the very next day they utilized the plans in order to stop the oil flow after they announced they were going to have to wait until the intercept well was in place in the late fall. a couple of months of unnecessary subjection of that oil flow. host: he is talking at the oils will in the gulf area. guest: talking about, the call to shake up after bp are very relevant here. in place for four years, she was a major official at -- as an offshore drilling regulator the

obama administration dismantled. a lot of the regulatory philosophical issues, before bp with that comes down to is how much power he gives to the industry. industry got to write a lot more in the offshore sector and that has changed because the industry has broken up and revamped. host: people die after a series of deadly accidents. oil and gas pipeline and a decade later, it has become the can-do agency p1 of the energy supporters at political who work on the story, we'll is appreciate you coming by. that is our show for today. we take our viewers live to the national press club where the chair of the senate judiciary committee will discuss the committee's agenda and upcoming actions.

[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015]

>> hi, everybody. if we are already -- all ready. welcome to the national press club. i am bob weiner of the newsmakers committee, and i will be moderating today plus his news conference with senator chuck grassley of iowa, chair of the judiciary committee to discuss actions. it is open to club members and we want to thank c-span and other media for coming today. in addition to chairing the judiciary committee, senator grassley serves on finance, budget agriculture and joint tax. cochair of the caucus and also a founding member of the senate whistleblower caucus performed in this congress.

senator grassley has pressed for judicial nominations alternatives to teens in jail courtroom cameras, antitrust drug control, human trafficking protections, and encouragement of american agriculture appeared a couple of major pieces of legislation he has authored that became law, a protection act in the medicare prescription drug benefit. he holds a record for not missing a vote for any senator in the office. he lists his occupation as a foreigner. -- farmer. he is known for his no-nonsense style and he strives for bipartisanship. he served in the house to 1980 when he was first elected to the senate and has served since. he will be running for another term. his press says his critics call him to conservative or too liberal. he is one of the few who does it

just about right. i am proud to host senator grassley today. when i was chief of staff senator grassley was a new house member on the committee. they first thing he did was to ask me to have breakfast with him a couple of times. he said, you are a liberal and i am conservative but we have a lot in common to her tort. he and the chairman worked together to abolish mandatory retirement for seniors. the major senior rights bill passed in the house and senate. despite the opposition of the big labor unions and the roundtable, it was quite an accomplishment. fast lowered 15 to 20 years when i was a spokesman for the white house drug policy office, i saw senator grassley, now in the senate, make methamphetamine and

requirement -- it plummeted in america under his leadership at the senate narcotics office -- caucus. a campaign helped cause youth drug abuse to plunge 30% in three years. and the general sends a one hello to you and thank you for all you have done. we have all seen senator grassley exposed abuse in the government. it is nonpartisan oversight at its best. and it is going and going and going. a few years ago, we are at the capital challenge and he says you're running increases your lifespan at 10 years. he joked back that yard he got back. the staff who did a great job in organizing today's event, told me he is still running. i want to say it is 10 years

after the run that you keep extending your life. i also want to thank penny, who have known for years. i want to thank john hughes, the chairman of the national press club. come and say hello. the chairman of the newsmakers committee, joann, national press club staffer. all of them healthy today's process. our national press club senior he will be taking the mike that will be used for questions by the audience. let's see. also, is. here? -- is eric here? if you can stand, they have had several months at an internship

and have done a spectacular job. [applause] this tony here? no. ok. my wife, if you would raise your hand the george washington university medical center, from iowa. the senator is at the center of the action. having sent to the floor the recent human trafficking law and the loretta lynch nomination for starters, we just learned loretta lynch is being confirmed today at 10:30 this morning. sworn in. that is right. if time permits, he could discuss the rationale for the timing also the collection, which the press recently reported you are at the center of. a swirl of activity at the club today on that. maybe how that relates to edward snowden, a complicated ring.

executive actions he did generate. and you will solve all of this what to do about police after american killings, overall minority disparities, teens in jail, judicial confirmations immigration, and you get to do all of that in an hour. we wanted to hear about all your alternatives to teens in jail. we understand you had news on that. senator grassley will speak for 20 or 30 minutes. i will moderate the questioning. please identify yourself and your organization. just a quick note, on may 7, we will bring in the director of aging on the national institute

of health who will talk about a fascinating sus -- subject, whether human lifespan extended in our lifetime. and what doesn't look like in the future and what are the reasons for that? senator grassley it is an honor to have you today and the floor is yours. i do want to mention senator grassley is a little under the weather today. there was a possibility he may not be a will to come because of his cold so we all really appreciate him being here on that basis. senator grassley: i seldom get sick so it is surprising to me as well. thank you for the introduction. good morning, everybody. glad to be reminded you're from iowa. i became chairman of the senate judiciary committee in january.

pundits made a big deal about the fact i'm a first nonlawyer in the history of the senate to be chairman of that committee. i would like to think of the fact i'm a nonlawyer, that that is a way to inject a little bit of iowa common sense into the chairmanship. most people do not realize the judiciary committee is the one committee i served on continuously since i have been collected into the senate. many committees dive deep into a narrow set of issues that are important, of course, but not always on the forefront of the mind of all americans. the dish area committee, by contrast hester's diction over a broad set of issues that are often fundamental to our national identity, issues sewn into the great and diverse fabric of american democracy.

