rooted in, his belief in this country, his belief and the courage to fight for what he believed in. there was a quote he made, i just read it today, it was put up by forbes as the quote of the week. but he once said, he who is not courageous to take risks will not accomplish anything in life. he took risks and had the courage to stand up. and one great foundation of this country provides the individuals the right to do that, to challenge others and to live a life that is very full. and he lived his life to the fullest and reached many and to the athletic world, he reached the height and to reaching others, he did the same in his personal lif

>> we will hear more about the legislative agenda for democrats with javier becerra chair of the house democratic caucus. he talks about the 2016 race and the latest speculation for a potential running mate for presumptive nominee hillary clinton. >> that is a decision left totally to the person who had earned our nomination. select clinton has earned the right to make that selection. i have total faith that she is going to make a really good selection. i have confidence that her decidings are going to be great for america and one of the most important ones that she will make will come early with her selection. >> what should be the role for senator sanders going forward in the party?

>> big, influential, active. i hope he is as animated moving into november as he has been throughout this primary process. folks. woken many he has made young people believe. he has given democrats the opportunity to bring into our party so many different faces. i thank him for all he has done, but i don't want to say for all he has done because he he still has a lot to do, and his voice is going to be very important out there. he inspired people who were beginning to distance themselves from the electoral process and from government. our government needs to have people betancesing to be involved. >> think back to when all this first started, the presidential season, the primary season. do you think at that point you would have ever said that senator sanders has a big role to play in the democratic party? >> no. no.

and you know what? this is america. that is the beauty of america. who also would have said that the republican party would become the party of trump? you never know. >> you can watch that entire interview with the congressman tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> madam secretary, we proudly give 72 of our delegate votes to the next president of the united states -- [cheers and applause] ♪

>> coming up next, a hearing on efforts to recover lost art that was stolen during the holocaust. then a look at the impact foreign workers are having on the u.s. labor market. and later, defense secretary ashton carter talks about ongoing efforts to modernize the military. >> helen mirim recently testified on khalil about effort to locate and return artwork that was stolen from victims of the holocaust. the actress recently starred in a film that focused on the issues. she appeared along shied those involved in the recovery process, including a man searching for lost family hair looms. this is two hours.

>> we are considering the holocaust ex-appropriated art recovery act. nothing congress does, and nothing anyone could ever do could right the wrongs of the holocaust. the nazis and alleys perpetrated a crime against humanity as evil and fast as any in history information a sense they destroyed the world as we knew it. as general eisenhower wrote to general george c. marshall upon liberating the concentration things germany, i saw that beg description. liberating them is one of the greatest accomplishments.

i am proud my dad is one of that great generation who flew b-17 missions from england over into nazi germany, shot down and captured as a p.o.w. on his 26th mission. there was a happy ending to this story or else i wouldn't be here. among many crimes committed by the nazis was the mass looting of art and cultural property from victims in europe. estimates reached as high as several million on thes. in the immediate aftermath of world war ii. the united states catalogged property and undertook to repatriate lost art to its native country. but for a variety of reasons, much never reached the people it was taken from in the first place. decades later, though, when more information began to come to light about the scope of the nazi's crimes, the united

states government resolved to do better. so in 1998 we convened the washington conference with more than 40 nations present. together we urged the victims and their heirs todom four and claim their heritage and took steps to achieve a just and fair solution to their claims. that same year congress expresseded that all governments should undertake good faith efforts to facilitate the return of private and public property. and then in 2009 the united states and nearly 50 other nations issued the tarazen decoration, urging the signatories, including the united states, to ensure their legal systems facilitated the just and fair solutions and that claims were resolved based on the fact and merits of the claims and awful the relevant.coms submitted by the

pearts. the heer act will ensure the u.s. government meets its commitment to these international pledges. fundamentally but for a limited time it enables claimants to proceed to the merits of their claims in a court with jurisdiction. the act creates a limitations period of six years from when laimants actually discover the identityity and location of the art and information that it is their. it waives state bars and the doctrine of latches. important doctrines developed based on assumptions that do not apply to the holocaust. but the act also represents a exroo mize. the ability to find art is better now, and claimants should be given a chance, but that chance should not last forever. in addressing civil procedure and remedies to the violations of humanity rights, the act falls in the jurisdiction of both subcommittees here today and requires federal

congressional attention. as the u.s. court of appeals for the 9th circuit wrote, the power to wage and resolve record, including the power to legislate restitutions and represent rations is one that has been rereserved to the national government. california's attempt to limit the period was an unlafell encroachment. so congress has the power to act, and we should. i want to thank again each of our witnesses for being here today to advance their testimony. next i think i will recognize senator schumer for his opening statement, then senator cruz, senator blumenthal and then to the witnesses. >> thank you, senator.

>> thank you for being here. for decades survivors and family members of those who parished in the holocaust have sought whatever small measure of justice they could for the crimes committed against them. even today, more than 70 years after those atrocities, there are still wrongs that need to be righted. while there are so many things that we can never recover from the holocaust, so many lives taken from us, it is our moral duty to help those survivors and their families achieve what justice can be found. for example, the nazis not only sought to kill jews in europe. they sought to destroy their heritage. temples were destroyed, books were burned and art was stolen. the nazis tried to end european jewelry totally, including the rich intellectual history of the jews of europe. they failed. but there is still work to be

done to help the survivors and their families reclaim pressured family hair looms that were stolen from them. pieces of art stolen by jewish families by the nazis have been passed down and sold through the years even though there are survivors and descendents out there who are the rightful owners. the statute of limitations for these crimes has passed. they occurred over 70 years ago. but the existence and location of these pieces of art of still be discovered. the movie women in gold was about one woman's legal fight to recover a piece of her stolen family history. and after seeing the incredible performance in the move, i called up ambassador l lauder and told him i wanted to help these holocaust victims and their families. so, along with my friend and -- colleagues, we

put together legislation to allow vakets to have their day in court. changing the statute of limitations to allow families to bring their claims to court once they identify a piece of art that was stolen, instead of when the crime was committed. this only makes sense -- this not only makes eminent sense, it is morally the right thing to do. it is a drop of justice in what was an ocean of injustice, but it is our duty as legislators to give that justice, that drop, to these families. so i want to thank again the senators for working with me on this important legislation, and want to thank chairman grassley for his willingness to work with us as well. and i thank the witnesses for left-handing your voice toss

this important issue, and i hope we can pass this bill as soon as possible. >> senator cruz? >> thank you, mr. chairman. on this day 72 years ago american, british and canadian troops had fought their way 10 miles inland of norm did on the coast of france. it was the day after d-day, which launched the allies' forces invasion to free europe from the grip of the third reich. as our troops swept across europe and into germany, what they found would shock and appall the world. they liberated places like dachau and or concentration camps where the nazis sent june speakable numbers of jews to forced labor, and many to their death. they also discovered hidden away in churches and underground mines countless works of art and other valuable

