some sleep. take some kind of countermeasure. next. as sleepiness lapses, two seconds is enough to result in you being completely off the road out of the lane. it takes little to have a catastrophe. such crashes involve bodily injury that is severe or fatality. there is little corrective

action in a timely manner. the slowed reaction times even without frequent lapses of attention could cause problems in congested traffic. even if you are not falling asleep, if your sleep be in the morning and you could have slow reaction times that will get you in trouble. finally, people are unable to judge their ability even when lapsing repeatedly. they think they are oh k. it is essential they do not drive to maintain alertness. plan your driving based on who has slept the most and is most fit. if you must drive overnight have someone else with you to watch you. have someone watch you.

don't let everyone go to sleep. the driver will go to sleep. i think that is my final message. thank you. >> thank you. our next speaker of the aaa foundation for traffic safety. >> thank you. i have been asked to talk about the prevalence of drowsy arriving on the road and in traffic crashes. in this presentation, i will be talking about recent research into the prevalence in drowsy drivers on the road both in terms of drivers falling asleep while driving as well as drivers who are highly fatigue did not asleep.

i'll also talk about studies of actual motor vehicle crashes that estimates the number and proportion of crashes involving fatigue and drowsiness. next slide. it national surveys that have been done by the national highway traffic safety administration, the cdc, traffic safety, the motoring public has been asked whether they have fallen asleep or nodded off while driving. about two out of five americans report having fallen asleep while driving at some point in their life. consistently across any study that has look at this, about 11% report having done so within the past year and approximately 4% of american drivers report having fallen asleep at the wheel within the past 30 days. if these statistics are likely to be underreported. studies have shown that a person has to be asleep on average 2-4 minutes before they realize they were just asleep. these are likely underestimates of the frequencies which people fall asleep at the wheel.

in addition, the aaa foundation in a survey we do a driving behaviors and drivers attitudes, in the past 30 days, how often have even when you retired had a hard time keeping your eyes open? more than a quarter of american drivers consistently reported

having done that at least once in the past month. 2% report having done that very often regularly. next slide. in terms of the pole of drowsiness -- toll of drowsiness, 2.4% of fatal crashes, 2% injury crashes. the statistics that these are based on were brought with a number of limitations that result in their likely being substantial underestimates of the scope of the problem. we don't have a fatigulizer. a driver who is alert and awake and unharmed and able to talk about what happened to me be willing to admit to that police that they were drowsy.

again, they may not realize or remember that they were asleep. one has to be out for 2-4 minutes he for the are likely to realize they were sleeping. in the case of more severe crashes and crashes resulting in fatalities. the driver may be unconscious or deceased. it is difficult for the police to ascertain what happened. another more subtle and more insidious limitation of the data is that in many states, the forms that police officers used to indicate what happened in a crash contains a simple series

of checkboxes to indicate whether the driver was perhaps drowsy, impaired by alcohol, angry, emotional, distracted, etc.. the when officer would indicate a driver is drowsy is by checking the locks. -- box. if the driver was an drowsy, they wouldn't check the drowsy box. unfortunately this creates a problems in interpreting the data after the fact. the way that it would be indicated the driver was not drowsy and the way it would be indicated that we don't know whether the driver was drowsy or not is exactly the same.

an empty box. next slide. i will be talking about the studies that have looked at greater depth on data to estimate the proportion and the number that involves driver drowsiness. the first study i will talk about is the one that was alluded to. in that study, they looked at vehicles in the d.c. metro area. with the researchers reviewing video that occurred looking at the signatures of drowsiness that was noted, eyelids drooping, researchers were able to estimate the level of jobs in is of drivers. in all moderate to severe driver housing us. this is a study for the bulk of the driving was done in circumstances that aren't typically associated with frequent drowsiness. another study that took a different approach to the problem was the study by dr. stutts and colleagues. researchers gathered a sample of police reported crashes. based on the data and other information and the police

reports, they developed a statistical model to predict the this is a study for the bulk of the driving was done in circumstances that aren't typically associated with frequent drowsiness. another study that took a different approach to the problem was the study by dr. stutts and colleagues. researchers gathered a sample of police reported crashes. based on the data and other information and the police

reports, they developed a statistical model to predict the likelihood that the driver was browsing -- trouser -- drowsy. the researchers applied this model to data from fatal crashes that occurred nationwide in years 2001-2003. when they did so, the estimated as many as 50% of drivers in fatal crashes were drowsy. in the author's own words, they fell in a conservative estimate. the national statistics suggested about 2% of fatal crashes involved a drowsy tribe or. they labeled it a conservative estimate. another study the gives us more

insight into the prevalence of drowsiness in crashes is the national motor vehicle causation survey some of the national highway traffic safety administration. this is a study where teams of crash investigators looked at the causes and can should bidding factors of the sample. it was severe enough that emergency services were dispatched to the scene. the study had a fairly in-depth perception of driver fatigue. this involves not only police reports of drowsy driving, the interviews by the investigators with the drivers and their family and others about whether they were fatigued at the time of the crash, work schedule, medications, etc. this is aside from video-based evidence, probably some of the strongest ascertain it we have

of drowsy driving in crashes. this study only looked at crashes that occurred between 6:00 a.m. at midnight. it did investigate crashes that occurred between midnight and 6 a.m. when as you might assume drowsy driving is significantly more prevalent. next slide. in this study, excluding the hours swing drowsy driving crashes are known to occur, researchers found 2% of drivers involved in these crashes were asleep at the time.

