c policy. the president's tax and regulatory policies have mr. perry: the president's policy has slammed the door is shut for the average american who is trying to climb the economic ladder and climb the middle class, to deferred dreams. weakness at home has led to weakness abroad. the world has descended into a chaos of this president's own making. while his white house lawyers, they construct an alternative universe where isis is contained, that ramadi is merely a setback where the nature of the enemy can't be acknowledged for fear of causing offense,

where the world's largest state upon sore of terrorism the islamic republic of iran can be trusted to live up to a cluke collar -- nuclear agreement. no decision, no decision has done more harm than the president's withdrawal of the troops from iraq. let no one be mistaken, leaders of both parties have made grave mistakes in iraq, but in january of 2009 when barack obama became commander in chief, iraq had been largely pacified. america had won the war, but our president failed to secure the peace. how callous it seems now. as cities once secured with american blood are now being taken by america's enemies, all because of a campaign slogan.

i saw during vietnam a war where politicians didn't keep faith with the sacrifices of america's fighting men and women, where men were ordered into combat without the full support of their civilian commanders to see it happen again, 40 years later because of political gamesmanship and dishonesty, it's a national disgrace. [applause] mr. perry: but, my friends we are a resilient country. you think about who we are. we have been through a civil war. we have been through two world wars. we have been through a great depression and made it through jimmy carter. we will make it through the obama years. we will do this.

[applause] the fundamental nature of our country never say knock down, we get back up. we dust ourselves off and we move forward. and you know what? we will do it again. [applause] mr. perry: i want to share some important truths, starting with this truth, we don't have to settle for a world in chaos and america that shrinks from its responsibility. we don't have to apologize for american exceptionalism or western values. we don't have to accept slow growth that leaves behind the middle class and leaves millions of americans out of work. we don't have to settle for crumbling bureaucracies that harm our taxpayers and veterans.

we don't have to re-sign ourselves to debt, decay and slow growth. we have the power to make things new again to project america's strength again and get our economy going again. [applause] mr. perry: and that is exactly why today i'm running for the presidency of the united states of america! [cheers and applause]

mr. perry: thank you. it's time. it's time. it's time to create real jobs, to raise wages to create opportunity for all, to give every citizen a stake in this country to restore hope, real hope, real hope to forgotten americans. you know, there are millions of middle-class families that have given up hope of getting ahead, millions of workers who have given up hope for finding a job. yeah it's time to reset, time to reset the relationship between government and citizens. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: think of the arrogance of washington, d.c.,. representing itself as some beacon of wisdom with policies that are smothering this vast land with no regard what makes each state and community unique.

that's just wrong. we need to return power to the states and freedom to the individual. [applause] mr. perry: today our citizens and entrepreneurs are burdenened by overregulation and unspeakable debt and that's not just the physical nightmare. it's a moral failure. i want to speak to the millenials just a moment. this massive debt passed on from our generation to yours. this is breaking of a social compact. and you deserve better. i'm going to offer a responsible plan to fix the entitlement system and to stop this theft from your generation. [applause] mr. perry: per to those

americans, to those forgotten americans drowning in personal debt, working harder for wages that don't keep up with the rising cost of living. i came here today to say i hear you. i know you face rising health care costs rising child care costs, skyrocketing tuition costs, mounting student loan debt. i hear you. and i'm going to do something about it. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: to the one in five children and families who are on food stamps, one in seven americans living in poverty, to the one in 10 workers that are unemployed or underemployed or giving up hope for finding a job, i hear you. you are not forgotten. [applause] mr. perry: i'm running to be your president.

[cheers and applause] mr. perry: where small businesses on main street, those that are just struggling to just get by. they are targeted by dodd-frank. i hear you. you are not forgotten. your time is coming. the american people, they see this red game where the independencers get rich and the middle class pays the tab. there's something wrong when the dow is near record highs and businesses on main street can't get a loan. since when capitalism have the biggest while regulation strangle our community banks. capitalism is not corporatism. it is not a guarantee of reward without risk. it's not about wall street at the expense of main street.

the reason i'm running for president is i know for certain our country's best days lie ahead. there is nothing wrong in america today that a change of leadership will not make happen. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: we are just a few good decisions away from unleashing economic growth and reviving the american dream and need to fix the tax code that is riddled with loopholes that sends jobs overseas. we have the highest corporate tax rate in the western world. it's time to reduce it and bring home jobs, lift wages for those working families. by the time this administration has finished with its experiment in big government, they will have added almost 600,000 pages of new regulations to the national register the federal

register. on my first day in office, i will issue an immediate freeze on pending regulations from the obama administration. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: that same day, that same day, i will send to congress a comprehensive reform and roll back of killing-job policies by obama policies. agencies will have to live under strict regulatory budgets, health insurers will have to earn the right to your money instead of lobbying washington to force you to hand it over. on day one i will also an executive order approving the construction of the keystone pie line. [cheers and applause]

mr. perry: energy is vital to our economy and i might add to our national security. on day one, i will sign an executive order authorizing the export of american natural gas and freeing our european allies from the dependence of russia's energy supplies. [applause] mr. perry: vladimir putin uses energy to hold our allies hostage. if energy is going to be used as a weapon, america will have the largest arsenal. [applause] mr. perry: we will unleash an era of economic growth and limitless opportunity. we will rebuild america industry and lift wages for american workers. it can be done because it has

been done, in texas! [cheers and applause] mr. perry: during my 14 years as governor, texas companies created almost one-third of all new american jobs. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: in the last seven years of my tenure, texas created 1.5 million new jobs. as a matter of fact, without texas, america would have lost 400,000 jobs. we were the engine of growth, because we had a simple formula, you control taxes and spending and implement regulations and invest in an educated work force and stop frivolous lawsuits. [applause] mr. perry: texas now has the second highest high school graduation rate in the country. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: and it has the

highest graduation rate for african-americans and hispanic students. we led the nation in exports. we passed historic tax relief and i'm proud to have signed balanced budgets for 14 years. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: we not only created opportunity, we stood for law and order. when there was a crisis at our border last year and the president refused my invitation to see that challenge that we faced, i told him, mr. president , if you do not secure this border texas will. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: because of that threat because of that threat that was posed by the drug cartels and transnational gangs

i deployed the texas national guard. and the policy worked. apprehensions declined by 74%. if you elect me your president, i will secure that border. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: homeland security begins were border security. the most basic compact between a president and the people is to keep the country safe. the great lesson of history is the strength and resolve bring peace and order and weakness and vast lation invite chaos and conflict. my very first act as president will be to rescind any agreement with iran that legitimatizes their efforts to get a nuclear weapon.

[cheers and applause] mr. perry: now's the time. now is the time for clear-sided proven leadership. we have seen what happens when we elect a president based on media acclaim rather than a record of accomplishment. this will be a show-me-don't-tell-me election where voters look past the rhetoric to the real record. the question of every conditioned will be this. when have you led? leadership is not a speech on the senate floor and not what you say, it is what you have done. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: and we will not find the kind of leadership needed to revitalize the country by looking to the political class in washington. i have been tested.

i've led the most successful state in america. [cheers and applause] mr. perry: i have dealt with crises after crises, to the diss integration of hurricanes and the first diagnosis of ebola in america. i have brought together first responders charities and people of faith to house and heel vulnerable -- heal vulnerable citizens. the spirit of compassion demonstrated by texans rans is demonstrated. there is a surplus of spirit. and among our great people, there is a spirit of selflessness that we live to make the world better for our children and not just ourselves.