many of the topics we debate invoke deeply held views. the committee oversees a judicial system that seeks justice for the injured and the accused. it upholds america's's reputation as a welcoming matt to the world by ensuring our immigration system is inviting to illegal immigrants who share a love of freedom and respect for the rule of law. it fosters ingenuity and innovations that grow our economy by deciding the rights of intellectual property. he holds the key to the constitution, the document that is able blueprint for a thriving democracy and is a guardian over individual rights and our

liberties. the founding charter of freedom helps guide america through our darkest hours, and paves the way to our most triumphant achievements. arguably quite like nothing else, our constitution promise of justice and equal rights under the law offers hope for the victims of injustice in our society. as chairman of the judiciary committee, i believe our panel bears a unique responsibility to uphold that promise for all americans, for americans struggling on the downside, for troubled youth who wonder if the struggle to climb america's is lateral -- ladder of opportunity and to stay on the right side of the law is even worth it hear it for the innocent victims who see

the government as a big goliath for the poor defendants wondering if they truly have a chance when they appear before the courts. i see my chairmanship as an opportunity to help secure america's's blessings of freedom and liberty. the words we the people applies to all americans. i cannot think of a better platform to embrace and expand opportunities to victims of injustice fan on the senate judiciary committee. i plan to make the most use of the next two years of the 114th congress to make a difference in the lives of americans. let's start with the youngest of those facing the criminal justice system. the juvenile justice and delinquency prevention act was

originally enacted in 1974. while it has been reauthorized several times since then, and has received funding, it has not really been revisited and updated since 2002. this is a program that not only helps prevent at risk youth from entering the criminal justice system but also, one of the miners already in that system. i am leading a reauthorization effort in a bipartisan way, the white house of rhode island. we introduced a bill last commerce to start a starting point. last week, we held a hearing in the judiciary committee to focus on fixing issues within the juvenile justice grant program that whistleblowers brought to

my attention. whistleblowers testified to widespread mismanagement and failures. they cited instances of fraud and neglect and core requirements for these taxpayer-funded programs. the justice department's negligence relates to an implementation of four criteria states must meet in order to receive funds. according to these whistleblowers, a few states meet all the grant eligibility criteria. but the office of justice program, which administers the program, turns its head the other way when states are not in compliance. worse yet states know about the blanket amnesty. apparently they did not even

try to follow the law. after i wrote four letters on this issue, the justice department finally owned up to some of these problems. they admitted having a policy in place way back since 1997 that allowed states to obtain several funds in violation of the law. they assured me they will end the practice. other issues remain. we are going to start writing these wrongs this week. the white house and i plan to introduce juvenile justice and legacy prevention act, reauthorization, and this week our bill will respond to issues highlighted by whistleblowers at last week's hearing by increasing accountability and oversight in the office of administration of the law.

the bill also seeks to improve the treatment of youth under the act, improving conditions for juveniles, and incorporating new science on adolescent development, we are also looking to update programs already established by the law and authorize funding for a five-year time. another reform area has been in the press both nationally and in my state of iowa, through the writing of the register. investigations by journalists and civil liberties advocates have exposed perverse incentives that have nudged enforcement of these laws way off kilter with basic fairness.

these laws are important crime-fighting tools that enable law enforcement to seize cash or property considered linked to illness -- the theory behind this is to choke off the funding stream used and that could be drugs human trafficking, money laundering, among other things. i agree it is a worthy an important public policy to help for the crime this way. it seems that sometimes, this tool is increasingly being used as a funding source for the government with thin regard of people's's civil rights. i'm working to draft bipartisan reform to fix the flaws. for starters, the quid pro quo and funding should be limited to

law enforcement agencies operation should not be funded based upon assets. in addition, real procedural reforms must be enacted for people whose assets are seized, including prompt timelines for government action, and the ability to challenge promptly before a judge and individuals who cannot afford a lawyer, to guide them through the system should be provided one. part of addressing the problem lies in reversing the recent decision in the supreme court that allows the government to prevent people from showing that they need access to their funds for the simple reason of defending themselves by hiring a lawyer. we also need to codify changes in the use of the program, and structuring cases were small business owners like one that

got national attention, iowa's carol, getting unfairly caught up in forfeiture for depositing money in the bank without indication of any underlying crime. a poor lady running a small respite that did everything cash wise, deposited the funds and she was suspected of laundering money, because she was near $10,000. i am also looking at an area of law to help defendants not being provided with consult, as the constitution's sixth amendment requires. that amendment -- it calls for any defendant charged with miss demeanors, faces a positive jail sentence to have a lawyer appointed to represent them. the supreme court established

this floor -- this rule for more than 40 years ago. we are learning states and localities regularly failed to comply with this requirement. as a result, potentially innocent individuals plead guilty to crimes. they also accrue a criminal record, which causes them adverse consequences, including difficulty finding a job, and cradle criminal history -- greater criminal history that would be considered in any future sentencing determination. some misdemeanors are treated as felonies in the legal system if a person becomes a repeat misdemeanor offender. if some of those earlier misdemeanor convictions were un-counseled somebody might be convicted of a felony who did not actually commit a felony. the committee will convene a hearing in the coming weeks to

