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 -- i think obviously the -- 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 states 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 are 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. so 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.

mr. pallone: 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. 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 ings and number of calories per

serving or to list the number of calories for the standard menu item such as for a multiserving item that's typically divided before presenting it to 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? dr. 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 servings. which would be different than what f.d.a. has system of for -- has. so, 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 consumers to be 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 easier 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

of 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. given the breadth of items and combinations on their menus 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 think they're similar. i worked for 7-eleven for 15 years, i think we have a good understanding of the challenges we all face. we at dunkin' brands have thousands of combinations. sandwiches, coffee, ice cream when you talk baskin robbins. we are located in conveience

stores. we have manager specials. we have tests, we have limited time offers. i empathize with everybody everyone here. but we have figured out how to label our products to make nutritional information available to consumers. all of us can do the same thing. 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 think 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 so thanks a lot. mr. pitts: the chair thanks the gentleman and recognizes the

gentleman for questions. mr. guthrie: 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 or 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 some of the localities that have nutritional labeling. 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? new york city has had it since 2007.

mr. raskopf: i believe it was 2008. we had a deadline we had to meet and we met it. mr. guthrie: were the new york standards similar to the federal standards 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. i was at something last evening that had a menu label up. soda can be listed from zero to a thousand calories so i choose the smaller. i knew i wanted to go cloer to zero than the other way. 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 . what we're trying to say, 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 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 the store. 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 pickles. 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 wanting 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 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 customers 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. 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 goes 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 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 kiosk 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 schrader 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. schakowsky: 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 questioned 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 adds to 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. schakowsky: now, if we go 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. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: who would receive the citation? ms. raskopf: what we understand is that that information would be given to us and give us time to correct that. ms. mcmorris rodgers: i want to ask ms. liddle and mr. o'quinn. i would say 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 quite different in a cookie cutter fashion which doesn't make sense? >> yes. >> yes. mr. griffith: thank you, mr. chairman. great to see you, delegate o'quinn. appreciate you coming to capitol hill to bring some wisdom from southwest virginia. up here. is there anything that you wanted to talk about that you haven't had an opportunity to talk about? mr. o'quinn: thank you congressman griffith. i would just say that this has been a very frustrating process. we meet with -- our industry meets with f.d.a. on a regular basis. mr. griffith: you're not talking about the hearing. mr. o'quinn: no, the hearing has been as smooth as silk. but the process throughout the

fleshing out of this has been difficult because we meet with f.d.a. on a regular basis on a wide variety of topics. this has been one particular topic in which they have been absolutely unwilling to meet or communicate. so here we are discussing a delay versus some clarity and reasonable flexibility but it has been a frustrating process but we appreciate the opportunity to be here today to air our side of the story. mr. griffith: thank you very much for being here. i'll ask both you and ms. liddle, the concerns about -- we've heard both today the concerns about somebody being charged with a felony, i guess ms. hubbard as well. one of the things you said, ms. liddle, was that as currently written, now, intent is a good thing. but as a lawmaker for a number of years, only a few years here, but a long time in the virginia legislature, if you don't make it clear somebody will misinterpret the intent and while the intent may be not to

charge your worker with a felony because they get a little excited with the cheese on the pizza or something where they don't follow the exact recipe, you've said the way it's currently written, they could be charged. is it a problem of the difference between the actual wording of the statute and the intent or do you all just disagree completely on -- ms. liddle: it's my understanding that this falls under the food and drug cosmetic act and under this there's sort of a presumption of guilt ahead of time. there are criminal penalties that could be put on folks and i -- mr. griffith: so you might like to see words like intentionally and repetitively or a pattern of intentional behavior. ms. liddle: correct. i agree with mr. o'quinn. it has been a frustrating experience waiting for rules from f.d.a. i frankly don't trust that the ultimate outcome of their rules will be correct and so i really believe that we need this fix. mr. griffith: i appreciate that and i would probably have some

more questions for you but the votes are on the floor and i know the chairman's been very patient to let me have this time. thank each and every one of you for testifying. i hope we can straighten this out. i yield back. mr. pitts: the chair thanks the gentleman. the time has expired on the floor. we have additional questions. i'm sure members will submit those to you in writing, if you'd please respond. this has been very, very interesting and informative hearing. i remind members that they have 10 business days to submit questions for the record. i ask witnesses to respond promptly. members should submit their questions by the close of business on thursday, june 18. so thank you for your patience your testimony and it's time for lunch, i think. with that, without objection the subcommittee is adjourned. [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]