it was said that when king george iii asked what general washington would do upon winning the war, he was told that he would return to his farm and relinquish power. and to that the monarch replied, if he does that, he will be the greatest man of his age. george washington lived in the service of a cause greater than self. [applause] mr. perry: if anyone is wondering if america sill poses the character of selfless heroes, i'm here today to say yes. i'm surrounded by heroes. they're in all generations. they are all in different generations, but would he haven

together by the same thread of selfless sacrifice. there are heroes mike medal of honor recipients like mike thornton. made it back to the safety of a water rescue only to find out his fellow team member had been left behind, presumed dead but mike didn't leave. he returned through enemy fire. he retrieved lieutenant norris who was still alive and then he swam for two hours keeping his wounded teammate afloat until they were rescued. chausechause mr. perry: he rose like marcus lattrell. he survived a savage attack in afghanistan and lost fellow

teammates. he is not just the lone survivor. to anita and me. he is a second son. and kyle who suffered the loss of her husband chris. when i think of taia kyle, i think of a brave woman who not only carries the legacy, but the grief of every family, who has lost a loved one to the great tragedy of this war or its difficult aftermath. anita and i want to thank her for her tremendous courage. america, america is an

extraordinary country. our greatness lies not only in our government but in our people. each day americans demonstrate tremendous courage, but many of those americans have been knocked down and they are looking for a second chance. let's give them that second chance. let's give them real leadership. let's give them a future greater than the future days of our past. let's give them a president who leads us in the direction of our highest dreams, our best dreams, our highest hopes and our greatest promise. thank you. and god bless you. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> if you missed any of the former texas governor's campaign announcement, you can watch it again tonight at 8:00 p.m. and take your calls to hear your thoughts on the 2016 presidential race and how it's shaping up. and another look at hillary clinton on voting rights and she spoke in texas at an awards ceremony. at 9:20 eastern time, our interview with another potential democratic candidate for president, former virginia senator jim webb as he talked

about his military and political career and shared his life story. here are some of our feature programs this weekend.

>> house committee recently looked into the f.d.a.'s menu labeling guidelines that require food vendors to provide calorie and new trishon information. the hearing is an hour and 40 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen if you take your seats, we'll get started here. mr. pitts: subcommittee will come to order. the chair will recognize himself for an opening statement. today's health subcommittee hearing will be examining the costly regulations regarding menu labeling proposed by the administration and scheduled to be implemented by december 1, 2015. the subject of our hearing, h.r. 2017 commonsense nutrition

disclosure act is sponsored by our conference chair, cathy mcmorris rodgers and representative loretta sanchez. the legislation will help business owners, franchisees as well as consumers who want easy access to accurate nutrition information. covered establishments including pizza delivery businesses and grocery stores will be subject to a cumbersome, rigid and costly regulatory compliance process to avoid violations and possible criminal prosecution. h.r. 2017 seeks to improve and clarify the final rule promulgated by the food and drug administration implementing the menu labeling requirements of section 4205 of the affordable care act. the f.d.a. issued a nearly 400-page final rule establishing

a one size fits all national nutrition disclosure requirement for restaurants and similar retail food establishments. the concern is that this final rule goes well beyond what was intended by the a.c.a. the obligations are imposed not only on chain restaurants including delivery establishments, but also on any other chain retailer that sells nonpackaged food such as grocery stores salad bars and males to go. small businesses that are not chain restaurants, but are subject to the rule, will face a dramatic increase in regulatory compliance costs. consumers most assuredly will see higher food costs, perhaps fewer choices. some retailers, may find it advantageous to stop selling

restaurant-food all together. instead of purchasing fresh sandwiches, consumers will buy prepackaged sandwiches because they will not have to comply. fixing this could fix thousands that otherwise would be burden ened with regulations that would be costlyp. according to the office of management and budget, the proposal would be the third most burdensome regulation proposed in 2010. 148,536,183 hours to comply. the objective is to provide clarity, flexibility and certainty for these companies. while also ensuring consumers have access to the information, they need to make informed nutritional decisions. i look forward to the testimony

today and i yield to representative morgan griffith who would like to introduce a witness. mr. griffith: i'm pleased to introduce israel o'quinn. israel has been a member of the virginia house of delegates, many decades ago and he has been there since 2011. he in his legislative capacity serves on the committee of commerce and labor which is akin to committee of commerce. he is a member of the energy and coal commission and he is here today as a citizen legislator should be not in his role as a member of the virginia house of delegates but food stores that is known as the food city supermarket chain and from the name, they do business in

kentucky virginia and tennessee. and he's here to talk about menu labeling as it impacts the grocery business. but most importantly i shouldn't leave out is that israel attended a fine institution of higher learning when he went to college. very great that you allowed me to introduce my old friend to the members of the committee. mr. pitts: mr. green, five minutes. mr. green: i that i our witnesses for being today. today we are examining legislation that will roll back a policy that will give people access to ordering foods. congress embraces information that be included on packaged food. providing the public with information allows people to make informed choices about the food they eat. the affordable care act was

enacted in 2010 to improve the health of american people and strengthen our health care system. the main substance of the landmark law expanded or access, affordable insurance and put to end the abuses and contained many provisions to promote prevention measures and general wellness. we know that consumers make better health decisions when they are empowered with information. section 4205 requires chain restaurants and food establishments that sell prepared food to include calorie information on menus and menu boards. menu labeling has become more important as people each eat out more. and it is a simple reform to ensure that consumers have access to the same information regardless of whether eating at home or outside their home. as we will hear from witnesses

on how away from home foods are negatively impacted the diet and health of the american people without easily accessible information, it's difficult to make informed choices. the legislation we are considering today may weaken this important tool. when enacted, the provision built off of the thrust of more than dozen state and local policies. it could end the compromise between the interests of stakeholders. it would have significant financial and public health burdens on consumers, industry and taxpayer funded budgets. giving stores and other food establishments a blanket exemption to a uniform standard is unwarranted. it is unsupported by the wealth of research on the cost of compliance and real word evidence from chains and restaurants that have embraced the commonsense measures. it would create an uneven

playing field. i appreciate the concerns with menu labeling requirements. while i do not support the legislation, i'm sympathetic to the concerns and the time and implementation and enforcement. due to lack of guidance, questions on the agency, i ask the f.d.a. to provide additional time for food establishments to comply. the law does not include a deadline. it should implement the period to review such guidance and comply with this important requirement. thank you for calling the hearing. and when considering the legislation, we must always keep the priority of keeping our broken health care system into a true health system in mind. i thank you and i yield back. mr. pitts: i recognize the chair of the full committee, mr. up ton, five minutes. mr. upton: thank you mr.

chairman. today we are going to discuss important bipartisan legislation that seeks to provide some balance to the recently proposed menu labeling guidelines. h.r. 2017. the bipartisan effort as always been spearheaded by cathy mrs. mcmorris rodgers, active member of our committee. this bill brings clarity and alleviate the unnecessary requirements that the rule has placed on businesses across the country. take for example my michigan-based company dominoeo, it has 34 million potential different menu combinations. and has nutrition information for your particular order and 91% of their orders are placed online.

requiring instore information for 34 million potential menu items would cost each store nearly $5 million and wouldn't address the problem of informing consumers. no doubt that the u.s. should have a policy for menu labeling. we need to take a pragmatic approach. the goal is ensuring customers have the information and in order to do that, we need to make sure companies can comply. the current situation fails to address the needs of consumers and places enormous burdens on businesses. as it stands, restaurants and similar retail food establishments have until december 1 of this year to comply with the final rule, yet there are still a number of outstanding questions and issues. complying with the final rule will take substantial time and resources and f.d.a. has failed to provide more clarity.