explore the problem and look at potential solutions. along the same lines let me explain another issue we are working to address. we are seeing studies that show 32% of american adults have criminal records if arrest records are included in the figure. it means a lot of people are often put in unfair situations because those records are sent to the federal government for inclusion in a database and searched for background checks. if an employer uses a database for hiring purposes, the records could be inaccurate. the database includes arrest records that never resulted in a conviction. it is not fair that an arrest not resulting in a conviction is included in a criminal

background check. while there is a process i which people can contest their records, being in the database there are flaws in the process that need to be looked and changed. over the last several months, i've been accused of being a roadblock to sentencing reform. let me be very clear on this point. i have told my colleagues and also had a discussion directly with the president of the united states that i would like to sit down and talk about how we could move forward. i am ready to address some of those issues. what i'm not willing to do as an across-the-board cut in mandatory minimum spirit i agree some should be cut, but i also think some should be raised. let me give you examples. with a heroine epidemic strangling some american communities, and white-collar

criminals getting paltry sentences, the last thing we need is to take away a tool that law enforcement and prosecutors used to get the bad guys. let me end with this. when i first became chairman, i talk a lot about the dual roles at the legislative branch. our constitutional responsibilities do not just include writing laws. we are also responsible for ensuring those laws are faithfully implemented and carried out by the executive branch. it is something i do not think we in congress do enough of anybody who knows my efforts understands why the judiciary committee has such a heavy focus on this vital function of the legislative ranch. i think i have a reputation as someone who does equal oversight of both republican and democrat

administrations. i want to make it clear this is not about the current residents of 1600 pennsylvania. the previous of menstruation was not fond of my letters and oversight either. we need to keep the federal government working for the american people and not the other way around. after immersing myself in the legislative and oversight jurisdiction of the senate finance or senate judiciary committee for the last 34 years i look forward to chant being -- championing these ideas or others and making eye -- the difference in the lives of americans are i am happy to take your questions now. bob: and you will make it big -- a big difference, senator. thank you, especially for coming under the conditions of your voice and your cold or you did great.

-- cold. you did great. why don't we tackle the elephant in the room. then we can get into everything else. what is your feeling on the delay of the lynch confirmation until just today? wasn't it sort of annoying to you that national leadership decided they would play the politics of using one bill to force the other, and six months of a delay in the confirmation of attorney general? what is your thinking on that? general grassley -- senator grassley: some of this will be a push back of the political party. i want you to know that as part of this. it was a long time, but let's subtract two months out of that time because this administration and the democratic congress in november and december could have

decided to do that. i also admit that we republicans said it would all be held older, but they had a bigger agenda that they were glad to be held over because they wanted to get 13 judges approved and a couple of pieces of legislation out of committee while they were still in the majority. that is their choice, but i do not think republicans should be blamed for the first two months. they could have gotten the job done. there is no eu could have filibustered it. -- no way you could have filibustered it. let's go over my role as committee chairman we would have the nomination up for consideration a second time because all of these nominations go back to the white house. they come back up. as senator leahy asked me, i

said on january 20 seventh we had the hearing on january 27. i said we will be put on the agenda as soon as all of the written responses to our questions come back. i forget just which week that was, but then there was a week of congressional recess that came in between. i citizens we get to that recess we would voted out of committee. so we did that. i kept my promise to the democrat leadership of the judiciary committee, that we were going to move her when i said we would move her. it gets out to the floor of the senate and at that particular point, it is not chuck grassley who decides when the agenda comes up. it is someone else. i except -0-- i accept the

majority leader's deciding when it comes up. i object to it. after the human trafficking bill came up, it got out of committee 19-0. then the democrats decide to filibuster a bill that came out 19-zero. as long as the filibuster when on we could not get to the nomination. why filibuster a bill that came out committee 19-0 come i do not know. but that is what held it up and that is all i can say. when it came up in the senate, other senators, not mine. bob: i will go in order of a few media here. chris, asked a question if you would like.

chris: thank you, senator. i want you to just comment on some of the issues that are happening in various minutes of colonies across the country. baltimore, your general reaction to it and what you think needs to be done by congress or on the local level? general grassley: i do not have a specific answer. i am not one of the people who would like to federalize everything. i would use it as an example of what is wrong with people in law enforcement. most of them highly trained and i'm not the guy facing some person. i hate to second-guess what

people i expect to protect me might be doing something right or wrong but we are going to have some discussion at the staff level and see whether or not anything be done, and you could maybe ask me in a month or two and i would be glad to respond to your question more appropriately. it may be we will do not decide -- will not decide to do anything. >> is there anything you might be looking at, at least in the early stages? senator grassley: whether to federal relies -- federalize, to give a presumption when a minority is killed by policeman that that should institute a federal intervention. bob: an interesting answer. why don't we go to bloomberg.

still here? do you have a question? >> can you talk about any plans to reintroduce the political intelligence will? you offered it as an amendment it was added in the senate and then taken out of the final bill. where is that now? senator grassley: i still have conversations on that. i think she has introduced a bill in the house of representatives. i did not introduce the bill originally appeared it was an amendment to another bill. i do not think i have to introduce a bill to show my interest in it. i think the people involved in political intelligence got a lot smarter now. that don't me don't need legislation, but it is much more difficult to sort out what they

are doing. it was very obvious when i got the amendment through the united states senate. >> you mean it is more complicated to try to come up with legislation? >> not only that, but a lot of things he had done in congress, particularly on oversight when you have got a good working relationship between journalism and those of us in office, it really helps to get things done. it was highlighted quite a bit and was not difficult to sell that transparency ought to be involved here because transparency brings accountability. it is not quite as obvious now as it was then. bob: why don't we go to "the washington times." senator grassley: we will get omaha. do not worry. that is ok.