cultural property that the nazis had taken from their victims. these stolen treasures were not simply the spoils of war. they were the fruits of a policy that stretched back well before the war to 1933, when hitler and the nazi party took power. this policy called for the systemic discrimination and oppression of jews and other grooms whom the nazis regarded as unacceptable according to their eviliology. the nazis enacted laws denying them citizenship, segregating them from society, banning marriages and ex-appropriating their property. the goal of course was to de-humanize the jewish people, a process that led to the so-called final solution, the nazi phaneuf mitchell for the policy of sternum nation. after all, if a regime is willing to strip people of their citizenship, their homes,

their businesses, their precious belongings, it is not much further of a step to expect that it may try to take their lives as well. and that is precisely what the nazis did to the jewish people on a horrific and unprecedented scale. sadly today over 70 years later we are still trying to cope with the consequences of the holocaust. one consequence that we are here today to address is the nazi's looting of hundreds of thousands of works of art and other cultural property in what has been described as the greatest displacement of art in human history. despite the allies' restitution efforts following the war, much of the stolen property was never reunited with its rightful owners. and over the years, often through sheer happenen stance, many works found their way into american museums and galleries. the great dislocations caused by the holocaust and a world war, followed by a cold war

that lasted another 50 years made it difficult, if not impossible for many holocaust victims and their families to locator prove the ownership of their stolen valuables. records were lost or destroyed. some were inaccessible because of the cold war, and many transfers of property went unrecorded on the black market. to undertake the herculean task of tracking down lost motions under these circumstances would have been a tall order even for a family with the resource toss do so. but many surviving families were left with nothing after the war, having narrowly escaped extinction. many families were not emotionally and psychologically prepared for such an arduous undertaking. and in many cases the work of finding and reclaiming a family's stolen heritage fell to future generations. this work unfortunately remains unfinished. the heer act which i am proud

to sponsor is intended to ease the burden on those families by temporarily preempting state time-based litigation defense like statutes of limitations and latches. instead it creates a uniform federal six-year statute of limitation that is tailored to the unique circumstance of of holocaust era disputes. this bill well help ensure that claims are adjudicated based on the actual facts and merit and are not short circuited by technical or non-merits defenses that far too often work to the disadvantage of holocaust victims and their family. the act is just one modest step to make good on the commitments the united states has made since it agreed to the warrant ference principles on nazi confiscated art in 1998. these principles declare that families, quote, should be encouraged to come forward and make known their claims to art that was confiscated by the

nazis and not subsequently returned. and that steps should be taken to achieve a fair and just solution to such claim. in 2009 the united states adepositted the terrorism decoration, which called on the signatories to make certain that claims to nazi looted art are resolved exe dishesly and based on the facts and marty of the claim. that is what the heer act aims to accomplish. the quest to reunite the families of holocaust victims with their stolen heritage is ultimately a quest to helm them reclaim a tangible link to a happier fine in their family's history arcs time before the darkness of the holocaust. that is far more valuable than whatever economic value the works of art or cultural artifacts might have today. indeed that is priceless. there are many issues on which the sponsors of this cornen, on, jorn

blumenthal and others and i might disagree, but on this issue i am glad to see bipartisan cooperation coming together on issues of principles and justice. that is what i am pleased to see and i am glad the witnesses are here to testimony and these important issues. >> thank you senators. to assure justice to victims, survivors, families, who is art was brazen len looted and stolen. this hearing room has seen a lot of history. this hearing is truly historic. it is a milestone and a landmark in assuring that this congress speaks on behalf of justice.

my father came to this country in 1935 to escape nazi persecution. e succeeded in bringing over his immediate family. they did not lose art, but they lost lives of family members. the destruction, and looting more ft of this art was than pilfering of property. was an act of inhumanity, problemming the victims of fundamental dignity and respect and culture that has lasted all of these years. it has been described in very clinical terms as, quote, the greatest displacement of art in human history.

but that on subtract characterization failed to do justice to the horror and unspeakable inhumanity of that era and of what they did. there are reports that hundreds of thousands of pieces of art and other cultural items were taken from those persecuted by the nazis and an estimated 20% of western art in europe according to the commission on art recovery. the time is long past to return e ill-gotten gains of that unspeakable horror. it was in fact more than the theft of material goods. was the hardship of loss of heritage and of a personal ackground.

and aggravating the theft was the destruction of the documentation by the same act of theft. in many cases the opportunity of victims and survivors to bring their claims ended before the end of world war ii under the statute of limitations. arbitrary statutes of limitations should not be used to bar these claims. the federal courts have ruled that states cannot provide a remedy, and that is why the act is fundamentally needed. it is not just a legal issue. it is a humanitarian issue. decades and generations overdue, congress can now provide some measure of peace and justice to families whose cherished art was brazenly stolen, and the time is long well past for this action.

financial recovery can never fully recover the lives that were lost, can never compensate for the unspeakable inhumanity and tragedy of the holocaust, but it helps recognize at least the courage and strength of rvivors in this room echoing programs unseen and invisible are voices and faces of people who could not be here, and their losses are very much with us now. you give them the advocacy that they deserve and need, and i thank every one of you for being here. thank you. >> thank you, senator. chairman? >> i think since we have had a long time for opening remarks, i will put my statement in the record. but i should thank all the witnesses for participating and one sentence from my speech

will kind of sum up where i was going to end up, the bottom line. we need to fulfill our commitment to make sure that the artwork is returned to its rightful owners. in addition, when the authors of this legislation feel it is ready to be put on the agenda, i will put it on the agenda. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we very much appreciate that and appreciate your leadership. at this point i want to welcome and introduce each of our five witnesses today. the first witness testifying will be ahmad rashad ronald lauder. he is a former ambassador to austria and former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the european and nato policy. he is currently the chairman of the council of the world jewish restitution organization, which was established in 1993 to address the unfinished work of returning jewish property that was stolen by the nazis during the holocaust. a graduate of the school of the

university of pennsylvania, ambassador lauder has served in prominent rolls in community sufficiency. healthen mirim is a prominent actress. she won an oscar for her portrayal of queen elizabeth ii . and in 2015 she portrayed maria altman and the women in gold, a get about their efforts to back a painting that was taken from her family during the holocaust. ms. monica dugot. she is a senior vice president and international rector of restitution for the world renowned auction house christie's, where she works to help investigate and resolving restitution claims. she is a graduate of the

cordoza law school. she served eight years as deputy director of the new york state banking department, holocaust claims officer. agnes is president of the commission for art recovery which was established in 1997 to advocate for and assist with efforts to rest tuitt art that was wrongfully taken by the nazis. she is a graduate of the university of law in budapest and has masters degrees from the university of pennsylvania and magill university. she has over 20 years experience regarding holocaust era property claims and litigation. he is currently of counsel toe a paris firm. mr. simon goodman. he is the accident ant of a german jewish family that lost many works of art during the holocaust and has spent decades in a quest to recover them. he is a graduate of munich

university and the author of the orpheus clock, a book about s efforts to reclaim his family's heritage. with that i would ask the panel members to stand and be sworn up. >> if you would raise your right hand. do you affirm the test you are about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you got? you may be seated. ambassador lauder, we will begin with your opening statement. welcome. >> thank you, senator cruz. before i make my remarks, i am president of the world jewish congress, and on behalf of the jewish people not only in the united states, but everywhere. we say to the senate thank you for this law. it has been long overdue, but we thank you very, very much on behalf of the jewish people. ranking member