businesses need know how to comply and to plan and put things in place and f.d.a.'s failure to provide clarity has made it impossible for those things to happen. we will hear from the stakeholders and i hope we can discuss solutions to the problem and i yield the balance of my time to cathy mrs. mcmorris rodgers. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: i thank loretta sanchez. our joint efforts to clarify these regulations and represent the needs of america's small business owners are critical. i thank chairman up ton and the 40 bipartisan members who have agreed to co-sponsor. h.r. 2017 is simple. clarify ut intent of this nearly 400-page regulation so businesses can comply with it

and consumers can have access to information. we have met with stakeholders and other member offices on all sides of this issue more than 20 times and asked how we can improve this legislation. something that we have heard again and again is that the 50% revenue trigger of what defines a restaurant is not fair. i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the national restaurant association to congress on april 28 that only discusses the 50% revenue exemption. mr. pitts: without objection. so ordered. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: these concerns have been heard and i intend to move them through committee markup. i hope we can discuss the merits of this important legislation beyond this one point. like many other regulations, good intentions don't always add up to practical policy. this regulation tries a cookie cutter approach to treat them

like capital grille and outback stakehouse. estimates say this regulation could cost american businesses more than $1 billion to comply and 500,000 hours of paperwork, one of the most expensive regulations ever. requiring dominoe' to post every potential topping combination as the chairman already said, more than 34 million possible outcomes where 90% of the orders take place over the phone or internet doesn't make sense. this is commonsense legislation which provides access to calorie information by clarifying not significantly altering this complicated regulation. we have been requesting comments from stakeholders since january and heard several on the revenue trigger and hope we can move on

now to the step in the regular order of process. this bill is ready to move, mr. chairman. and i thank the chairman and yield back. mr. pitts: the chair recognizes the ranking member of the full committee, mr. pallone, five minutes. mr. pallone: thank you mr. chairman. i would ask unanimous consent to put in the record a letter from congresswoman delauro addressed to you and mr. green. mr. pitts: without objection. so ordered. mr. pallone: increasing access to nutrition information can play an important role in fighting obesity. obesity in this country is far too common affecting 78 million adults and 13 million children and it is a serious and costly health problem such as heart disease, stroke and type ii diabetes. while there are many factors we

know that are overconsumption of calories is one of the primary causes and i have provided information to consumers. thanks to labeling and education act which i was a co-sponsor, this information has been available on pack acknowledged food items. it's not only been available to american families when eating out. this is a critical gap when you consider american families are eating out twice as often and spend half of their food dollars on food made outside of their home. the congress passed labeling requirements in 2010. under the law, restaurants and retail food establishments with 20 or more locations doing business under the same name and offering the same menu items are required to put calorie information on their menus. the availability of this information will help make

informed choices about the food they are purchasing for themselves or families. this is not a new idea. prior to the passage, more than 20 states and localities had passed some type of menu labeling reincluding california, new york city and d.c. area in themon gentlewomanry county, maryland. these efforts and support from consumers, led the restaurant industry to work with congress to draft the menu labeling policy that would provide for consistent requirktse and clear information to consumers. after much debate, f.d.a. implemented the menu labeling requirktse in december of last year and this was a challenging issue and i want to thank f.d.a. for following the inat the present time of the law while taking into consideration the concerns raised and the comments received. we will hear that there are

areas of the final rule where additional guidance may be warranted such as what constitutes a menu and various parts of the store among others. i'm sympathetic to these concerns and agree that further clarification is needed particularly for establishments without prior labeling menu experiences. however, i do not believe legislative action is necessary. f.d.a. has minimized the re wirements. i have no reason to believe that the agency will not work with these stakeholders to address these concerns. f.d.a. is working on guidance document to clarify some of the outstanding issues that we will hear about today. for these reasons i do not support h.r. 2017 and would be with the labeling rule. i look forward to hearing more

about the legislation. i yield the rest of my time to mrs. matsui. ms. matsui: i thank the member for yielding me time. we agree that the rising rates of owe bosity constitute a health crisis and we agree that access in nutrition information is an important step in addressing the obesity epidemic. the affordable care act has taken great strides by requiring nutrition labeling at restaurants and other places where people purchase food. the f.d.a. has been working to implement this requirement in a reasonable way and provide guidance to stayed stakeholders who have the ability to comply. additional time is warranted. i look forward to working with the f.d.a. and stakeholders to ensure that this provision is

successfully implemented to benefit consumers without imposing overly burdensome or impractical requirements on our businesses. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses and working with my colleagues to address this issue going forward. mr. pitts: that concludes the opening statements. any members' opening statements will be made part of the record. and one u.c. request, i would like to submit the following document, a statement from the food and marketing institute. without objection, so ordered. we have one panel before us today and i'll introduce them in the order of their presentation. first mrs. hubbard, easy mart stores on behalf of the national association of convenience stores. secondly mr. o'quinn that

congressman griffith introduced. on behalf of the food marketing institute. third, executive vice president investor relations of dominoe's on behalf of the american pizza community. next ms. karen rozkoff for duncan brands ink and director of nutrition policy center for science in the public interest. thank you each for coming today. you'll each be given five minutes to summarize your testimony. there is a series of lights on your desk. and when it hits red ask that you run. i will monitor my tv on the floor. we are scheduled to vote between

11:00 and 11:30 and get through the members' questions. you are recognized for your summary. >> chairman ranking member, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. i'm the c.e.o. of easy mart stores. it owns and operates nearly 300 convenience store in texas, arkansas louisiana and offer foods. imtestifying on behalf of the national association of convenience stores. although more than 60% of our members operate single stores, many of these sting single store owners do the name under a major large businesses that are covered by the labeling

requirktse. the convenience store industry strongly supports h.r. 2017 the commonsense nutrition disclosure act and the effort to provide consumers nutrition information. most of the food sold is prepack acknowledged as has been discussed and already provides this information. if congress enacts h.r. 2017, consumers would receive more nutrition information and would receive it in a way that is more useful to them. the food operations is different. yet the f.d.a. final ruling was geared toward the chain restaurant model. many chain restaurants have the same food displayed on the same menu in all of their locations. that is not true for the convenience store industry. vens stores even those that are part of the same chain, sell different foods based upon the different locations and

different market demands and even stores that do sell the same items may offer it in different ways. at easy mart, we have different foods in different locations which would require different menus. like a breakfast sandwich, they might have a different calorie count because the supplier is different. easy mart deals with more than 50 food suppliers and has proved difficult getting the nutrition information we need from them. we expect that some won't give us that information by the december 1 deadline and isn't much we can do about it. nothing in the law requires them to give us the information we need. the responsibility is ours alone. the food we offer changes frequently. at any given time we may be testing 15, 20 different products and some of them will become permanent fixtures and others may change and may be

temporary. this adds to the complexities of complying with the rules. we want to provide our customers with useful information. and h.r. 2017 does not roll back the regulations but gives us the flexibility we need to do this. for example, the legislation would allow us to have one menu board in our locations rather than a scattering of confusing signs throughout the stores that repeat the same information, a basic wall of words. it would allow us more flexibility to display call rotion and ranges rather than calorie counts for all items. the bill would give us more flexibility for foods we are testing in different locations. in addition, the bill would be very helpful in curbing the high punitive nature of the high enforcement provisions. it should not be a felony if a store doesn't prepare the same way as another store on the exact same day if one of my

clerk makes a mistake. and no mistake in this area should be serious to charge our store owners with a felony. we need more time to comply. once new regulations are issued. this is a complex regulatory regime and we must analyze our locations differently. we need time to work with our suppliers. h.r. 20717 is good sensible legislation that will improve f.d.a.'s rules by helping businesses actually comply and that will mean more good useful information to consumesers. i thank you for the opportunity to testify. mr. pitts: the chair thanks the gentlelady. and i recognize our next witness for an opening statement. >> good morning members. i'm director of strategic initiatives for food stores based in virginia. our company operates 105 food

markets and an associate owned company and we take pride in. we are members of the food marketing institute and the national grossers' association. we really appreciate the work that you are doing to consider the impact of the f.d.a.'s menu and labeling regulations and the need for the nutrition disclosure act known as h.r. 2017. as grossers we like to provide our customers with the products they want in the format they desire. more than 90% of the foods in our grocery store have not only the calorie information. many of the remaining items that we offer are sourced from within the store. if a fruit or vegetables gets ripe in the produce department, we bring it over to the deli apartment and cut it up and put it in the salad bar.

they prepare foods that is specific to a single store. throughout our stores and across our company, we have personnel that is focused on food safety. that includes implementation of the food safety modernization act, compliance with labeling and ingredient labeling, bioterrorism and recordkeeping and proposed updates to the nutrition facts panel. we also have our own staste and quality standards that go beyond these laws. the last thing we want is someone to get sick from the food in our grocery stores. you might ask how is this related? these are all related to the supermarket industry and where we devote time and resources. there are regulations that are not applied to chain restaurants. when the f.d.a. takes a chain restaurant menu labeling law and stretches it out to grocery stores on top of the other laws

that we comply with and abide with, it shouldn't surprise anyone that the glove simply doesn't fit. we are making healthy choices and i will highlight three of those things. we with other grossers have a healthy initiatives departments that make informed decisions about healthy eating, something we didn't have to do but it's the right thing to do. we invested significant resources in the scoring system, a system that gives a zero to 100 score tag so you can tell the nutritional value. we are involved in a locally grown produce initiative. they were formerly tobacco farmers and growing the best tasting fruits and vegetables. over 14-year span in this program, we purchased 750,000 in product to nearly $6 million. we are able to offer premium

produce at a an affordable price. we were doing locally grown a long time before it was actually cool. in closing, you may or may not be aware that grocery stores operate on a profit margin that is 1%. there is little room for us to absorb costs. when you operate you simply don't have the luxury of spending money on things that bring little to no value. the costs are passed to the consumer. in an economy that contracted at.7%, consumers can't afford to pay more and get little in return of those investments. our industry has-- attended a lot of meetings with the f.d.a. and very few meetings and very few answers. we believe that h.r. 2017 is a huge step in the right direction. we thank you for putting this bill in and thank you very much for your time and attention.