question is bouncing off what you said a couple of minutes ago, preliminary stages of deciding whether to federalize when a minority is killed by policeman, are you suggesting we should do away with internal investigations, that they cannot be trusted? that is what i hear a lot. senator grassley: my answer was some of the things turn out there for consideration i do not think i would do away with internal investigations, as long as there are roles for oversight for the justice department and most of these are in a role. sometimes the justice department stepped in and sometimes they have not. you already have federal oversight of that. >> i degree. you -- i agree.

something else we also see if there is a friction now between the police and the department of justice, especially after, as eric holder made in ferguson. i've heard about this as well. can you speak to some of the friction now? senator grassley: i do not think it is a question of doing things differently. you do not throw gasoline on a fire. bob: the senator from omaha, you said? there we go. senator grassley: he just got engaged here. >> you mentioned possibly after you guys look at this at the

staff level, and option might be doing nothing. how concerned are you about the level of anger out there on these incidences and the protests you would see. how that be seen if congress does not take action, and who is it up to then? senator grassley: you have asked me to do exactly what chris has to read i cannot be more specific than what i am. i just cannot be. i think it is something you have got to think about and not have hasty action. it doesn't mean we will have to take action. but i think common sense among law enforcement. but i'm not one to pile on police. when the decision has to remade and you are not there, but some of the stuff used young television is very nerve-racking, and very

difficult to say, even when you do not have murders, minorities but you have got a policeman chasing somebody that probably did a misdemeanor, we have had these cases in iowa. someone passes hands are up in an automobile accident. you have got to use common sense in your work as a policeman. bob: ok. please identify your name and organization. >> e mentioned the active little while ago and another part of that was to reinstitute parts of the on a services fraud overturned and the house took that out at the last minute. do you see that coming out anywhere going forward? very close to you reading the indictment, a lot of attorneys are telling me it is very

difficult for the justice department to bring some of these cases because the court narrowed fraud. thoughts there? i spoke to it -- senator grassley: i spoke to it in my remarks. white-collar crime is being soft pedals. -- soft peddled. intended to increase white-collar crime. it is an area we are looking at to make sure there is more equity in the area. that is one of the areas i am suggesting maybe we needed increase in mandatory minimums. yes. classical. i was wondering, do you believe with the passage of the whistleblower protection act there is enough legislation now on the books to adequately

address those issues, as long as implementation is done correctly, or do you believe additional legislation is needed? senator grassley: i would not rule out additional legislation. i go back to i think carrying out the spirit of the laws we arty have. it is like i told people in judiciary committee last week. i said a perfect example, we had two whistleblowers testify. are they going to be punished for testifying? one of them is still in a position with nothing to do. i said to the assistant attorney general, this is exactly what is wrong. it reminded me of the grandfather of all whistleblowers.

he is testify before congress and then in the nixon administration. mix in --nixon did not like it. he said, "fire the s.o.b." then when he got his job back, he was up in the attic of the pentagon. last week, there was an example. the agency does not matter. his move from their own office to the closet, you know, the message out there is, there is a great deal of peer pressure going along. do not make us look bad. all contrary to the principles involved in the whistleblower protection act. i asked every president of united states ought to have a

rose garden ceremony honoring whistleblowers. from the top of government to the bottom, that whistleblowers is legitimate. if we did that, we would have 3000 whistleblowers come out of the woodwork. that is what you want. assistant attorney general. you have got all of these. you cannot know what is going on. if you have got somebody telling you something is wrong, you ought to do something about it. if you do not, you come to us and then get punished in violation of the law, even in violation of a specific law that says you do not get punished for testifying before congress. we all work for the same taxpayer. so i do not think you need any more law. some court decisions you may have to overwrite that is bad

but you have got to have people in the bureaucracy just do their job. the job is, if something is not right, change it. but was a lowers the government to do what is right and what the law requires and how the money should be spent. bob: let me jump back in because it begs discussion of another element in the room -- elephant in the room. edward snowden considers himself a whistleblower and considers himself patriotic. he says he went through the process and knew he would be prosecuted, so he felt, he says and those who write about him say, that he could not do it any other way. as a result of what he did congress and the courts and the white house have made significant changes, though the legislation is still pending in

terms of accepting or rejecting. many in the white house press corps feel it is not the substance of the calls, but the listing of the people in the calls, your friends and sources, the problem in the book collections. there is that side of the election. because edward snowden broke the law, is he a whistleblower, or is he someone who was actually simply an illegal criminal? it is a difficult question. i do not even know. senator grassley: right now, the latter. the legislation got to the house of representatives which would apply whistleblowing laws to national security people because they are exempt now from whistleblower protection laws. he could have gone the whistleblower route. but when he did not have that, he violated the law. you can suffer the consequences

when you violate the law. bob: ok. >> hello. what are the prospects for getting legislation passed to address litigation abuse, and he see it going a two-pronged attack dealing with the letters and the actual post-filing kinds of issues? senator grassley: it will be more comprehensive than just dealing with demand letters. it is getting close to a final agreement and maybe in two or three weeks, we will be introducing a bill. maybe before that. it will be comprehensive, but it will not be like the house bill. it will have some of the house provisions in. but for example, there will not be a presumption and probably less strict on pleading and discovery.