>> the funeral for joe biden son took place this morning.

president obama was there to deliver the eulogy. we heard remarks from beau's brother hunter. hunter biden: the first memory i have is in a hospital bed next to my brother. i was three years old. i remember my brother was one year and one day older than me holding my hand, staring into my eyes. saying "i love you, i love you." over and over again. in the 42 years since, he

never stopped holding my hand. he never stop telling me just how much he loves me. mine wasn't the only hand beau's held. beau's was the hand everyone reach for in their time of need. beau's was the hand reaching for yours before you had to ask. that is my brother's sotrtory. that is his story. not his accomplishments. they were many. leader in kosovo, attorney general. the most popular elected official in his state a major in the army national guard.

to me my brother is not defined by his extraordinary resume. he is defined by the quality of his character. the boy, the man who always held you close. the one who always made you feel safe. the one who always made you feel braver then you might have been. the one you could always count on for a special kindness. the one who listened. the one who was always there when you needed him the most. >> beau biden was 46 years old. if you missed the funeral services will more bits and nine

at 8:00 eastern on c-span. >> this sunday on road to the white house. a conversation with senator jim webb. he discusses growing up in a military family and his service as a marine in vietnam. >> what i don't enjoy his campaign plans, to be blunt. i actually said and announced the exploratory committee that one thing i can say is i will never go anything to anyone if i am elected. it is a tough proposition to be

able to raise enough funds to conduct a viable campaign. >> jim webb, this sunday at 6:35, on road to the white house 2016. >> this sunday night on first lady influence an image. the lives of two first ladies, jane pierce and harriet lane. orphaned at a young age, harriet lane lived with her uncle, james buchanan, and becomes hostess to the white house when he becomes president, and the first to be called first lady in print.

examining the public life of the women who fill the position of first lady and their infant an -- influence on the presidency. as a complement to the series, c-span's new book, first lady the lives of 45 iconic american women. it is available as hardcover or e-book through your favorite bookstore or online bookseller. >> last month, toakata expanded its recall to include more vehicles in the u.s. the executive vice president of takata testified before the house energy and commerce subcommittee on manufacturing. this portion of the hearing is one hour 25 minutes.

mr. burgess: we are to the second panel. we will be given five minutes to summarize opening statements followed by questions from our members. mr. david kelly, project director, independent testing coalition, mr. john mozella, the chief executive officer. we will begin with mr. kennedy. you are recognized for your

opening statement. mr. kennedy: distinguish members of the subcommittee, i'm honored to be here on behalf of taktata and our employees. safety is the core of who we are and what we do. we are proud takata and bags have prevented serious injuries and hundreds of thousands of accidents. it is unacceptable to us for even one of our products to fail to perform as intended. we deeply regret each instance in winch someone has been injured or kid killed. our chairman has made the commitment personally to administrator rose kind. let me tell you what we are doing. after months of testing, we have agreed to take brought action in

conjunction with automakers to respond to your concerns and those of the public. we have recommended expanded recalls that go beyond what is suggested by the science and testing. most of the ruptures have involved older driver inflator's . that were originally subjected to previous recalls. most of those have occurred in regions of the country with absolute humidity and high heat. we are proposing expanded national recalls to replace all of these inflator's, from the start of production through the end of production, and any vehicle registered anywhere in

the united states. the recalls will proceed in stages. the final stage will include the replacement of all inflator's previously installed as remedy parts. takata will stop producing the batwing in fighters altogether. nevertheless, our agreement will contemplate expanded recalls for passenger airbag inflator's including an nationwide recall for one type of inflator. the others will cover specific vehicle models registered in the timidity's day's with the potential for the recalls to expand to other states if ordered. we will continue to test inflator's beyond the scope of the recall to determine if further action is required.