coons, senator and members of the committee. to many americans, the fall of azi germany and the end of world war ii is a matter for the history books. we know about the mass murder of human beings, but few people know about the mass theft of victims' property, and even fewer know about the specific confiscation of priceless works of art by nazi leaders, including hitler, gion and other top officials. what makes this particular crime even more despicable is that this art theft, probably the greatest in history, was ontinued by governments, museums and many check tors in the decades following the war. this was the dirty secret of

the post war art world, and people who should have known better were part of it. in many cases, legal barriers like arbitrary statutes of limitations were imposed on families that had not been aware that their father's paintings hanging in a private home or estate museum. at is the issue which brings us together today. how do we find the best way to render fair and just decisions for the artworks that are still dispute and those still missing? make no mistake. this crime continues to stain the art world. i commend helen mirin for bringing this massive crime to

the public's attention in the wonderful film woman in gold. unfortunately, most stolen art ses do not end as positively asthma re-altman's struggle to retrieve her uncle's paintings from the austrians. in spite of everything, this remains a very complex problem. with each of us here today, we would like to see every piece of stolen art returned to the rightful owner. we recognize that what a victim might decide is an equitable outcome is often quite different from what a respected possessor of stolen art believes is fair. in many cases a confiscated piece of art may have been performed with all good tentions because the buyer

was unaware that the work was stolen. 18 years ago in 1998, those of you committed to restitution concluded that international cooperation and standards were necessary to help how this art can be recovered. along with representatives from 45 nations, we developed what today is referred to as the washington principles. i was there, and the amount of excitement happened is truly spectacular. 11 years later in 2009, 46 nations, including the united states, issued a decoration which urged the signatories, and i quote, "to ensure that the legal systems or alternative processes, while taking into account the different legal traditions, facilitate just and fair solutions with regard to nazi

confiscated and looted art, and to make certain that claims to recover such art are resolved expeditiously and based on the facts and merits of the claims ." when the united states endorsed the washington principles in 1998 and the decoration in 2009 , the u.s. committed itself to the recovery of art that was confiscated by the nazis during the holocaust. our adherence to this commitment requires that resolutions of such cases be based on the merits of each procedural on technicalities or the capacity of one party to outspend or outwait the other. there are museums here in the united states that have been waiting out the clock to pass

the statute of limitations. this also forces claimants to spend enormous amounts of money on legal fees, another strategy to make them give up. this is not justice. stalling claims is an abuse of the system. sadly, there are museums that feel no need to uphold the washington principles. many institutions do the very least that is required and not much more. the fundamental question posed by the heer act is have we here in the united states done enough to ensure fair and equitable solutions? i believe we have done a great deal, but there still could and should do much more. the act creates a uniform natural statute of limitations

for claims for nazi confiscated artwork. the bill provides that existing legal claims should not be denied simply because of the passage of time, especially if the claimant did not have actual knowledge of the artwork's location and the facts necessary to make a claim . once a claimant does have the requisite knowledge, he or she cannot and should not sit on their rights. we are suggesting that once a aimant has actual knowledge, they must bring the case to ourt within six years. this bill is also important for what it does not do. it does not prejudice the merits of each case one way or the other. it simply allows claimants to have their day in court and not

be flawed by technicalities. the builders do not create a new legal theory or rule of liability under which da a case can be brought. in other words, it does not create new at 11:00 causes of action. the act's purpose is to advance the cause of justice before the law. the bill's aim is not to inflict punishment or pass judgment on any individual who may have unexpectedly acquired artwork that was confiscated during the holocaust. rather, the act's goal is to ensure that people with claims are afforded an opportunity to have their cases heard on their merits. mr. chairman, some may ask why hould we care now? this theft of artwork by the nazis was evil. that was the holocaust, and it

took place before most people alive today were born. so i believe we should care deeply because denying victims of the holocaust and their families access to a just hearing based on the merits of each case is wrong, plain and simple. there is another reason as well. denying the justice continues the crimes of the nazis, and that is unconscionable. it gives victory to the nazis 71 years after their unconditional defeat. we must always keep in mind that the practicality, every piece of istominen art, a murder was committed. seven decades after the end of world war ii and the holocaust, resolving this problem is long overdue. if people are truly interested in justice, if they really wanted to solve these issues, then they should support this legislation. we can not go back and change

what happened as we can do to stop the continuation of this crime. after more than 70 years, it is time to put these ghosts to rest. it is in fact long overdue. thank you, mr. chairman, for this opportunity to speak before the committee today. i want to personally thank the chairman and senator schumer, senator cruz and senator -- for l for inducing introducing this important legislation. > thank you, ambassador. you have to press the red button in front of you. >> that makes sense. i am helen mirim. i am an ack who portrayed the role in the film woman in gold. i will explain a little bit. this is the true story of a woman who overcame enormous odds and righted a wrong that

had stood for decades. 60 years after fleeing vienna during the nazi era, mrs. altman who was by then an elderly jewish woman, began a many years long journey to reclaim niemi possessions seized by the nazis. among them was a famous painting, which was a painting of her aunt. reclaim what was rightfully hers, was to fight the austrian establishment and take the case to the u.s. supreme court. on a more personal level, maria had to confront those terrible memories of the end of her family life in vienna. returning to the country she had been forced to flee by the nazis and reliving the pain of having everything she held dear being riched away from her and the people she loved murdered in the death camps. so i personally had to go on a

journey portraying maria altman, and the journey -- i am a child of the second world war. i was born in 1945, and the memory of the second world war was very much a part of my history. but i never really truly confronted the absolute reality of what had happened in those days. and in playing maria altman, had to put her memories into my mind, and to do that i had to read a lot of research material and really relive those moments. that is why, honestly, i am here now. it was that journey of playing maria that made the absolute reality of those days so relevant to me today at this moment in time. it is a terribly sad fact that more than 70 years later victims of the holocaust and their families are still

contemplating whether to seek restitution for what was stolen from them and lost under the most horrible of circumstances. but a lack of transparency, a lack of access to information concerning the location of stolen art, and a lack of a legal assurance that at least they can have their say in court, this discourages them from taking action. so when considering this issue, it is essential to understand what is preventing the victims of nazis from reclaiming what is rightfully theirs? logically i think we all could agree that the right thing to do in every instance is to return the art to its rightful owners. the very act of nazi ex-appropriation was not only unjust, but it was unconscienceably inhumane. and still today it seems there are some out there who lack the will to recognize victims and

their families as the rightful owners. as the senators pointed out, art lost in the holocaust is not just important for its aesthetic and cultural value. restitution is so much more, much more than that, than reclaiming a material good, and this is what i learned by playing maria altman. restoring physical parts of lost heritage to holocaust victims and their families is the moral imperative. for me, maria altman and for many families fighting to reclaim what rightfully belongs to them. art restitution has very little to do with potential financial gains. art restitution is about preserving the fundamental human condition. it gives jewish people and other victims of the nazi terror the opportunity to reclaim their history, their culture, their memories, and most importantly, their