the letters may be about the same in the case of demand letters. that is a little more controversial. but to be -- the most important thing is, you want to know who is suing you and you need to know how your patent is being violated, you see. bob: front row and we will swing back around. >> your leadership introduced the patriot re-authorship last week. questions on whether these straight no added safeguards could pass the senate. would you put an alternative through your committee at this point? i know you're talking to intel leaders. i wonder if there have been any -- senator grassley: i am still talking to members of the intelligence committee.

for a long time, my staff and i were talking and senators were involved in those negotiations. i decided to not go along with what the house has put in. maybe the house is going to drop that bill last week and they did not drop it. i would have to say it is pretty much in flux at this point. i am still seeing what we could do with a compromise between judiciary and intelligence. bob: either order. click a two-part question on the same issue. can you talk about the prospects for possible immigration bills that may be coming through, and part two, and you're prepared remarks, you talk about other issues besides immigration. is it fair to say those issues would take a high priority? senator grassley: you know how

it is in the united states senate. getting bipartisan bills is pretty important. on all the other issues you are talking about, we're trying to take off from where we left off last year, things that did not get done last year, moving along that line. juvenile justice reforms is another example. i did not make it clear my opening remarks, but i did say almost from january that i was going to wait until i passed a bill to it was a matter of efficiency. passed a bill or bills, i do not need to pass everyone of those bills. it would trigger us may be doing something. but we work for three months on that because years ago and in the house did not do anything.

so i figured i want to use my time and the committee's time where we could accomplish something. rather than spending three or four months on immigration and have it die in the house. i think the house might act, but there is a feeling around town that the house may not do anything. then you could understand i would spend a lot of time that could be spent, and probably the president did not sign that project. >> going to the voting rights act, there was a thing last year introduced, and again this year. do you have any intention of bringing voter rights act fixed to the committee? now that you have gotten control to both houses what about cameras to the supreme court? senator grassley: it depends on

what you want to fix if you want to fix. if you want to fix more minorities voting, more are already voting. the supreme court throughout the section of the voting rights act, if there is some other reason for being involved in doing something for the voting rights act, i will take a look at it but it seems to me it has got to be different than the original of the voting rights act. in the last 50 years, it has made great progress. >> what about supreme court cameras in the courtroom? senator grassley: i am sorry. i guess i did not hear that. let's hope the bill will get passed. i'm a firm believer in it. our two justices said they would rather, over their dead body. it happens i do not want those

two supreme court justices to die, but i believe that we could and hands people's understanding of the court system by having the supreme court, very much and so on. it divides both republican and democrats. a bipartisan group to get it pass in a bipartisan group against it here not quite as easily printable. >> senator grassley, i thank you for being here. i had lobbied congress.

my name is jane. i'm a freelance journalist. we were working for the federal legislation on whistleblowers. one of the issues that came up and i bought you with your recent investigation. private universities are recipients of a huge amount of federal tax dollars. and yet grant recipients who blow the whistle are not protected. i myself amongst another group of scientists, i lobby congressmen. we were disenfranchised, lost. rear and jobs. at least $400,000 were put into training. because i stood up for waste fraud, and abuse and fabrications come falsification of data and all of that, we lose

our careers and there is nowhere to go in the private sector. can you tell us if there is any hope for translating whistleblower protection at the private university level where federal tax dollars are involved? senator grassley: we have done a lot of times with the private sector, whether it is nonprofit or for-profit him it would not make much difference. we have legislation. it is not general legislation. if we had that, you would be affected. a lot of times, we get legislation passed, wall street reform, where risk -- whistleblowers get protection. i would be willing to look at that. bob: other questions, hands raised? great. clients hello. i am with the union of concerned

scientists. i have another whistleblower question. which is, the military whistleblower system is not as strong as it should be. there are some efforts to strengthen that. public health employees including scientists. i wondered if you considered supporting efforts this year to strengthen the military whistleblower protection act? senator grassley: i will be glad to look at it. i wonder if you could be any more specific than a member of the military has a right under law already, to talk about congressman, if they want to? can you do better than that? obviously, the senator probably has got a way to do it but i cannot speak to her specifically. but again, you get back to something are you going to look

or something by passing the law? getting these laws the way they were intended to be carried out. bob: ok. other questions? answer raised. >> a quick one. i was just wondering. president obama renominated -- to be head of the federal regulations authority. i was wondering i believe your committee looks at that. is there any schedule, she has been authority for a number of years. is her confirmation on schedule? senator grassley: we will have a hearing next week but i do not know whether she is on that. we usually have four or five at one time. i do not know if she is on that list were not. i want you to know we take them

up the way they come up to us. particularly, it is true of judges, as an example. the priorities are what we received from the white house. >> you getting from the democrats -- what is your plan this year and how fast you are getting them to the floor? >> this year, there is no change. but i suppose, come july of 2016 there will probably be cut off after july, because you would allow those judges to be filled by a new president. were you asking judicial nominations?