mr. pitts: the chair now recognizes our next witness. >> i'm honored to have the privilege to speak on behalf of the 20,000 pizzarias called the american pizza community. and for 900 small business owners. you are giving us a chance to discuss how calorie information is best presented. our requests are modern solutions that will inform consumers and relieve a cost burden from small business. you will find them more than reasonable. at domino's, there are 34 million ways to make a pizza. pizza hut has published they now have two billion. you can't possibly fit all the iterations on a pizza like you can for burgers. f.d.a. did understand that, too and they said put ranges.

if you put ranges for a whole pie, that's a range of up to 2,000 calories. if you do it by the slice, it is hundreds of calories. we think it should be more precisely so the customers know what they are eating. our solution is to put the information where our customers go online. half of all domino's orders and pizza hut and poppa johns come from online and five minutes there will be more. the rest of our customers who don't order on-line pick up the phone to order. that means very few people and our figures show less than 10%, walk into a store and look at an order board. what do you do when you order pizza. to illustrate this point, we spent an average in a store in michigan. out of the 324 orders we witnessed, 91% were placed remotely either online or by

phone. 7% were placed in store and not either 2%, 5-124 used the menu board. it makes no sense to retrofit this on a menu board. my second point is imposing a expense on small business people. most people think of us as big business but with are small business owners. nearly half of domino's franchisees own one store and our average is five stores per franchisey. this is the common model for pizza. while make the small local business people that live work and hire in your districts pay thousands of dollars a year for people they don't use. they define broadly. the original law is the primary

writing of the restaurant. i think primary means first and foremost and not all. we send advertising fliers and put posters up and they weren't intended as machine u.s. and this isn't unique to pizza. it spans across many restaurant times. f.d.a. claims to have recognized, but the definitions they laid out don't differentiate these properly. the last regulations require that you have to certify at the corporate and individual store levels that you have listed all the correct calories in all the correct places and you could face criminal penalties should you do this wrong. and what about class-action lawsuits if one is heavy-handed with the cheese? we believe that a business should be required that it has made reasonable efforts tom

depict calorie information. and inadvertently putting too many toppings on a pizza should not be charged with jail time. the job of calorie labeling won't be an easy one. people have a right to know what they are eating and we have been disclosing calorie information for 14 years. computer program and nutritional research and operational systems will need to be put in place. so we have asked for more time. let me be clear, no way do we see a delay in the rules a solution. we must have a legislative fix. i cannot say it too many times we are not seeking an exemption. we want to comply that provides the information to our customers in the clearest way and doesn't make small business pay for that they won't use.

for all these important constituencies, chairman pitts and members of the subcommittee, thank you for listening to me and thank you representative mrs. mcmorris rodgers and sanchez for your help on this issue. . . ms. raskopf: i'm with dunkin' company, which includes dunkin' donuts and bass kin robbins. bass kin robbins franchisees own an average of one restaurant, dunkin' donuts' own about six. so they are small business people. we supported national uniform

menu labeling for many years and we continue to believe a national standard for providing nutrition information on all restaurant-type foods is critical. over the past several years, dunakin brands and many others -- dunkin' brands and many others have worked to help reform what had previously been a complex, highly localized approach to menu labeling. before the federal solution labeling laws for being passed on a state by state, city by city basis and in some cases counties were competing with cities to pass such laws. competing state and local flaurs difficult and disruptive for businesses as well as lacking in consistency for customers. a national approach to labeling was an important and necessary step for our franchisees --es our industry and most importantly for consumers. it's been long overdue and remains critically important. we acknowledge that today's food service industry is large and complex.

however, though we continue to have some specific questions in regards to how to efficiently and effect ily implement certain sections of the regulations, appreciate f.d.a.'s commitment to working with stake holders. we believe f.d.a. generally followed the intent of the law and did so in a manner to largely minimize cost and burdens to the food service industry. while some may argue that there's expense and inefficiency in regards to implementation, after having complied with both individual state laws as well as completing much of the work to meet the year-end deadline, i can assure you, f.d.a. has worked to address most of the significant and potential costly issues to us. likewise, the new labeling regulation is intended to benefit both businesses and consumers by focusing on all establishments that serve restaurant-type food not just a select few. for this reason, the regulations

specifically include not only restaurant chains but also other food servicer re-tailers with 20 or more locations including convenience stores, grocery stores and others. h.r. 2017 includes a provision that imposes a percentage revenue threshold exempting grocery and convenience stores from having to label their restaurant-type food. we strongly disagree with this. the benefits of nutrition labeling are important, no matter the size of the menu or the percentage of sales from food. i hope congress will maintain the labeling regulation as it was written. grocery and convenience stores are increasingly competing against our restaurants. while we welcome the competition, we believe that restaurant-type food that grocery and convenience stores sell should be held to the same standards as the foods that traditional restaurants sell. this is about the type of food being sold, not the business format. a final point aide like to make is there have been many concerns expressed in regards to the

extent of -- associated with determining nutritional information and the cost to communicate that information. to be clear, the regulation states that food service operators need only use reasonable means to calculate nutrition information. lab testing is not required. there are multiple ways to determine nutritional values. many of them at minimal costs. and very importantly, the regulation does not require menu boards. the regulation, how companies choose to communicate nutrition information is a business decision not a legislative one and from high tech to low tech, there are many communications options available to retailers. for these reasons, we do not support the language in h.r. 2017 that clarifies this point and to -- and to be clear we do not believe any additional legislation is necessary. all clarifying information can be handled through f.d.a.

guidance. thank you for the opportunity to testify. the chair: the chair thanks the gentlelady and now recognizes dr. wooten. ms. wootan: i appreciate the opportunity to share the consumer view this morning. the sci agreing with give manager time to comply with policy but we strongly oppose h.r. 2017. the commonsense nutrition disclosure act supports neither commonsense nor nutrition information disclosure. commonsense would be to side with the american people who are afflicted by high rates of obesity, over domino's which is hardly in need of congressional protection given its almost $2 billion in annual sales. at a time when 2/3 of americans

are either overweight or obese, half of our food dollars are spent on away from home foods and studies clearly link eating out to obesity. commonsense would suggest that congress support americans' ability to make educated choices from the widest range of food service establishments provided under the law. i admire the gutsyness of some of my fellow witnesses. it's political aastute and clever to focus on the fixes h.r. 2017 would supposedly provide them while failing to mention the bill would exempt them from providing calorie information for their prepared foods. this bill most definitely would not make it easier for people to access meaningful, easily accessible nutrition information. that's why over 115 health experts and organizations oppose this bill. supermarkets state they're

willing to give customers what they want but file mention that over 80% of americans want supermarkets to provide calorie information for their prepared foods like fried chicken sandwiches and soups. and more than a quarter want calorie labeling for the hot dogs pizza, nachos and other foods sold at convenience stores. how are people supposed to make informed choices if congress supermarkets, convenience stores pizza chains and movie theaters withhold nutrition information from them. supermarkets and convenience store exg rations about the cost of menu labeling remind me of concerns in the early days when i was first working on menu labeling. but those did not turn out to be true. menu labeling software is inexpensive. many supermarkets already have dietitians on staff who can conduct calorie analysis. restaurants have shown that