families. the generation of jewish people that were burdened by the cruel acts of the nazi regime had the choice but to carry on with their lives. after what they had experienced, tremendous loss and deep sorrow, moving forward was the only viable path because the past held such unbearable pain. today we live in a freer world where a new generation has emerged with the resources and time to finally begin to deal with this issue and pursue justice. i mean it was incredible to me. i was doing a play in new york. the audience every night when i ame out from the stage door, every night people would approach me because the film was out at that time and say that is my family's story. that's the story of my family. that happened to us. it is extraordinary how many people out there share maria's

story. their mothers, and grandmothers. so for what it is worth, maria altman's story is one of noble justice, one i believe that is important to be told, and one that should be continued to be told by future generations. and it is a story that is not made possible without this incredible country, the united states of america. these are american stories, stories that capture the integrity and the power of the united states. it's justice system and it's rule of law. the maria altman story as a refugee in the united states was finally granted justice through retaining what was rightfully hers at the hands of the u.s. supreme court. but victims of nazi theft should not have to demonstrate the boldness and sexassity to commit the resources that maria altman had in order to recover

what is rightfully theirs. art is a reflection of memories hat are shared across familial and cultural lines. when the jewish people were dispossessed of their art, they lost their heritage. memories were taken along with the art. having no memories is like having no family, and that is why art restitution is so comparative. the lives of so many people could be rejuvenated through the actions and the leadership of the u.s. congress to ensure that fair and equitable solutions in these cases are assured. greed, cruelty, self-interest, domination will always be with us. it's an easy option. justice is so much more difficult, so much more complex. but we all dream of justice. we are incapable of changing the past, but fortunately we

have the ability to make change today. thank you for your leadership and your efforts to address this issue in these modest reforms contained in the act by ensuring that at least here in the united states access to justice and the courts will be ensured. thank you very much for this opportunity. >> thank you for your testimony . >> thank you mr. chairman and members of the committee. >> please turn your microphone on. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good afternoon. i am monica dugot, international director of restitution at christie's. for the last 120 years i have overseen the company's responsibility to do our best to keep looted objects off the market. i have been asked to appear oday on my individual. to offer what information i can.

while christie's takes no position on the proposed legislation at hand, it is broadly supportive of measures that enable and promote the fair and just resolution of restitution claims as per the 1998 washington conference principles. today my goal is to provide what help i can from personal experience and perspective by explaining three key concepts. one, why restitution issues persist in the art market today. two, how christie's gaffe navigates these issues, and three, how we aim to resolve restitution disputes when a title claim arises. let me start with a bit of background from the market perspective. for many reasons, art restitution was a closed chapter for many decade after world war ii. nazi looted art may have been in plain site in national checks, and much more was absorbed into private collections in europe and the united states. the looted art became unshackled from its history.

the circulation of loot the artwork, by which i mean not just paintings, but drawings, objects, books has been inevitable. i wish to emphasize this is not just a problem for jews, but much broader. even people who did not consider themselves jewish were persecuted on one basis or another. just as nazi looting was large in scope, the scope of these issues is enormous. estimates range from as few as hundred thousand objects to several millions. the emotional value to the rightful owners and their families who view these object ases part of their heritage may be beyond estimate. w does christie's and a half gate? chrisities handles a large volume. we have a dedicated restitution team and a strong threat of

responsibility running through our entire business operation. as a global market leader we set a high standard for the profession and act in a self-policing capacity through an internal system of checks and balances. we conduct thorough due del janssen to protect cristie's good reputation. we also enguy in the issue the art restitution because we have a responsibility to do so. we respect the heirs and claimants looted collections, and respect the position of collect tors. it is important to understand that christie's role is that of of a broker. we do not take title to the art we sell. claimants may include the victim or their direct heirs. consigners are usually good patriot purchasers with no connection to a theft in the past. we need to ensure as far as we stolen to take on a

inside. if we find we can't convey good title, we will tomlin to sell it. in cases where it becomes clear that there is an outstanding claim, christie's can work as a third party for a resolution. by remaining a neutral intermediary and committed to promoting solutions, christie's helps to maintain a safe and trusted mark place where buyers, sellers and heirs all know we are committed to addressing to the best of our ability any nazi era issue in provinces of the works we offer. chrisies vets almost almost every pre-1940's artwork for sale. we do this across my objects and regardless of estimated value. this means we are looking at about 100,000 items a year. in our due diligence work we

look for sensitive names, names indicating an artwork may have been in a victims collection or in the possession of a notorious nazi collector or may have passed through the hands of complicit dealers. we look for markings. we check artworks against up to a dozen database of looted and stolen artwork. when we fwind a potential issue, we undertake whatever research necessary. the fragmented respiration and lack of centralization of information increases the challenges to our limited resources. in the last decade we have handled over 200 claims. the majority for financially modest art works, which nonetheless have real resonance for the claimants. when these claims do arise as a result of our research findings, christie's follows a preferred approach, which is to advocate a settlement.

rather than litigation. essentially our approach is to act as an intermediary between the claimant and the current holder of the claimed artwork. we try to help each party under the other's position and to help interpret or context lies information. especially as a sensitive and upsetting time. our goal is to establish a fair, amicable, trance parent dialogue to bring back a fair, amicable, transparent claim resolution. have a good discussion between claimant and holder is often the most productive route. there is legal moral and ethical correctness on each side as well as a high degree of motion a lot. we act as a nuretral party to protect the market and bring a semblance of closure to both sides. i hope this gives you a sense of the issues active in the art market tied afternoon how christie's seeks to work on them with care and attention,

working with both parties on agreements. thank you for inviting me to join this panel here today and continuing to draw attention to the issues that affect all of us in the international restitution community. >> thank you very much. >> chairman and members of the committee, i would like to join the other members of the panel in thanking you for the opportunity to testify in support of the heer act. the united states has been committed to assist with the restitution of nazi era confiscated art for over 70 years arnings i commend you for introducing a bill that is next step to uphold that commitment in the spirit of the washington conference principles. in a january 2016 decision, the d.c. circuit court found that clarification was still needed regarding holocaust era property looting. in simon versus the republic of

hungary, the court went on to state that the elicit taking of a art during the holocaust did more than affect genocide. rather, we see the ex-appropriation as genocide. just like the prosecution of genocide should never be barred by the statute of limitations, in the same manner, works of happy procured during a campaign of genocide should be deemed as forever tainted. since the conference principles, current possessors of art have repeatedly to mischaracterize u.s. policy, although this policy has been clear and consistent sin the 1940's. it is important that the act retain the main elements of this policy. a bill aimed at ensuring claimants to have access to

justice should not be a vehicle to federally protect those who have been fighting all along to keep these cases out of court. therefore, nazi era confiscated art should be returned to the rightful owner. lack of knowledge should not defeat restitution. confiscated art or holocaust era loot the art or all the other terms used to describe that during a campaign of genocide means all types of property loss regardless of the reason for the persecution or the geographic location. the committee should consider that the act would not achieve it's purpose of enabling claimants to come forward if it eliminate one type of procedure obstacle in order to replace it with another. to cite some concerns narrowing the definition of looted art.