an additional 5% were fatigued. nearly a third of crashes were unable to assess whether the driver was fatigued or not. this was suggest as many as 3% of all crashes involved a driver who was asleep. this is only out of the 60% of crashes were researchers could ascertain that. next slide please. the last study i will talk about is the study that i did for my employer, the aaa foundation. this was a study that used the national highway traffic safety administration's national automotive sampling system. he sample crashes in which a motor vehicle is total way from the scene.

i looked at data 1999-2008. over 47,000 crashes involved over 80,000 vehicle driver's in total. data on drivers attentiveness was assessed not just from police reports, but interviews. 2% of drivers were drowsy. researchers reported 45% of cases they were not able to assess whether the driver was drowsy or not. the distinction between the driver not in drowsy and the investigators not being able to make a determination is important. i was able to use a statistical

method of multiple -- to estimate the proportion were investigators couldn't make that determination. it is a method in which you build a model using data that is related to the probability a driver will be rousing or the operability -- will be drowsy or the probability. using this model identify other cases in the data where drivers drowsiness is actually known that are the most similar to the cases you are looking at and make a random draw from the distribution of the data were drowsiness is known to estimate the drowsiness in cases where

investigators were not able to assess. next slide. that is a message the national highway traffic safety administration has used since 2001 to estimate the proportion of fatal crashes. in 45% of cases, driver drowsiness was unknown. i estimate that 4% of drivers in all crashes were drowsy. 7% of the crashes involved at least one drowsy driver. among the more severe crashes those in which an occupant was hospitalized as a result of injuries sustained, i estimate as many as a percent of the drivers were drowsy. -- 8% of the drivers were drowsy. 12% of drivers involved in fatal crashes were drowsy. 17% of fatal crashes involved at least one drowsy driver. based on the number of people killed in crashes each year, that would imply over 5000 people each year are killed in

crashes involving a drowsy driver. next slide please. a couple of comments and observations on these studies collectively. no single study can provide the answer. there is reasonable convergence across multiple studies that the proportion of crashes involving a drowsy driver a much higher than is reflected in the official statistics. a couple of trends are although

the studies with the best ascertainment are also based on some of the less representative samples of drivers in crashes, we see the study with the best ascertainment of drowsiness goes with in-depth interviews, those with video data of crashes estimates the highest proportion of crashes involving drowsiness. probably unrealistic to expect solid ascertainment or drowsiness in data that is collected by officers who arrived at the scene of the crash. on the data front, it is important to distinguish the driver was not drowsy verses where they can't make a determination. that is absent from most data we

have. to summarize, survey show as many as two out of five drivers report having fallen asleep while driving at some point in their lives. 11% of drivers admit doing that in the past year. 4% report doing that in the past month that is consistent across multiple studies by different organizations over the span of a decade. official statistics estimate 1-2% of crashes involve rousing driving began likely -- the study with the best data and research methods consistently show a much higher prevalence of drowsy driving. on the low end. on the high-end come as many as 24% involving drowsy driving as the cause or can should bidding factor.

the data tends to suggest the prevalence is on the high-end of that range. thank you. >> thank you. in your presentation, you are very clear that there are severe and safety consequences. i'm wondering if you could tell us in simple, general terms what is affect in combating fatigue. >> the primary countermeasure is adequate sleep. healthy sleep. it was your other speakers talk about what healthy and unhealthy sleep is.

occur not too far before the driving episode. sleeping one night and two days later driving with inadequate sleep. the other most commonly used way of coping with drowsiness is caffeinated beverages. there is evidence that caffeine can promote alertness, but no drug is a substitute for sleep. it is not a chemical sleep. it is forcing areas of your brain to use -- to be more alert. blocking some molecules that produce sleep in the brain. they cannot block all of it. once the pressure for sleep is very high, caffeine cannot stop drowsiness. it also doesn't last a day. you take a couple copy, it depends on how many -- how much caffeine is in the coffee and what your sensitivity is.

none of it will last in your bloodstream more than 3-4 hours at most. then you are faced with the problem of what do you do now if you are still drowsy? you will have to sleep. it won't keep you going indefinitely. it is probably the most common way people attempt to cope with sleepiness when they have to drive. it is a limited countermeasure. alas, the options are quite limited. what are the medical implications?

>> i'm also wondering if you could speak briefly on the nature of differences with respect to fatigue and sleep. what effect and problems does a post to you as a researcher? >> there are differences in how rapidly people will become impaired. everyone becomes impaired. take some people longer than others.

as had typically, we don't understand the basis for it. those who take longer to get impaired are the minority of the population. you're not even sure that there always -- it is so is the same. we don't understand what it is that makes them less of vulnerable. once you are awake too long, everyone will become impaired. even if you don't feel it, it doesn't mean fewer not experiencing drowsiness or lapses. the only way to be safe and certain is get adequate sleep. >> you cited 2009 data. i am wondering if you had a chance to look at anything more

recent and if you could comment on what it shows. >> the data from 2009 was the last data cited in official the nationalby traffic safety administration. -- those statistics are based on data that is collected annually and is presently available through 2012. the most recent data from 2012 shows that 1.6% of drivers involved in fatal crashes in 2012 were believed to be drowsy or fatigued at the time of the crash. >> what would you say is the general trend for the drowsy driving data? and, if so,rend

which direction is it heading? >> in official statistics, there does not seem to be much of a general trend. proportions ine the official statistics may have decreased slightly. as i talk about in my presentation, i believe that is a vast underestimate. i would not look to the data published in those sources for evidence of a trend or lack thereof. in the study that i conducted that looks at eta from 1990 99 1999-2008, in that data, there was not evidence of an increasing or decreasing trend in the proportion of the crashes that involved drowsiness.