calorie labeling is affordable and feasible in the dozens of jurisdictions where it is already in effect. it's also disingenuous for supermarks and convenience stores to promote themselves to sust hers as alternatives to restaurants while at the same time lobbies congress about how different they are. supermark bakeries, buffets, is a lad bar, are like those in restaurants. and many of -- and many supermarkets now have tables where people can eat. 7-eleven and sheets are among the 100 top food service establishments in the country and some of them belong to the national restaurant association. it is particularly hard to understand why pizza restaurants need a special exemption from listing calories on in-store menu boards. while other people -- while many people do order pizza by phone or computer, similarly many do

not enter fast food restaurants and order instead through the drive through. yet fast food restaurants aren't opposing having to provide their customers with nutrition information on each of their menus. likewise, pizza restaurants should not deny nutrition information to their in-store customers. pizza is a real problem in americans' diet. it's the fifth largest source of calories. it's the second biggest source of saturated fat. and it's the third biggest source of sodium. if any restaurants need comprehensive nutrition labeling it's pizza restaurants. the variability of pizza, with its different crusts and toppings is no different than the variability of subway sandwiches with different breads and meats and toppings and spreads or ice cream sundaes or chipotle burritos. calories can and are being

expressed as ranges or being provided for commonly ordered, standard builds. finally, to allow restaurants and food service establishments to label only far fraction of items is a recipe for confusion. it would be deceptive for consumers and make it difficult for them to order. i urge the committee to oppose h.r. 2017. your constituents' health depends on it. >> the chair thanks the gentlelady. as the gentleman said, i overheard him, you're making me hungry. thank you for the testimony. we'll now begin questioning and i'll recognize myself, five minutes, for that purpose. mr. pitts: to all the panelists let me start with this question. with the implementation date of december 1, that's six months away, that's still a lot of

outstanding questions for the f.d.a. considering the short amount of time for compliance and the lack of guidance from f.d.a., would you all agree that there should at least be a delay for implementation, just yes or no. ms. hubbard. >> yes, sir. >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. mr. pitts: ms. hubbard. what are the biggest issues your businesses are facing and what do you anticipate the costs will be for implementing these regulations? ms. hubbard: i think the biggest challenge we face is the diversity in not just the industry but within my own chain, our own stores. we're 45 years old. we've acquired a lot of stores. they all have different products. the way they're laid out. if you will envision one store

we walked in and the food service is on this end that offers fountain as a bundled piece with something you purchase. the fountain dispensers are on this end. coffee bar is somewhere else as is the hot dog and pastry case. the way we interpret this, we have to have all the postings of all the calorie count adjacent to those products and repeated. it would be duplicative throughout the store. it literally would be a wall of words for the consumer to try to interpret to find what the calorie count is and how we display that. if somebody were to move that piece, that displays the calorie count, is that now a felony? we're very concerned about the punitive damages of this and the practicality of trying to implement and have all these in different stores. we truly would have 300 different compliance plans. mr. pitt: mr. quinn could -- mr. o'quinn, what are the biggest issues you're facing

with this? mr. o'quinn: i think certainly some of the biggest issues come in how you label these products in the grocery store. if you take a salad bar, area -- salad bar area, for instance, we've -- looked at multiple ways to do that, such as putting it on the spoon itself. but should perhaps my 10-year-old cousin comes through and move the spoons around, you're subject to f.d.a. punitive penalties. if you label everything up on the sneeze guard someone comes through, cleans that, the alcohol based cleaner makes one fall off, how do you account for that? and then, you know, we looked at electronic boards and how often do things have to cycle through how big do they have to be? i think the physical labeling of it is certainly one of the biggest channels that we're going to face and how you make that consistent and how you make it the same every single day.

mr. pitts: ms. liddle, would you please respond? the biggest issues you're facing. ms. liddle: the biggest head scratcher for us is why we would put unclear range information on a menu board for those very few people who look at a menu board. we think a better solution for the few people who walk into a store would be to put a comprehensive booklet perhaps on the counter top, or maybe even an ipad. but to put ranges on a static menu board that consumers, that won't help consumers to make a good decision seems to not make sense to us. so that's the one issue. and then secondly, even though we are a big company with revenues, as ms. wootan pointed out, we are a conglomeration of small business people. half of our guys only own one store. so we're going to make them pay for something that people are not looking at that -- that to us is just beyond the challenges, it makes no sense at

all. mr. pitts: ms. hubbard you said you would support a delay. if congress or f.d.a. should act to delay compliance for a year does that solve the problem or would we simply be back here a year from now hearing testimony debating regs again? shouldn't we just put h.r. 2017 on a fast track to the white house? ms. hubbard: i absolutely do not think a delay solves our problem. we still have the issues just as i said on how do we communicate this to the consumers. if the intent is to provide consume wers useful information, make choices, don't we need to do that in some concise way they can actually find it? i think we've all walked into maybe a quick serve restaurant and been overwhelmed by the menu board. can you now imagine that 50 times worse with the configurations of all the sodas and even within the advertising on the store? a delay does not solve this, no,

sir. mr. pitts: my time has expired. i'll have to send questions to you in writing. i recognize the ranking member, mr. green, for questioning. mr. green: i want to remind the panel, the affordable care passed in 2010 here we are five years later and still have a problem with obesity in our country. and some of the suggestions in here, we're not going to stop people from eating what they want to. i'm going to go to domino's or dunkin' or get enchiladas in texas at one of our conveniencesters -- stores but the bottom line is we want people who are concerned their obesity, their children's obesity, their parent's obesity and it ultimately end in diabetes. that's why it was part of the affordable care act. i would like to see what we could do to be workable but again, you're right, i've been in a lot of convenience stores but we do have some folks who are complying with it and -- but

we still need to make sure consumers have that information. and maybe we need to present it in a better way. i don't know if a booklet on the counter, fast food stores are meant to be fast food. nobody is going to be -- to leaf through a booklet while wait firg their hamburger. but ms. raskopf i want to thank dun din -- dunkin' donuts for the work on the issue. it's critical for the industry and also for consumers to ensure that the presentation of calorie information is easily understood and regardless of where they live or where they dine. how much the discussion on this issue has been focused on types of restaurant, retail restaurant, food restaurants, should be covered by these menu labeling requirements. however it seems to me our focus should be more on types of food that should be covered especially on consumer demand for ready to eat and prepared food continues to grow.

in your testimony you note the similarities between supermarkets an restaurants. we've heard from supermarkets that the cost of compliance would be up to $1 billion. i've not heard that concern from restaurants. ms. raskopf, can you explain what the cost of compliance would be for the dunkin' brands restaurants? ms. raskopf: we spent the last year looking at this to ensure we were able to comply with the -- with this by the end of the year. we too have a complex business. if you look at all the different ways you can order coffee, a thousand different way sandwiches ,000 different ways, and ice cream sundaes 80,000 different ways. this is complex but we have been able to figure out a way to do it with the menu. the cost is going to be bass kin robin -- robbins shops it's

about $400 per restaurant. for dunkin' donuts about a third of our dunkin' donuts shops have digital boards and the cost for them will be to label the drive-through boards the cost will be $600 or $700. if they don't have a digital board it's $1,200. it doesn't require menu boards. there's a multitude of ways to label for nutritional value. mr. green: dr. wootan, there's been a lot of talk about the definition of restaurants. the intent of the law is not to confine the scope to restaurants or other establishments primarily engaged in the sale of food but rather to apply broadly to entities that sell food to consumers. this was based largely on the trend of american families spending food dollars on items prepared outside the home. that's been going on for a

couple of decades now, not only my children but my grandchildren. dr. wootan, as someone involved in the drafting of the original legislation is it clear that the law was intended to broadly cover restaurant-type food? ms. wootan: absolutely. when the law was written it included not only restaurant bus also other food service establishments and that was meant to cover the broad range of food service establishments that provide prepared foods. in fact, i remember this supermarket industry trying to get an amendment to strike that part of the law, make it clear that they were excluded and they were not successful in that effort. they knew they would be included, they should have been preparing for this and getting ready as the restaurant industry has been. mr. green: in a consumer per speppings, can you discuss what you think the impact from having certain food establishments exempted? ms. wootan: not having nutrition information in supermarkets and convenience stores will limit

people's access to information. they are increasingly competing with restaurants and people are stopping at the grocery store and buying fried chick on meat loaf with side dishes as they do at restaurants system of more and more, people are turning to supermarkets for prepared foods like they do for carry out from restaurants. and at pizza restaurants, while many people order over the phone, those people that do walk into the restaurant want to have nutrition information. you need to look at this from the consumer perspective. from where the consumer is ordering, that matters. where they need the information. the law does not require a pizza chain to put up a menu board if they don't think enough people are going into the restaurant that they feel they need to have a menu board, they don't have to have one but if they think enough people are coming in that they're putting up a menu board and listing pizzas and prices then next to that price they also need to post the calories.