shifting the burden of proof unnecessarily to the claimant, and adding other procedural obstacles. cases related to holocaust looted art should only be adjudicated on the merits. statute of limitations and latches are intended to abort the adjudication of claims. these procedural doctrines were not designed to deal with the greatest art theft in history. one of the many things for statute of limitations concerns the unfair burden on the possessor the obligation to conserve evidence of legitimate oneship for decades. in the case of nazi era looted art, the burden is on the aimant to produce proof of ownership, a task economy indicated by the fact that the original owner often disappeared along with the proof of ownership. providence research was almost

impossible right after liberation, but today there is much more information available. toby clear, the act will not create a new cause of action and is not retroactive in nature. however, those claims that have not been adjudicated should now be heard on their merits only. take the cases until state law. statute of limitations had passed before the end of world war ii. is it reasonable to deny a restitution case because the victim failed to file a case while he or she was enslave inside a nazi death camp? some state have statute rules that are more favorable to claimants. the act should not act to establish claims that are valid in the states. it should ensure this is also rereflected in the final version of the act. i thank the committee to share

my experience. i hope to serve as a resource to the committee as you consider this legislation, and i hope we can all celebrate the 18th anniversary of the washington conference together with the passage of the heer act. >> thank you very much. mr. goodman? >> thank you senator cruz, senator blum tall, all the members of the committee. i am grateful for this opportunity to testify in pport of the holocaust recovery act. for the last 20 years i have dedicated my life to recovering my grandfather's art collection lost between 1940 and 1945. seth goodman was murdered in april of 1944. but it was not until 1994, when my father died, and i inherited his correspondence that i became aware of my father's

solitary and largely unsuccessful quest to regain his own father's dispersed collection. my father never shared with me what he was doing. it was probably too painful. my father did survive the war in britain, although badly wounded during the war. as soon as victory was declared, he returned to the netherlands only to find his parents gone and the family home stripped bare. in addition, almost automatic of my grandfather's letters, documents, photos concerns the art collection had been destroyed by the nazis. his library was all shipped to germany. my fare's only recourse was to try to sketch an inventory from memory. meanwhile, the governments affecting my family, those of the netherlands, france and west germany, erected severe bureaucratic barriers, making restitution next to impossible. the dutch usually insisted on

being paid before returning anything, but more often they simply absorbed ard work into their collection. they denied knowledge of any pieces from my family's collection being in west germany and suggested my father look behind the iron curtain. today we know many works were smuggled through switzerland at the end of the war and filtered into the art market, including the united states. my quest began in earnest in 1995 when 50 years after the war the allies began to de-classify world war ii documents, including thousands relating to art looting. gradually the u.s. archives and those of britain, france, holland and germany began to make available transcripts nazi looters gave at the end of the war. only in 2002 was i able to uncover the room by room envenus doris made of my

grandfather's home. today these archives are still being updated and digitized. two months ago, the dutch archives made available an actual image of a painting that eluded my family for over in 190 during the occupation. iter 20 years of research, have by no means finished tied to it in thousand artworks of -- and antiques lost by my family during the holocaust, all of which leads to the concept of statute of limitations and any delay made by latches. after my father died, the first painting i found was in chicago at the end of 1995 in the case , the defendant claimed the statute of limitation had expired, even though the painting had been hidden from view for 30 years. then it was exhibited briefly twice. and then hidden again from view

for another 20 years. they also claimed we should have acted sooner after the painting was first exhibited, despite the fact they had changed the title of the painting. another defense was that my family had never -- i not been duly diligent, despite my father's five decades of endless search. in contrast, no particular diligence is required from the purchaser of an artwork and the mere assumption of good faith is often sufficient. furthermore, under swiss law, for instance, a good-faith purchaser of stolen property automatically acquires good title. it was not until the 1990's that began to track seriously the provenance of artworks. i would like to think that i represent all claimant families in saying that the removal of any unfair restrictions, which and are the claims of holocaust victims and their heirs would be long overdue but most welcome. i am truly grateful to the senate judiciary committee for

enabling me to voice the difficulties that claimant families like mine have and do it since the end of world war ii. thank you. senator cruz: thank you very much. i would like to thank all of the witnesses for your very powerful testimony. ambassador lauter. 70 yearsounding that later we are still working to reunite families of holocaust victims with their stolen property. could you share for the itmittee some light on why has taken so long and what remains to bring justice to this issue? ambassador lauter: thank you, senator cruz, for that question. the first aspect we just heard about is the fact that a great many of the records were destroyed.

and the descendents of these various families that had looted art really had no record going on. we had to really work on a record base. the organization around 1990. it took us literally 10 years to reconstruct many of the records. the year until almost 2000 that we had necessary records. the problem was that, although we had the records and we knew where many of the pieces were, most museums that had records started to stonewall us. and each case became an actual fight. the result was that it was until very recently -- and i thank dame helen's appearance in "woman in gold" and mr.

weinstein for having made the movie -- that the public really got more aware of it. i wonder, frankly, if it wasn't , would this law ever come forward. so the question of time. it is a question of knowledge of what happened. and today, we are seeing something remarkable. i wish this legislation had happened 10 or 20 years ago. happened.ct is it it is going to have a major effect on the future. and many, many works of art that have been -- i use the expression "the last prisoners of world war ii" -- will finally the rightful owners. and i want to thank the congress for what they are doing. senator cruz: thank you, ambassador. let me ask you.

do you think the united states has lived up to our commitment as set forth in the declaration nazike sure that claims to looted art is made expeditiously and on the facts of the claim? yes and no.auder: there have been organizations in art that has been returned correctly and there has been other art that has been, let's say, found a way to make either the statute of limitations or other factors stopping it. and very often, it is very difficult for a museum when they are told that one of their best toof art is a piece stolen they tried to find ways to stop it. providenceuestion is we -- providence research. many paintings, this question of what happened to them between

19, let's say, 1939 and 1945. sometimes the germans kept a very good records. other times, the records were destroyed. it is a question of try to put together the things. but the united states has tried to live up to the washington declaration and the declarations. but at times, it has been of necessarye lack laws. and i think this is what the here actor does. senator cruz: thank you. mirren, a lot of people have approached you and shared their family stories, like murray is stories or the grandmother stories. are there any of those conversations that were particularly memorable or compelling that you could share with the committee? mirren: i think it wasn't

so much specifically one-story, but the fact that there were so many of them. i would say, every night, someone outside the stage door would approach me with great emotion and say how much this film had meant to them. it was finally to see the telling of their story revealed to the world that they found so deeply moving, exciting, and utterly meaningful, just the fact that their stories that had been suppressed or, even if they tried to tell people, nobody wanted to listen. someone wast listening was important for them. senator cruz: thank you. that may finally mention -- in your testimony, you said that it