>> yes, they said you only have done two this years. -- this year. but in terms of open to that point, how many do you expect a week, or how will you handle it? senator grassley: we will handle them on the same basis we have. one thing you want to remember, and this gets back to the question he asked me number one. the answer i gave there, they decided they did get them approved. those went back to the white house and carried over. they would have been approved by now. they changed the rules after

election generally judges do not get approved at that point. they go over to the new congress. i kind of resent the fact they are saying we do not pull out the number of judges they did. if you look overall just over 300 judges have been approved by republicans under this president. only two have disapproved. you're in a situation compared to what bush had approved at this time, 270 something, as an example. i think the numbers we could talk about are very positive. bob: in the back again. >> i had a follow-up question. going back one more time to you are in the process of thinking

about how to deal with minorities being killed by policeman, there are a lot of minorities killed by policeman and i lived in baltimore. 20 of officers. i wonder if doj might struggle with that kind of a large-scale undertaking? senator grassley: what was the question? bob: would doj struggle with the undertaking of a large number of killings, is that your question? >> right. senator grassley: you're talking about six or seven different states in the last months. the justice department has the legal authority to do it and they have the responsibility to do it if they feel the federal law has violated and they could investigate. they already decided to get involved in some and some the decided not to get involved. i made application to the justice department for a lawyer

for the family in des moines who are not minority, but there some was drowned when he was he wasn't properly tied into his life jacket and he drowned. they would like to have a federal investigation. i can't make a decision for the attorney general. it's an awful decision he's going to have to make. i have been involved in a promoting the federal investigations. >> we have one or two at most questions. >> i wanted to follow-up on sentencing reform. senators ohchr and rand paul are pushing for that issue.

the united states leads the country in people in prison. a lot of people are in there for nonviolent offenses. you said you wanted to talk to the white house. do you think this bigger issue of sentencing reform will move this year? grassley: i want to sit down and talk to them. i do know how far it has aggressive this point. i am willing to do some legislation in that area. >> i think we will take one more question if there is one. final question. >> last year we spoke about the need for beneficial ownership law. since then, the u.k. has passed

a law toward that end. i did not know if you had any plans to try to push that or make that a priority. grassley: what's the law? >> it would basically create a registry of an official owners for corporations in the united kingdom. grassley: i don't know if the issue is the same for the united states. i think it's perfectly legitimate or it you need to know who is running a company. transparency brings accountability. >> senator grassley, thank you for a wonderful presentation. it was a lot of fun. i think we covered every issue on that list and we did it in an hour.

thank you very much. we are adjourned.

>> if you missed any of the discussion with senator grassley, you can find it on www.c-span.org. later, an executive nominations or nasa. at noon it, coverage of the white house course on density dinner from saturday, including the red carpet arrivals and remarks by the president and comedian cecily strong. the supreme court will hear cases on gay marriage. this could pave the way for same-sex couples to marry in all 50 states. more than 30 states and the district of columbia allow same-sex marriage while it is banned in about a dozen others. you can find the case on the

c-span networks. we will take your calls. we will bring that to you at 4:00 p.m. tomorrow afternoon. live to the department of justice for the swearing-in ceremony for loretta lynch as the 83rd attorney general. vice president joe biden will perform the swearing-in. she was approved last week. she is expected to deliver remarks during the ceremony.

>> we are waiting as people come into the room it. we are waiting vice president joe biden who will perform the swearing-in of loretta lynch as the 83rd u.s. attorney general. she was confirmed last week by the senate after taking longer the last seven attorneys general combined. her confirmation was held up

another issue, abortion language in a human trafficking bill. she was able to get a vote and was passed to the senate last week. she succeeds eric holder who officially stepped down on friday. we expect to hear from her during the ceremony. it should be starting shortly.

>> we are just waiting for the swearing-in of the next attorney general. she will succeed eric holder who stepped down on friday. she will be the first african-american woman. she waited longer for a confirmation vote than the last seven attorneys general combined. she was confirmed last week in the senate by a vote of 56 to 43. there were 10 republicans making that possible. we expect the vice president to perform the swearing-in and we expect to hear from miss lynch herself.

>> the ceremony is expected to

start any moment. it was scheduled for 11:00. the house will be out for a session. >> life resident of the united states joe biden. [applause] [applause] vice president biden: i first

stepped into this room during the nixon administration. ira member walking into this holding and inking about the majesty of this place and how much we rely on it. for all of our basic rights and protections. your whole family is here today. i hope you will forgive as we used to say in the senate a point of personal privilege. i am so happy to meet your dad. dad, stand up. [applause] this is a man who never thought it paid to be silent in the face of oppression and prejudice. so many people so many people not only in your home state of north carolina and into the country ou so much, not just for

your wisdom but the courage it took back in those days to speak out as you did. a baptist minister who always thought his children that anything is possible. think about that are in a lot of his teller children that, but in the face of jim crow in north carolina, raising a lovely, bright young woman as well as her brother and saying anything anything is possible. the truth of the matter was, he not only taught it, he fought for it. as i understand, he made it clear they had to work for it as well. taking young loretto to the courthouse to see important cases was in those days fairly

innovative. why does he have his young daughter with him in the courthouse? at the local library, he would drop her off where there was some security. she was surrounded by all those works, just an incredible love of learning and language. this is an incredible moment. a baptist minister who preached during the citizens in greensboro finds himself 50 years later with his daughter in this magnificent room, now leading the march to a more perfect union. this is something he fought or his whole life and still fights for. it's about time. it's about time this woman is being sworn in.