mr. pitts: the gentleman from illinois, mr. shimkus, five minutes for questions. mr. shimkus: i was almost going to sneak out from the hearing. i understand there's some people who want to see this information. and i think if you did national polling, people say sure i'd like to have it on. i don't think i've ever in my life read a menu, i don't think i've ever looked for calorie numbers. on anything i've consumed. and i bet that -- i bet i'm in the majority of americans. so i just flow that out there. i really struggle with this. this is the -- this is the perfect example of a nanny state. of a national government telling individual citizens and saying what is best for them.

and directing and pushing private sector individuals to push people to consume things that the -- that they feel that it is. and it's unfortunate but we are here. and so we have some issues to address. i was here when we passed the health care law. all we passed with thuzz esenate version of a bill. -- was the senate version of a bill. obamacare that passed the health care law, was a senate bill. that we passed on the floor without any additional debate or oversight for a year and a half later. so the -- i want to go to ms. hubbard. ok i have sons. that i love very much.

so they go and they get a drink at one of the convenience stores, they have personally titled a scour-ade. now i'm not sure what's in this thing, i think it's sprite, coke power ade you know, that they mix themselves. you can't label for that, can you? ms. hubbard: no, sir, that's one of the complexities of the bill and of that self-service. it also would entail we list the calorie count for the items in cups without ice. i would also bet your sons also put ice in their cups so therefore even what we provide them based on the rules isn't going to be accurate, if i were to get the combination right. mr. shimkus: how many kinds of items would have multiple concerns about getting the right

calorie count and if you didn't if you were held accountable by i guess federal law enforcement i guess we'll have federal law enforcement police coming in to retail stores, checking the menu labeling and ensuring adequate calories or -- are posted in multiple combinations? ms. hubbard: virtually everything we serve would have some sort of ability to, all the drinks obviously have a wide variety of calorie count combinations. some of the that self-service by the consumers. on the prepared items even if i have a clerk that's feeling generous that day and they put or the cheese sticks together, they slap an extra slice of cheese together, they don't cut the pizza in exact eighths, all of those things and i think obviously the viewpoint -- you point out the obvious concern, this is a felony now. how do i protect.

mr. shimkus: a felony. mr. o'quinn, also a delegate, i guess, that's what you call in virginia, part of this debate early in the health care law was the same debate we have here in energy and commerce is that there was a concern that if we don't have a -- this is not put in a national bill there would be maybe local community movements or county movements or even state would then disrupt national chains so the national chains said save us from ourselves, or save us from the different parts of the country who may do individual referendums and have multiple -- can you speak to that? from both positions that you, as a representative, not representing the state but you know, can you address that? mr. o'quinn: yes, sir. i think that certainly states

and individual localities across the country adopting menu labeling laws. i think that becomes difficult for single store operators even a medium-sized grocery chain like we are to comply with this patchwork of regulations. none of those have been in our area but they've been in plenty of our friends' areas. so now you're saying that the f.d.a. is going to come in with this more overarching rule and be able to enforce it across the entire country but then what you set up is, you've got the federal rule that would supersede the state laws but all they have to do is mimic the exact same regulation at the local level and then all of a sudden it doesn't supersede it's more or less exactly the same system of you could have f.d.a. in your store one day say, this is not going to work. you're outside of your five calorie variance and you're in big trouble, you could also have someone from a town or a city or county coming in and saying the

exact same thing if they have set up a law that does not supersede the federal law itself. and so you're going to be right back in the same boat only f.d.a. will have promulgated regulations, it's not like there's going to be a regulatory process by a local county government. you're going to be dealing with an on the fly interpretation by somebody else. to me that's a really slippery slope to start down. >> thank you mr. chairman. i'm listening to will mr. shimkus describe mixing the sodas at the fountain and i have to tell you, i hate that. i'm a purist. if they -- some of those machines now you press coke and it gives you five different cokes i'm always afraid i'll get the cherry coke and mix it with the regular because i don't like to do that. mr. pallone: anyway, i guess i'm going to be asking questions about pizza here. i want to start with dr. wootan.

i'm interested in how h.r. 2017 treats serving sizes and how it differs from f.d.a.'s final menu labeling rule. the f.d.a. final rule allows pizza slices to provide calorie counts per pizza or per standard slice with a listing of the number of slices per pizza. h.r. 2017 seems to allow something similar. it would allow establishments to list the number of serves and number of calories per serving or to list the number of calories -- calories per the standard menu item such as for a multiserving item that's typically divided before presenting ato the consumer. do you think the f.d.a. final rule on h.r. 2017 are offering two different approaches or are there substantive differences between them and if there are differences, could you explain their implications? ms. wootan: there is one other

option, to list the nutrition information by the serving size or common unit of subdivision unit without having to list the number of serving. which would be different than what f.d.a. has system of for example, you could reduce the number of calories in a pizza overnight by slicing it into 10 slices instead of eight slices. you could take a plate of chicken wings and you could just put half the chicken wings on one side of the platter and the other half of the chicken wings on the other and say it's two servings and then change the calories from 1,000 calories per appetizer to 500. so the law as written would not require that the number of servings be listed and without that information it's very difficult for consume toshese able to compare options. even with the servings listed it's difficult. so say an appetizer of nachos is listed as four servings and the chicken wings is listed as two servings, you can't really compare how those would stack up

for you personally. it's much ease wrer to list the calories for the whole appetizer, the whole pastry, the whole dessert and people can compare options and decide which one they want for themselves. this is not about, he left already, telling people what to eat. this is about giving people information so that they can make their own choices about how many calories they want to eat. given what a terrible health burden there is from obesity and other diet-related health problems. mr. pallone: we've heard from pizza places and convenience stores about the difficulties they face with coming up with calorie counts for the myriad choices they offer whether it's the 34 million different combinations of pizzas or the different calorie counts possible with self-serve soda machines. i imagine restaurants face similar issues. could you tell us whether it's simpler for the restaurant industry or whether you're finding ways to address

similarly complicated issues? ms. raskopf: i worked for 7-eleven for years, i think we have a good understanding of the challenges we all face. we at dunkin' brands have thousands of combinations. sandwiches, kofi, ice cream when you talk about bass kin robbins. we have manager -- baskin robbins. we have tests, we have limited time offers. i emp with everybody everyone here. but we have figured out how to label our products to make nutritional information available to consumers. i'm sorry that the honorable congressman from illinois left but to say that people are not interested is a mistake. every month 400,000 individuals

visit blockbuster.com and baskin.com every month to get nutrition information. millenials in particular care about this information. mr. pallone: i think you're right. i'm a little bit like mr. shimkus in that i don't pay much attention to it but i think maybe that's because we're older. i think younger people pay a lot of attention and maybe we should pay more attention, frankly system of thanks a lot. pll pitts: the chair thankings the gentleman and -- mr. pitts: the chair thanks the gentleman and recognizes the gentleman for questions. >> on dunkin' doughnuts, i know you're located in new york city. when new york city started this in 2007 you've been working on menu labeling for seven of eight

years? ms. raskopf: we have been working on it hard and fast for the last year, but we have perhaps had more insights than others who don't locate in localities. mr. guthrie: was it difficult to comply with the laws? ms. raskopf: i remember sitting around a table like this saying we can't do it but we did. mr. guthrie: how long? mr. raskopf: we had a deadline we had to meet and we met it. mr. guthrie: were the new york standards similar to the federal standards rks or different? ms. raskopf: we feel it's similar. mr. guthrie: ok. so when you look back, and all of us want to eat more