-- that the here act would not achieve its purpose of --bling claims to come form forward if it illuminates one obstacle to replace it with another. i can say that is not my intention and i am confident that that is not the intention of any of the authors of this legislation. let me invite you and indeed every member of this panel to work with our staff. you can work with my chief counsel and if there are specific elements that would andove this legislation prevent the inadvertent creation of additional obstacles, we would certainly invite you to share that with our team because it is my intention and i believe the intention of all the authors of this legislation to remove the procedural for areas -- procedural barriers so that justice may be served. it has been far too long and justice needs to be carried out. so i would've -- i would invite

everyone on the panel to work with our team to make sure there are not any inadvertent barriers put in place. with that, senator blumenthal. senator blumenthal: iq, senator cruz. i want to join in and thank everyone of you for your powerful and eloquent testimony. der, i know your work on this issue began long before this movie. i think we discussed this issue long before they movie and actually held meetings publicly in rooms a fraction of the size of this one because, at the time, there was little or no public attention to it. of dame mirrenrk and the movie, i think, has been to greatly elevate the visibility and profile to give us the support that we need for this profoundly important cause. and dame mirren, you used the

word "modest" to describe this proposal. it is indeed exceedingly modest. all it does is unlock the courthouse door to thousands of their day are seeking to present their case. again, some of the most powerful institutions in this country and come in fact, as i listened to goodman, what i really felt was anger and nazis, but also at the museums and other very reputable institutions that have repeatedly invoked these technical legal obstacles. let's not be too polite about it. after case after case

after case around the country -- i'm not going to name the museums, but they are among the leading institutions in our nation. and, in some sense, they have been complicit in this injustice. they have indirectly aided and thuggery of the nazis who were completely immoral, in fact a moral. but these institutions have made a pretense of serving the rules of morality. you,o, let me ask ambassador lauder. do you think we can enlist the others in this cause and institutions that perhaps ought to be on the right side, the right side of justice in the right side of history? ambassador lauder: yes, we can and we should. is no museum wants

to be looked on as keeping not -looted art. ii think the more we can expose those museums that are holding it, i think we win the battle. i think this question of having the claimants be able to talk about their merits is the right thing to be done. too often, these museums have hid behind statute of limitations. but more important, what they have done is they have made it so expensive for so many throughs to do the work many of our recovery. we have dozens of claimants come to us and say please help us. hugeuseum is causing us amounts of money that we can't afford to get a piece back. very often, we have had to speak to the museums and tell them, unless they really and truly stop doing this, they would then

have the publicity of having naz i-stolen art in the museum. that has worked in many cases. but again, each case is a fight. and this changes the whole -- this makes it a level playing field for the first time. senator blumenthal: mr. goodman, you had your hand up. i think that one of the claims presented to the museum, they will take it to the legal department. the legal department will give the advice that this is not a claim that could be successful in court. then the museum feels that their main duty is to the collection, to preserve their collection. and since there is no viable legal claim, they feel already

hesitant to even review the claim. if the here act would remove that obstacle and would allow the leaders of the museum to hear a legal advice which would be, yes, this is a valid claim and you may lose it in court, then they would be much more willing to sit down and reach a fair and reasonable resolution. senator blumenthal: i have one more question for mr. goodman and aim mirren. and beingur story very familiar with the story told in the movie, i take it that, in neither of these cases was there any kind of delay, which is the purpose of the statute of limitations, to prevent, in other words, delay in making claims are taking advantage of the passage of time. stories, the one depicted in your movie, dame mirren, and yours in your own

that theretes to me was no way there was delay are postponing of claims. am i correct in that observation? yes, that is absolutely true. in every case, my family acts as soon as we can. the problem has been gathering afficient evidence to get case to court or, if not a settlement. it has been an uphill battle to gather the information, most of which didn't become available until the end of the last century. add that, have to despite all this, it is extremely expensive what families like mine do. despite the obvious financial obstacles. it is a point of honor that i have to resolve what is outstanding of my family's. and damienmenthal:

mirren, in the story that you do take, there was hardly delay. in fact, it is a story of determination and incredible courage. dame mirren: yes. the minute that maria understood them as far as i understand it, she read a newspaper article talking about restitution. she was not aware in her life up to that point that that was ever going to be a possibility. suddenly, it was revealed, i guess a law was changed or something happened, and she realized now that there was a possibility to do that. and the minute she understood many, manytarted years, 10 or more years, that it took her to get to the point of the art coming back to her. and it was a very, very long and difficult battle. but i think the minute -- and again, this was a woman who had a little boutique in los angeles. she wasn't a rich woman. that she had the advantage of a young lawyer.

we tell the story in the movie, randy schaumburg, who came on board. and that was really how she managed it. hadrwise, even if she wanted to, it would have been know,ible because, you the lawyer's fees and all the rest of it would have been very difficult. senator blumenthal: and she lit a fire under him. god, sheen: oh, my did. absolutely. she was an extra ordinary woman. i'm forcefully, i never met her. but i saw a film of her. really, we all over her a great deal, all of us sitting in here dealing with this issue. >> it was 12 years and am as $4 million worth of time and travel that she did. must say i met her at the beginning and she was the most determined human being i have ever met. really portrayed

it perfectly. but it was 12 years of her work and huge amounts of money that went involved before this time. and the last thing the austrians said was, before you can bring a claim in austria, you had to put sat -- putdowns of daylight $5 million or some huge number, before you could do it, before you could bring a claim. and that is why the claim came to the united states instead of in austria. senator blumenthal: thank you. you, senator thank blumenthal. i would note in your exchange, this asesses described modest. and that's probably the first time i was has been used to describe the united states senate. [laughter] senator larry. senator larry: thank you. tell us on the outside, why it is that the doctrine of latches should not apply in this circumstance to this type of case covered by this

legislation? ms. peresztegi: i think we heard testimonymirren's that holocaust survivors, when they came to the united states, they were not ordinary citizens in terms of going after their rightful property. i think that it would be unjust to put the burden on the court level of dueferent holocaustassigned to survivors after all you have been through. senator lee: latches being under cable doctrine, is there a take care of certain unfairness is that otherwise would be brought about in the law? and in this circumstance, they echo the occasion of that doctrine would be manifestly unutterable? ms. peresztegi: yes. senator lee: talk to us a little

bit about the federal hook in this. when we are looking at theft, most of the time, theft is an issue of state law. it is not in the ordinary circumstance a matter of federal law. -- can law can governor governor theft on a federal enclave, theft of federal property, certain types of interactional -- intellectual property. in terms of artwork, it would be a matter of state law, both as the substance and as to procedural issues, like statue limitations. tell us why this is an appropriate use of federal law in this circumstance and what gives congress the jurisdiction to do this. ms. peresztegi: the state of california tried to address this a statute ofcted limitation law that covered -- artst art of program

misappropriation. that law was struck down in the ninth circuit. it was held that addressing this issue is a federal issue and the state had no power to carve out that exception. that exception could only be carved out at the federal level. senator lee: and the reasoning that the ninth circuit used was what? that by creating this special designation -- ms. peresztegi: the united states has a consistent form policy about restitution artworks since 1943. more a commitment and the obligation of the united states in general to address these issues. and therefore, it is a federal right to carve out that exception. senator lee: so given that consistent foreign policy, it would be impossible for anyone state to recognize a special

rule relative to this type of dispute, involving this type of art without engaging in foreign policy. ms. peresztegi: yes. ok.tor lee: that makes sense. one question that might be raised by some would be -- this applies with respect to art taken in connection with one particular type of genocide, one particular very ugly episode of genocide in our history. it does not deal with other genocides around the world, other mass conversations of life and property. so why focus on this one rather than others? do you want to address that question? ms. peresztegi: sure. i fully agree that there are other grievances around the world that may be of interest in this setting. on the other hand, again, the united states has a consistent policy of regarding the restitution of nazi looted art.