[applause] it's about time. remember what she is to say? i'm tired of being tired. we got tired of this weight. use showed such grace and humility during this process. this is a woman who is incredibly qualified, just like eric holder whom i have known for years. he is among one of the finest attorneys general we have had. he has been in this environment such of political hostility he has stood his ground on a principal and he has been right. [applause]

the reason he was always so nice to me is he was on the committee to choose vice president. he owed me for what he did. that is a joke, press. that is a joke. for the past six and a half years eric set next to me in cabinet meetings. there is a protocol where each seat is. you will sit on my left during those cabinet meetings. eric sat there and i do know how many meetings we have had in the situation room.

he served the department with distinction and our country with honor and i thank him and his wife and his family. he has a beautiful family of brilliant kids. [applause] i want to thank them for their service. i have confidence that loretta lynch will succeed -- exceed the high standards. she is cut from the same cloth. they embody the mantra of their predecessor, the man after whom this building is named. " the purpose of life is to contribute to making things better." five generations your brother

is also a apt is mr. -- baptist minister. your dad taught you to stand up for what's right and speak out for what's just and get up when you get knocked down and move on. if there is anything you need to know about loretta lynch, she excelled in everything she has done. she has never been limited by lower expectations of others. she has always exceeded the expectations set for herself or it she was at the top of her class in high school. she decided she wanted to go to harvard. she did well as in this hiring longline your. for 30 years she has been a fair-minded independent lawyer and prosecutor.

she has shown the resolve to gile -- jail terrorists mobsters, and gang members. she rooted up public corruption. she summoned determination to bring down a financial rosters and child abusers. she has shown a dogged pursuit to bust human trafficking rings that she is encountered. she is shown in annual commitment to the rule of law and basic human right. she forged striving for accountability in the crucible of genocide in rwanda. as a top federal prosecutor, she has worked with and learn from law enforcement officers and. you are going to have a great partner in this one, director.

she has unimpeachable credibility to strengthen relations between law enforcement and communities. people often say that i trust those people who arrive at the right decision not through an intellectual examination of the argument but when it's starts there got and goes to their heart and is articulated by a fine mind. that is who this woman is. that is how loretta gets it right. the president and i can't start -- wait to start working with her. she will enhance the capacity to combat cyber attacks and cybercrime.

she will prosecute those who prey on the most in need of our protection. she will continue to lead with her humble yet fierce determination to stand up for what is right, do what is just and not yield to anyone. i will close with this. i imagine being the daughter of an english teacher, my angelou's words have never been far away from her. my angelou once said, " if someone shows you who they are leave them. if someone it shows you who they are, believe them. " it's found. she has shown us her entire life who she is. believe her. i believe her and the president

leaves are and all of the people in this department will believe her. you have shown who you are and everything you've done. you've upheld the values of the oath you are about to take. we believe you. to the staff of the department of justice, you are the best of the best and with loretta, you have the best of the best as your leader. all the qualities she brings to the job of attorney general are because of what she has learned as a federal prosecutor. she is one of you. to the american people who are blessed with another remarkable public servant to lead this department, i am now going to swear u.n. as the -- swear

you in. the whole family, come on up here. you are going to stand here. i want to put your left hand on the bible and raise your right hand. i -- loretta lynch: i will support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies foreign and domestic. i will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. i take this obligation freely without any mental reservations

or purpose of evasion. i will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which i'm about to enter. so help me god. vice president biden: congratulations. [applause] [applause] [applause] loretta lynch: here we are.

i have to say as i looked out on all of you gathered today it seems like such an understatement to say my heart is full. it is full of the most deep and profound gratitude. i must thank so many people who made it possible for me to stand here. i have to thank the president for his faith in me and asking me to lead the department love. mr. vice president, thank you for your comments today. thank you for your support and your wise counsel through this process. i have to thank senator schumer and senator leahy. thank you so much for being here. thank you for your support not just today but over the years and doing what i thought was

impossible, making the senate a welcoming place for me and my family. thank you so much. thanks to my wonderful family. we are quite the force multiplier. many of you have come to know my father to this process. he has been in every hearing and every vote. it did not just start now. i room or looking up -- remember looking up and seeing him in the gallery at my first trial. he was there for everyone. he has encouraged me in all things, even when my choices were not ones he would have made for me. he has been the best of fathers and i thank him. [applause] i hope you know that without

him, i would not be standing here before you today having just been sworn in as the 83rd attorney general of the united states of america, just one week after his 83rd birthday. [applause] my mother could not be here today, but she is never far from my thoughts here it she grew up in a world where she was told what she could not do. or who she could not be. she knew that she could soar. she did. she raised a daughter she told whatever the dream, to be a lawyer, a prosecuting, or the attorney general, of course you can. i thank her as well. i have to think my wonderful husband who has supported all of

my choices in my dreams. i would not trade his love and support for all the riches in the world are in a to me, they are all the riches of the world. [applause] thanks to my colleagues and friends here in the department of justice in the eastern is to give new york and beyond. tremendous thanks go to people who could not be here today, the thousands of people, many of whom i never met personally, who expressed their support through this process. to the churches and schools who wrote letters and made calls two people on the street who stopped me and sometimes said just a word or two please know that those words made all the difference to me as i traveled this road and i thank you.