nutritional. so i guess -- soda can be listed from zero to a thousand calories so i choose the smaller. so what's reasonable to make people more healthy. i went to our schools, we have a lady in davis county, kentucky, making sure kids only get three pickles if they get a cheeseburger. if they get four pickles, they violate federal law. that sounds silly to say that but that's absolutely true system of what we're trying to say, that's fair i'll take -- that's actually there, i'll take people and show it to you. how do we get information in people's hands that i think the vast number of american people want, i think they want the information, but in a way they can sit back and say washington is doing things that are reasonable. so we talk about having to display 34 million different pieces of information if you

take how many ingredients you have but if you factorial it out, it gets almost -- i think dr. wootan you said that labeling software is very inexpensive but if you take menu labeling software that's inexpensive to come up with your calories and you have to print 34 million different combinations or print it all to your source, i think what's simple, we talk about young people wanting information, my kids live on their phones. so why not have it displayed in an electronic way that people have access to and they can always have it? that seems to make sense because the information -- to get the information to the people and take care of all the different problems. i don't know why that doesn't make sense. would that be easier, ms. hubbard if you were able to do it electronic? ms. hubbard: yes, sir. we have already looked into having that on our website and we have a mobile app, as you point out, i think the millenials and younger generation do, they live by

those. that would be a way to easily, they could even do combinations and it come -- it could compute those. i agree that most of that generation needs that but i disagree with ms. raskopf that our locations are similar. if you walk in dunkin' donuts there's one point of purchase and one menu board. ours is split throughout ther islow case. based on the rules as they're written, an advertisement, we would have to post the menu combinations on every single one of those pieces. mr. guthrie: we agree we want everybody to have information, how can we do it in a way that people don't look back, i could take you to davis county, kentucky, and show you the lunch lady making sure they get three paycheckles. they can't get in and reach on

the glove and put it on the plate, that might violate federal regulations. i know you want to offer this information in a way that works and doesn't look absurd when you go to, when reporters come to a school and say, are you kidding me? is there somebody in washington worried about whether a kid get there's or four pickles? i said that's true. that's why you're here. i didn't stage these workers to tell you that, they're here doing it. >> i think you can information overload. our tags have a score you have front of package labeling, you have the larger back of package label, you're talking about a lot of labels on one single food. frankly, you could put a label across the front just like a tobacco product that says this product will make you obese and i promise you people are still going to make that -- still going to buy that product if they want it. i think you're arguing apples and oranges here. everyone wants people to be healthier but in the end they'll et what they want to eat. doesn't matter what you put on

there. they're going to get what their taster is set for. mr. guthrie: i'm one, i almost never pick up something that has that label on it and not read the calories. i come from wanning the calories but let's do it in a reasonable way. mr. pitts: the chair recognizes the gentleman, mr. schrader. mr. schrader: thank you. i guess for dr. wootan and ms. raskopf, and to everyone, obviously this rule is not ready for prime time. we have considerable discussion about what it's going to do how it will be implemented, i understand that. although the rules have come out -- it's my understanding that there's not been a lot of guidance going on. some of you already addressed this. some of us sent a letter asking for a delay to iron out, get

some more guidance before we went prime. i'm grateful for this hearing and actually for this bill so we can look at what options we may have to make this actually reasonable and work because i think like everyone testified, we want to actually have good information out there for our consumers. i think that's good. that's -- but i am curious. do you think a little more time is needed? or should we just get to it and do up and down votes on this type of legislation? ms. raskopf: there's a lot of common ground with all of us. first, i think we agree an additional year is fine. we at dunkin' brands are ready to go now few but if others need more time that's fine. we all want that final guidance from the f.d.a., we want to make it clear that promotional and advertising materials are not covered by this. we want to know that when we

reformulate a product how long do we have to get that information to the public. so i think we can all agree there's a good deal of common ground here and we need to get that guidance from the f.d.a. i don't think it's additional legislation that's needed. it's the final guidance from the f.d.a. ms. wootan: i think many of us expected that food establishments would be able to implement menu labeling directly from the final rule but it turns out they have lots of questions that need answering that go beyond mere interpretation so guidance is necessary and that guidance is going to take a little bit longer because there'll be an opportunity for public comment. hearing people testify today, many of them don't have a full understanding of what's required. certainly 34 million possible combinations of pizza is not required by law. if they don't recognize that, i think their lawyers need to read the regulations more carefully. some of the other things about having 10 different signs in the convenience store is not required by law system of there's clearly some misunderstanding about what the

law requires and the guidance will help to clarify that. i think also as some of them become more familiar with the regulations they'll realize that this is not as burdensome as they think it is. just like the restaurants did 10 years ago when i first started working on menu labeling in oregon and other places around the country. i heard the same pla complaints from the restaurant industry. once we started to do it they realized this is not as complicated as it seem. they worked through it, they did it, it did not cost them a lot of money their coust hers like it, use it, and it's helping them to make lower calorie choices when they want to. mr. schrader: i ask that the letter that a lot of representatives and senators be put in the record. mr. pitts: thank you and i have another u.c. request from the ranking member for a letter from wegman's to put in the record without objection, so ordered. mr. schrader: just a last question i guess for maybe ms.

liddle. states have gone their own way on this and implemented labeling requirements if convenience stores grocery stores, everything. so how are you -- how have you dealt with that so far and isn't there an opportunity maybe with some sort of federal better federal guidelines to make it easier for you guys to compete in different venues across the country? ms. liddle: we have always agree a federal preemptive lieu lau is a good idea because we have been dealing with a patchwork of different municipalities and changes. but my argument isn't about how difficult it is to get the 34 million ways up. i actually do that online. any pizza that you can concoct in your head i can give you the actual calories for that slice. so i want to do that for my consumers. what i don't want to do is retrofit onto a menu board, just to fit in the box of the law,

say, well, put ranges. you don't have to put all 34 million, the law doesn't make you do that, that's true. but i want to do that. i want to do that because it's the right thing to do. what i don't want to do is put ranges that consumers will not understand and make my small business franchise yeses pay for that. mr. schrader: thank you. mr. pitts: the chair thanks the gentleman. dr. murray if -- dr. murphy is recognized for five minutes. mr. murphy: i think this panel is important in trying to deal with obesity in america. i want to look at this picture globally. none of us want to have the epidemic of obesity and the problems it brings along with it. there's a lot more that gos with this. there's a couple of schools i've been monitoring over the years, not in my district. one is a famous study done with naperville schools outside of chicago. they actually required physical activity intensive, not just battle ball, throw the ball, get

hit, sit down so you're not doing anything, but real cardiovascular activity where they wear monitors and they found their obesity rate plummeted and they found the kids involved in these activities, their reading scores went up they math scores went up dramatically. similar studies have been done in cambridge, massachusetts and other places. it does raise other issues system of calories itself i'm concerned by this passive, small number. if you look at studies out there, cause of obesity include genetics family history, age age of the person, sleep levels, emotional wellness medications they're on, other health conditions such as thyroid or adrenal gland functioning, smoking, anybody propose we put all those things on message boards too? those are going to be much more predictive. in other words, if what you do is sit in front of your tv and eat our food and that's all you do you will get fat. i don't care what restaurant it

is. and i get concerned that we're taking a pardon the pun, such a small slice of information here and we're not getting americans the information, get off your butt and move. that's what it ought to be. i'd like it when some restaurants say that some boxes of cereal say that. good for them. powerful message for kids. but i look at how the messages go through. we are going to have some things i'm not sure we can get the whole thing out, if we're going to be comprehensive, let's be comprehensive. i understand daily chef's specials will be exempt from this? is it more -- why is it more difficult to provide nutrition information in grocery or convenience store than a restaurant? can someone tell me that? >> our concerns are, and ms. wootan said we wouldn't have to be menu boards. i may need new lawyers i said

any place adjacent. any place i offered food or advertising combinations, including the fountain drinks, because i'm offering it as bundle here, adjacent to that product. so it is the number of menu boards and postings that i would have to have and the enormous combinations and i truly believe it would be information overload for consumers. >> and you compete for customers against traditional restaurants? >> we offer limited food offerings. but we operate in rural -- >> prepared food? >> they have fewer items in a convenience store than most sit-down restaurants. so they have fewer to analyze. they don't have to put them through the lab, you can run the recipe through a computer. >> those with online ordering,