the united states also undertaking the washington principles and in the declaration allows claims to come forward and affirmed in the declaration that the claims should be heard on the merits. that wouldsomething be the next logical step in that policy. senator lee: ok. this one certainly wouldn't preclude us with respect to other atrocities. ms. peresztegi: no, not at all. senator lee: in fact, it gets back to this consistent foreign-policy approach the united states has taken with respect to this genocide, these atrocities, that dictates or necessitates our action here. it certainly doesn't preclude us from doing so elsewhere or the need to do so based on the need for a consistent foreign-policy might arise. ms. peresztegi: yes, i agree. senator lee: thank you. senator cruz: thank you.

i've been designated or delegated to act as chairman while senator cruz is out of the room. and we are going to proceed in of senatorpearance kunz. sen. coons: thank you, senator blumenthal. i would like to thank the panel for your double work. ideaer,or laud the very that you are to set free the last prisoners of the second world war is such a powerful and story. yours is a reminder of the power and painting to inspire come inspire years and years of work and millions of dollars in investment to make sure it is restored to its rightful owner. and i am rifle for the works of the senators who convened this hearing on this important piece of legislation. mr. goodman, how would the here act, if it had been law at the

time, made a difference? how could it support your efforts to recover your family stolen art? mr. goodman: in the first instance my family found itself in court in chicago, we won the first motion to dismiss. however, my family and felt obliged to settle out of court because we had no guarantee we would win or that the judge would not throw the case out based on our case having expired in the statute of limitations. so we had to accept second-best were on strong moral ground, but very weak legal ground. theit's also my belief that senate here can further our cause, law aside. the mood that would be set by the senate would be sending a

message to me and the art business in general that a settlement is welcome and long overdue. so yes, the next time i am in court, this will be of help. there are at least 20 good paintings missing from my family's collection, several gold renaissance sculptures and at least 300 important antiques. so the search goes on. we are talking about statute of limitations, i have been walking -- been working on this for 20 years and i have uncovered a lot. and there is still a lot more to find. i don't know where i will be next year. if this passes, this would be a huge help to my family and it establishes a moral record as well that we should follow. senator kunz: thank you.

what would be different with the here act and future actions? ms. peresztegi: in some of these cases, the actions of previous family members, the answers stirs -- the ancestors were whether they did the right thing, negotiated, were too long or too short. i think it was open to interpretation. and what i think this will act will bring a certainty. the best way to resolve these claims, if both sides know where the lost art and spirit than you can sit down and reach a resolution. thetor coons: do you think art world would risk -- would respond in a constructive and positive way? or do you think there might be other vehicles found for delay

or are there real concerns about this legislation? >> i can only speak to christie's. we see ourselves aligned with the spirit of the bill. market perspective, we need to be able to convey good title. we need to look at the facts of the case and make sure there isn't any taint on the artwork. again, without commenting specifically on the bill, was basically the bill is proposing template that we already have instituted at christie's, which is negotiated sure thats and making we are looking at the facts and a achieving sort of a fair and just solution

espoused by the washington conference principles. senator coons: dame mirren, if i might, the less question. the looting of the art by the nazis was a piece of their larger horrific campaign to destroy an entire -- an entire people and their culture. today, we are engaged in a conflict with isis who is doing very similar things. it is looting and a strong cultural artifacts of an entire region. how do you see the impact not just on those who are the victims of nazi actions and have been dedicating so much time in their life to undoing those injustices, but what sort of impact do think this might have on the appreciation in the world of the value of cultural treasures? i think it's a -- i mean, i absolutely agree with you.

and when i was engaged in the film and having to imagine having to live in the world that maria had to live in and her memories, i thought, my god, this is happening to people as we speak. this is happening to people. people are banging on doors and lives but and taking also trying to take peoples history away from them. as the sort of horrors of what happened in the second world war , as i grew up and i began to learn about them and understand more and more, the thing that really affected me the most and does to this day is the idea of losing all trace of your existence on this planet, all trace. even if you personally survived, to live in a world with absolutely no family, no history, no memories, no photograph of them, no one to talk to and say what was grandma

like? not have a picture of grandma. just that this simple human things, this is why feel very strongly that this has nothing to do with money. it so happens that, yes, some of these works of art are worth a lot of money. but it is so much more to do with reclaiming your place in human history. that it wasng today like someone going into those -- in thecave since south of france where you have the cave paintings. that's all we know those people, those paintings, and then going with a knife and scratching them out, saying we don't want to remember you. you're gone. you're finished. so, yes, it is happening as we speak and it is something that eternally determined against, internally. senator coons: thank you. senator cruz: thank you, senator coons.

: i. tillis: senator tellis want to thank you and others. we have a lauder, do rough idea of how many pieces the numberissing and of people that are still waiting to take action like mr. goodman has taken action? ambassador lauder: there are no good numbers, obviously. we can say it was probably 200 to 300,000 works of art somewhere in the world that have been unaccounted for. i'm talking about major works of art. because the minor ones we will never know. but the major ones we have seen from the records that the nazis kept, what they stole. but it does not even touch the amount of drawings and prints, the amount of furniture that was never recorded. but the closest we can say is probably a couple thousand -- a couple hundred thousand works of art still out there somewhere. senator tellis: mr. goodman, you

are saying that there were still 20 more pieces of art you are trying to find. how many have you recovered to this point? and what are your prospects of identifying the other 20? have a been identified? are you try to work it out? is there still a lot of searching to do? ms. peresztegi: there is still a lot of -- mr. goodman: there is still a lot of searching to do. i know there is a painting that survived the war and came over here. beyond that, i have the artimony of two different galleries that conflict. so one of them is probably lying to me and i can't yet figured which. so it is an ongoing process. i have recovered or at least receive settlement so far for about 20 paintings. 300i received about antiques from the dutch government about 10 years ago. i've had settlements from the and, mosternment recently, i have an important settlement from germany, the

state of bart barton bird for two renaissance clocks. so it has get me very busy the last few years. but it is by no means finished. senator tellis: when you talk about settlements, give me an idea of what the nature of a settlement would look like. mr. goodman: in some cases, i have to settle for a nominal sum, maybe 40% or 50% of the real value. but i have to weigh that against what legal action might cost if i were actually entitled in a .ense to get to court and then it all depends on where i found something. i recently found a painting in switzerland where legally i don't have a leg to stand on. but for emotional reasons, i got the consignors to give me 50% of the proceeds. i would like to get something back. i found a painting in los angeles, where i live, about a mile from my home.