all analysis to date indicates the potential's for rupturing is limited to a small fraction of over inflators. one rupture is too many. it does explain how why a safety-related defect may arise in some inflators. not all of the inflators proposed are defective. 50,000 tests to date and research involving leading experts, our best current judgment is that potential for rupture is related to long-term exposure over many years to persistent conditions of a high heat and high absolute humidity and potential factors including possible manufacturing and vehicle specific issues. we have proposed a broader remedy program.

task kata will help determine the safety and service life of the remedy parts. we will work with our customers to get the word out to consumers who help maximize recall completion rates. in december we were producing 300,000 kits per month. we are now producing 700,000. i september we expect our monthly production to reach one million units. half the replacement kits we shift contained inflator is by other suppliers and we expect

that to reach 70%. we have confidence the in the inflators we are using today and that these will work as designed to save lives. we will continue to do everything we can to ensure uncompromised safety and the success of the recall efforts and we will keep congress and the public updated on our project. >> mr. kelly is knowledge. mr. kelly: thank you for the opportunity to discuss the independent testing coalition. the itc is committed to an independent and comprehensive investigation of the technical issues associated with takata airbag inflators as we focus on

the safety and peace of mind of all motorists. our primary goal is to find the root cause of this problem. as we look at this issue, it is apparent there is no silver bullet or easy solution to be found. the public needs to understand experts have been studying this problem for years. if this was anything but the complex project that it is, a root cause would have been identified by now. unfortunately that is not the case and a formal determination is not complete. we will conduct tens of thousands of chemical tests. this will be supplemented by a similar number of nondestructive tests, and many advanced

simulations. there be a significant amount of data generated from our tests that must be analyzed. this issue is too important for any stone left unturned. i do want to stress that we intend to conduct our investigation. we will work with all the affected parties. we will conduct this in an independent manner. we appreciate any suggestions from all parties but we will do our own analysis and testing procedures. we intend to make our findings public. mr. burgess: the chair thanks the gentleman. >> thank you for this opportunity. on behalf of the leading global

companies, i appreciate this opportunity to testify. first, the hearing today is timely and welcomed. we are fully committed to doing our part to complete this recall while continuing the bill of safety advances in the recent years. there are no quick fixes. we support rosekind's decision to prioritize effective manufacturing remedy programs. we want a clear unified approach. we share the committee's frustration. it is difficult to tell our customers how long this will take to resolve. the logistics in a global economy with 80 million units sold each year are highly complex and there are legal impediments to the industry led coordination. the key challenge is more basic.

getting consumers to take advantage of the free fix. the average consumer participation rate after a year and a half is 83% for newer vehicles. it falls to 44% for vehicles 5-10% old and further to 15% for vehicles older than 10 years. because of these concerns, our members have tasked the alliance to conduct the most intensive public opinion research ever on recalls learn what motivates some consumers to respond and why others don't. what motivates them to go into a dealership, what messengers are most effective. work is underway and we will share the results to help forge a multipronged effort to strengthen consumer participation. recall policy is vitally important. we are committing -- we are committed to resolving defects.

it is one piece of the safety equation. most fatalities, 90% plus, result from human error. what we are seeing profound gains and safety, technology does offer the promise of greater -- all the drivers we hear, are part of a continuum that thinks they will save thousands of lives by helping to compensate for human error. this is our emerging reality. let me state the obvious. we are committed to improving safety and proud of the results we have achieved. it is good business. safety innovation is critical to the competitive landscape.