i thank you as i prepare to join the outstanding people of this department of justice. it has been the honor of my life and a privilege of my profession to have stood a shoulder to shoulder with you twice before. you are the ones who make real the promise of justice and redress for all americans. i am honored beyond words to step into this larger role today as your attorney general as we continue the core work of our mission, the protection of the american people. all of us at the department are here because at some point we said, i want to be a lawyer. if i want to be a law enforcement officer. i want to be a federal agent. i want to be someone's hero. at the heart of that, whether attorney or agent, staff or

principal, is the desire to leave the world a better place for us having been part of it. the challenge in that for all of us that love this department and the law is to use the law to that end. to not just represent the law and enforce the law, but to use it to make real the promise of america, the promise of fairness and equality and liberty and justice for all. i have been reminded that we are all just here for a time, whether it's in this building or on this earth. the values we hold here will live on long after we have left the stage. it's our responsibility and our mission while we are here to breathe life into them and imbue them with the strength of our conviction and the weight of our efforts. i know this can be done. i am here to tell you that if a little girl from north airline

who used to tell her grandfather in the field to lift her up on the back of his meal so she could see way up high -- mule so he could -- she could see way up high, we can do anything. [applause] [applause] we can imbue our criminal justice system with both strength and fairness for the protection of those victims and the rights of all. we can restore trust and faith in our laws and in those of us who enforce them. you can protect the most

vulnerable among us and the scourge of modern-day slavery so antithetical to the values forged in blood in this country. we can protect the growing cyber world and we can give those in our care protection from terrorism and the security of their civil liberties. we will do this as we have accomplished all things great and small. working together and moving forward and using justice as our compass. i cannot wait to begin that journey with all of you. i thank you for being here today. not just in this room, but in my life over the years. thank you so much. i look forward to working with you as we make real the manifest promise of this, our department of justice. thank you. [applause]

>> loretta lynch is the new attorney general. tomorrow, the supreme court takes up same-sex marriage cases. you can hear the recorded oral arguments. we will have it at 4:00 on c-span3. >> c-span is leased to present the winning entries in the student cam documentary competition. it is the annual cap that encourages middle and high school students to think critically about issues that affect the nation. students were asked to create a documentary based on the theme the three branches and you.

mckinley layer is what our first prizewinners. her entry focused on federal funding for natural resource management. >> if you live in tulsa, you are going to drive along riverside drive grade you are going to see this river. the majority of the time, it's

empty. this little stretch is where we paddle for 100 feet each direction. we need 18 minutes of depth to paddle safely. today, there is half a foot, which means most of the riverbed is dry. there is no water. >> and also impacts the community asked that he, recreationally, and economically. >> development is important. one thing people forget is to move from other places to tulsa. they want to move where they can enjoy life it's something that is often overlooked when you look at how we can encourage people to come in with profitable businesses that are offering jobs. >> there are studies showing the

correlation between outdoor deck or -- recreation or quality of life. people want to live where they have something to do. >> the river is a big economic stimulus forest. it completes the your. >> we want to feel the sun we want to feel the air. we want to be in contact with nature. >> healthy lifestyles and it active population are so valuable. having water in the river would benefit. these parks are along the arkansas a and people expect to see water. >> many people have put the blame on the army corps of engineers which manages the dam. >> but some water in the river? we try to make releases that are

going to minimize negative impacts. >> it is for flood control and navigation and fish and wildlife. >> the primary reason our lakes is flood risk management. all the other things are important. hydropower recreation >> we must move very carefully and thoughtfully and delivered late as we look to the prospect of trying to put water in the river >> having more water would have impact. many of these benefits are made possible through the reform and development act. this gives them the flexibility to work with states and local communities to manage the river.

>> the first bill i will sign is the water resources development act. this will put americans to work, modernizing our modern -- water infrastructure. >> it gives the corps of engineers the authority to look out for flood control and other things having to do with the waterways. i look and i see the opportunities that we haven't also that we are not doing. >> when releasing water, the court and must consider how much they let out. they must schedule the releases carefully to account for the wildlife of the area and prevent flooding. the releases are often minimal. when the downstream portion of the river does not receive

water, sand is visible. it is becoming increasing. in addition to the repairs there is a series of low water dams that would promote more dependable water levels. >> there is a long-term essential to getting people to be on the water. >> this would open up the river to a new base. the benefits are indisputable. where will the funding come from? >> this funding can be done by the increase in the value of the land. it can have a part in it. some federal funding and local funding. >> unfortunate, they will not fund the repair of zinc dam.

as center in half stated, the funding is coming from the federal and local government in addition to local benefactors. much of the philanthropy is supporting the $350 million construction of the gathering place, one of the most expensive privately funded parks in the united states. we need to develop and test legislation with all the benefits of the water reform resources development act. as recreation flourishes and businesses grow, there will be a bigger tax base which means more money for local, state, and federal government. this could ultimately pay for itself. >> i travel around and i see other communities that have a river resource that runs to the town and how other communities

capture that and utilize that resource and i would very much like to have that as an option here. >> we are at the red carpet. you will the journalists and stars arrive and you will hear

from president obama and cecily strong from a saturday night live. we will take you behind the scenes of the dinner. 2600 people are in attendant. tickets are $300 per person. we will be reading it and facebook comments. follow us on twitter and facebook. if you are tweeting, include the #whcd it will all be live on c-span. now let's watch the arrival of the white house correspondents dinner.