are we going to have the technology to provide that information on the key yosk when you say i want the special number one? it's going to flash -- is that what we're doing? is that what year proposing? ms. wootan: the calorie information disclosure is tied to the method through which they provide information. if you're a restaurant that has a printed menu, calories would be there. if you're a restaurant that has a menu board if you have foods on display like your doughnuts on display at dunkin' donuts, the calories would be next to each doughnut. the way the information is provided will dend on the -- depend on the way they decide to give information to the their customers. mr. murphy: if you smoke you have a high percentage risk you'll get an illness. not everybody who smokes gets cancer but it's a high percentage. i wonder about this, do we reach

the point we give people a false sense of security if you only know your calories you'll be ok. all those other factors i mentioned, i'm more concerned about kids that are not moving. it's that formula. you have to, if you're taking the same amount of calories you burn you don't gain weight. take in more than you burn, you gain weight. i think we have a long way to go on this. in erm tos -- in terms of other health promotion. but i see my time is up. mr. pitts: chair thanks the gentleman. we are now voting on the floor so we'll keep going for watching the vote total, i'll get us over there in time. ranking member submitted another level for u.c. request to be submitted to the record signed by congressman loebsack, welch kilmer ruppersberger and slader to secretary burwell. without objection, it will be entered in the record. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from illinois, ms.

schakowsky, five minutes for questions. ms. shah coutsky: there's a little deja vu for me. my career started in the grocery store 45 years ago when a small group of housewives wanted to know how old our food was because everything was code dated and we did -- we -- like detectives we cracked some of the codes and found things in the grocery store that were days weeks, months, and years beyond the date. we questioneded the date. now everybody looks at the dates. i stand in the dairy section and watch people check the milk dates which they do. we want to encourage people to look at the calories. whether or not my colleague from illinois does, maybe he should. maybe we all should. and i just -- i want to suggest in terms of pizza. if there were a board that said on a slice of pizza this is how much sausage toods that slice,

this is how much pepperoni adds to that slice, i can figure out at least relatively whether i get a sausage pizza or pepperoni pizza or if there's a difference at all or if i get mushrooms or whatever i could see that. this is not hard. i'm sorry, it is not hard. to list the additions that you have on a pizza so i can check and see which is the better choice if i'm watching calories. there may be a gender difference there too. i don't know a woman who doesn't look at the calories on foods that we're buying. we all should. in terms of the grocery stores, many serve as catering operations also. why on a catering menu would it be harder to list what the calories are on those things? i would make decisions i do get catering things from my grocery store. i would leek to know that. what is the difference between, there is one a ham sandwich or a

turkey sandwich and that kind of thing when i'm having a party. health -- the cost of obesity, just for the health care costs is projected to be $344 billion by 2018. so even if you don't care about diabetes and all the other related things to obesity, we ought to be caring about the cost of, you know what it costs us, what it costs our health care system, to treat obesity. and that i think would be one of the most important pieces of information. so i don't quite understand the problems here. i did want to ask, why is this not a simple idea? and the f.d.a. suggested it.

ms. liddle: to do as you suggest, to put the information you described on a menu board would be hard to read and would be a little bit like a tree falling in the forest and no one hearing it. ms. schakowsky: if you've got calories, these arguments are just silly to me. ms. liddle: there's almost no one in the store to look at the suggestions you're making. but i do want to do what you suggest. i want to give you that precise information online. ms. shah cusky: i up -- ms. schakowsky: now, if we doe to the grocery store you see the date on the products. and believe me, people want it. and we have it. ms. liddle: we've been

disclosing it voluntarily for 14 years. ms. schakowsky: i care about young people too but i'm telling you juvenile diabetes and juvenile obesity is a problem but it certainly more than just young people. i wondered if you wanted to comment, dr. wootan. ms. wootan: there are a lot of people going into pizza restaurants, it may only be 10% but those people who do go in have the right to nutrition information like those people who are ordering online. if they don't think it matters then they don't need to have a menu board and list the options that are there. but if they have a menu board and think people need to know what's on the menu and list prices for it, then they need to post the calories. as you said, obesity really is one of the most pressing public health -- ms. schakowsky: when i order pizza, there's a menu attached to it so i can do it by phone or online again. why not on that menu?

just list that? ms. liddle: that's what we're proposing. that we bring the calorie information right on the electronic or online menu. ms. schakowsky: when i get the pizza, there's usually a paper menu attached to it. why couldn't it be on that? a carryout menu? ms. liddle: we consider those promotional materials. they're ads with flyers that say order this special. which is one of the other problems with the legislation for us and many other restaurants. mr. pitts: we have eight minutes left in the vote. chair recognizes cathy mcmorris rodgers five minutes for questions. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: i too do look at the calorie count. my democrat colleague and i loretta sanchez share that in common and why we're working with everyone to accomplish the goal of pro-- providing

information in a commonsense way. that's the purpose of the legislation is to accomplish the goal of the calorie counts in a commonsense way. i appreciate everyone being here today. wanted to start with ms. hubbard. i understand you own almost 300 stores is that correct? ms. hubbard: yes, ma'am. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: did you purchase them all at once? ms. hubbard: no we built some in 1970 that have evolved and morphed, we have acquired many stores and our construction model as changed. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: are they the same on the inside? ms. hubbard: no. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: do they sell the same things? ms. hubbard: no. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: is it possible you might need to design, buy and install a different menu board at every location?

ms. hubbard: every single location. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: how much do you think it will cost you? ms. hubbard: we think it will easily hit a million dollars for all our locations. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: next to ms. liddle of domino's, a bipartisan group sent a letter to the f.d.a. requesting a one-year delay on the enforcement of the regulations. do you support a delay on the enforcement of the regulation? ms. liddle: we support and appreciate that. however, we do not think it's the solution. we really believe we need a legislative fix. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: do you think even with a delay you and your franchisees could be able to comply with the regulations? ms. liddle: we could put ranges of calories on menu boards that would not make sense to consumers and that would cost our small franchisees a lot of money. we could do that, yes.

mrs. mcmorris rodgers: do you think others in the pizza community, papa john's, godfather's and other feel the same? ms. liddle: i think the smaller the company, the harder it is because of cost of compliance. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: as the rule is written, could you or one of your store managers be criminally charged for failure to comply? ms. liddle: the way the law is written, there are criminal penalties, you have to certify the information is correct both at the corporate level and at every store. there are 75,000 pizza stores in the united states. that's a lot of paperwork, one, and there are lots of teenagers who make hand-made products and even though we have very precise recipes for each thing, they can be off a little bit if they're just a little heavy handed with the cheese or if they don't put as many pepperonis on, it's not going to be the same calories exactly. i don't think that warrants sending a kid to jail.

mrs. mcmorris rodgers: thank you. ms. raskopf. i want to ask, who is responsible for having the correct calorie count at each location? the individual manager or someone in the corporate office? ms. raskopf: if it's something from our central menu that most restaurants will carry, that's something we at the corporate office do. there are things like manager's specials and those would be exempt as our understanding -- is our understanding. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: if the f.d.a. or local law enforcement officer were to come in and find that for example, a doughnut had been oversprinkled and therefore did not comply with the posted calorie count and was outside the allowable standard, who would be at fault? ms. raskopf: the reasonable standard under the f.d.a. protects all of us in the food service industry. they understand that when you're making hand prepared food there will be error. my understanding with the f.d.a. is really this is all about, any penalties are there to try to go

after anybody who would deliberately mislead the public. it's not very -- mrs. mcmorris rodgers: is it possible that one of your employees could be charged with a criminal charge? ms. raskopf: that's not our understanding. incorrect. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: who would receive the citation or criminal charge? ms. raskopf: we're still waiting for more guidance on that. what we understand is that that information would be given to us and would give us time to correct that. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: ok, then wanted to ask ms. liddle and mr. o'quinn, i would say that the two of you are quite different and also different from others on the panel, such as dunkin donuts. do you think this regulation tries to treat entities which are actually quite different, you know cookie cutter fashion which doesn't make sense, maybe you can just say yes or no because i'm out of time?