auto companies are investing $100 billion every year in research and development to comply and compete with various public policy requirements. into compete in the globally dynamic marketplace. our polling shows your consumers , your constituents do see the progress. relative to 10 years ago your constituents say cars are saved or -- cars are safer. they have higher-quality. the progress is being recognized and that is being recognized. chair: the chair thanks the gentleman. >> i appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. we represent auto manufacturers that sell trucks

in the united states. we sold 43% of new vehicles purchased in the u.s. last year and produced 40% of all vehicles built here. our member companies are committed to a future in which there are zero fatalities. this hearing prisons an opportunity to further this important discussion on improving auto safety. the takata issue is an unprecedented situation. affected automakers are taking extraordinary measures to locate and communicate recall information so they know to take vehicles in for repair. our members have gone far beyond what the law requires. multiple rounds of recall

notices, cindy express mail so the notifications are not discarded. . they are working closely with their dealer networks to ensure that they created the itc to conduct independent testing of recalled parts is led by david kelly. recall campaigns are only one component of creating a safer environment. all stakeholders must work together in the effort to improve vehicle and highway safety. critical areas of focus include oversight of safety systems, the development of new technologies, and driver and passenger behavior. this committee has given the ability to require reporting and tracking of safety data that better allows us to identify

problems and the existing fleet of vehicles and to address and solve them. the number of recalls is evidence that the requirements of the tread act, and the commitment of the manufacturers are advancing the goal of improved the equal safety. automakers are deploying advanced technology to accelerate the move to crash avoidance. soon vehicle to vehicle and vehicle to infrastructure communications. vehicle to vehicle communications could address 80 pretrade -- 80% of crashes. for newer vehicles the recall completion rate is upwards of 80%. the completion rate falls dramatically as vehicles age. this is a key challenge and

raises an important question. are there limits to the success of a voluntary system? global automakers and members are exploring ways of the that the industry can achieve better outcomes, working with officials and a happy to talk with you about new methods for getting useful, effective, and actionable recall information to customers such as including recall notifications and annual vehicle registration processes. it is it is important to keep in mind that highway safety is improving. we announce the traffic fatality decreased by 3.1% over the previous year and by nearly 25 percent since 2004. however, there is clearly more to be done. regarding the recall, the most important thing that we can do is to make sure that people are aware of the status of the vehicle. every vehicle owner should go to a safer car .gov and enter their vehicle identification number to determine whether additional action is needed. this needs to be done now, and it needs to be done several

weeks from now when manufacturers will have posted a specific bands of the vehicles that have just been added. i did this myself for my vehicle and my children's vehicle, and it gave me the peace of mind. global mind. global automakers in our members will continue to work toward our mutual goal. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. mr. burgess: the chair thanks the gentleman. the chair thanks the entire panel for testimony. we're moving to the question portion of the hearing. i will recognize myself for five minutes request is. i have a couple of questions that relate to the appellate inflator. mr. kennedy, i will primarily ask you. mr. kelly, you have information because of your independent testing role. please feel free. is takata the only airbag manufacture that uses sodium

nitrate in its airbags? >> it is ammonium nitrate. >> nitrate. mr. kennedy i believe we are the : only one that uses it as a main propellant. there are there are other manufacturers that use it as a supplemental propellant. mr. burgess: is there any other airbag other than those manufactured by takata that has experienced this energetic disruption? mr. kennedy i cannot really : speak to recalls for the other suppliers, chairman. i really don't know the answer to that. mr. burgess: it is just that we have had -- the 2nd hearing i have been involved in this issue. ammonium nitrate just keeps coming up. a pretty powerful compound. and it just begs the question, is there a linear relationship between ammonium nitrate used as an inflator and these accidents that are happening?

mr. kennedy: the studies that we have done and the research that we have from some of the leading experts in the world seems to indicate that ammonium nitrate is certainly a factor in the inflator ruptures. there are many, many other factors. i think you heard doctor rose can't talk about some. you heard mr. kelly talk about some. it takes a long time's. seven at 12 years. it takes high absolute humidity high heat. what is difficult what is difficult about the situation is you can put to inflator is in that situation. one is fine and what is not. that is really what the struggle has been with getting to the root cause. ammonium nitrate appears to be one factor that contributes. high humidity is an issue. my understanding is some of these are manufactured to absorb humidity which would then go along with the seven to 12 year timeframe of presumably what they will get completely used up over some time. is that correct?