and that collector, after i talk to him for about a year, ashlee tookit off is -- actually it off his wall and helped me loaded to the back of my car. so there are good people and there are bad people in all of this. senator tellis: if you think about that here at, it wouldn't a politicallye charged debate. but what about in europe and other originating countries? what sorts of challenges do we have or opposition is there to what the senators are trying to do with the here at? ms. peresztegi: there is a difference between most of continental europe and the u.s. legal system. one of the fundamental differences that statute of limitations is prescriptive in europe. what it means is that come after passage of time, the title actually transfers to the possessor. while in the united states, the statute of limitations is procedural.

which means that a claimant would be barred to recover the artwork, but the title would never pass. europe, if someone is art, even iflooted he gives it back to the original owner, he can go to court and claim it back from the original owner. in the united states, if he gives it to the original owner, he could never go to court and reclaim it. of the differences why europe, most of the countries in europe, france, germany, austria, holland, the u.k., took the option to establish commissions or set special laws or adjudicating bodies is because they couldn't change the statute of limitation laws in europe. in the united states, the last 16 to 18 years, there have been town hall meetings and all sorts of efforts to establish some

sort of a commission. mostn the united states, of the items are privately owned. in europe, they are publicly owned, most of them. carter inminister of germany or france decides that they are supposed to behave in certain ways and wave the statute of limitation defenses, they have a power to do that so they do not have to change the law. in the united states, you don't have such a government body. therefore, you need to change the laws. and in the united states, you can. senator tellis: thank you. senator cruz: senator klobuchar. senator klobuchar: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you everyone for being here for this hearing. in 1961, the minneapolis institute of art was the least a

1911 painting by for nard legere rooftop."oke over determined that the painting had actually been stolen from the home of a jewish art collector by the nazis during world war ii. the institute did the right thing by returning the stolen art to the ears of the jewish art collect. but -- art collector. but the process for determining that the art was stolen was long and arduous. it took 10 years of research. to ensure that the claim was legitimate. to make thisrk process work more effectively and quickly for the parties involved? ms. dugot: i think that a lot has changed in the last several years, in access as well. and being able to support claims and documentation. in that sense, that claim might

be resolved differently now, in terms of access to supporting a claim. in terms of the law or i should ms. peresztegi: respond. about the research aspect? i think at the time of the washington conference principles, the principles of the end call for the general database. at that time, there was hope that digitization and computer id possibilities would develop quickly in a way that we could put all the information together and have a major database and just click a button and have an answer. it never happened because this is not how information is processed. did not stop many institutions, countries with national archives, and other information to develop their own

local databases. so today, you can sit at your desk and look at the getty institute research center, the auction catalog during the relevant period. you have another one in heidelberg. you have the collection digitized. you have that during collection digitized. so you have tremendous amount of information today. what would have taken an enormous amounts of time or maybe not even ever have been completed 20 years ago, today, you can do it quite quickly. senator klobuchar: thank you. mr. ambassador, i was thinking that -- how has the level of international cooperation improved over time or has improved? ambassador lauder: it depends by country. some countries have improved. some countries, like in germany, providencee enough

research. it is now starting to do it. in countries like switzerland, they have really a truly almost stonewalled it. but in the case of the legere that you spoke about, i believe it was originally sold into switzerland and the records were very difficult. unfortunately, many people knew it was stolen. but the question is between knowing it is still in -- is stolen and fighting a piece of paper to say here it is is very difficult. but the question is many countries have started to become better at it, certain european countries have not. senator klobuchar: thank you. i am impressed you knew about the one painting. ambassador lauder: i collect art. senator klobuchar: really? i'm kidding. we were late because we were at so maybe you answer to this question. i like the movie. i answer -- i watched it twice.

from a policy put both standpoint by doing the movie. dame mirren: as an actor, you have to enter into that world. you can't get it from the outside. you have to actually live in that world. altman, i hadia to put her memories into my mind and i had to know exactly what that world was like that she was coming from. was playing the role and thinking about the role and subsequently now being here, i -- ere because because the emotional -- i mean, you know, always -- all the time playing the role i thought, supposing someone came to my door tonight, a group of guys thumped on the door, broke it in, walked into my house and

all everything that i own, forced me to sign a paper, basically giving it to them all, selling it for a very small amount of money. it has nothing to do with the value. i don't own anything of great value like that. but the pure emotional thing, why is it -- was it wrong then and suddenly today, only because it is 75 years later, it is suddenly -- you know, we forget about it. no. we don't forget about it. it is as wrong today as it was then. and the justice that we should be seeking for them should be sought forth now. i don't see any difference. anyway, it was thoughts like made me feelt of very emotionally involved with this particular subject i'm not jewish. this didn't happen to my family. but i had to imaginatively live in that world.

and i feel very strongly about it. senator klobuchar: thank you very much. thank you.z: senator hatch. senator hatch: thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to be added as a cosponsor for this bill. and i want to component everybody on this panel for the excellent testimony you have given. i am honored to serve with the distinguished senator from minnesota on the united states holocaust museum board of trustees. the museum's website said that his primary mission includes "encouraging its visitors to reflect upon the moral and spiritual questions raised by the events of the holocaust as well as their own responsibility democracy."of even though the holocaust ended more than 70 years ago, this legislation is part of that responsibility and how the job of remedying the effect is still

not over. ambassador lauder, i have great respect for you. is it fair to say that one i impact onf the naz stolen art washe unprecedented in scope? ambassador lauder:? i'm sorry, the question is senator hatch: is it fair to say that one component of the nazi regime was to steal this art? ambassador lauder: it was a major part of the regime. for two reasons. it destroyed the memory. the other aspect is that they wanted very much to use that art both to make museums and to give to various collectors in the nazis regime, be it hitler, goring, or other things. hitler also wanted to make a major museum in lengths.

but the fact -- in lintz. but the fact is that art is a cripple part of what they have done and we will never know all the things that were stolen. senator hatch, i also thank you for all the years you have worked on this subject, all the years you have been with the holocaust museum and your work there is exemplary. and behalf of the jewish people, we thank you for what you have done. senator hatch: thank you. you are so nice. israel.ot back from i went all over. i have to say i have such admiration for the israelis and the jewish people throughout the world. and you in particular. mirren, you are one of my favorite people. [laughter] dame mirren: thank you. senator hatch: i think it is fair to say you are one of everybody's favorite people.

you are a terrific actress and i feel very deeply towards you. people andut real experience can powerfully communicate the reality of something like the holocaust. thes like mr. goodman's and film in which you start can raise awareness in ways that nothing else could. so more than 70 years after the war ended, how can we tell these stories in order to keep alive moralou described as a ?mperative mora dame mirren: i believe that i am an artist that our history as a people, as a legal system, as a -- you know, will be told through our art ultimately in a thousand, 2000 years time. this planete on will be communicated to future generations through our art.

that is what was so extraordinary, specifically about maria altman's world, the viennese world. historyad about in books this glorious time in fianna that was so full of culture and art. and being in vienna and shooting the film and seeing the beautiful houses built by the jewish community, i realized it was a jewish culture. this beautiful memory of vienna and the music and the painting was actually created by the jewish people. so you know, to try and take is --way from them just was so unutterably cruel and unfair. anyway, i guess that is what i'm saying. our memory as a people on this planet is created by our

artistic contributions. senator hatch: i agree. thank you. mr. chairman, can i ask one more question? thank you. , one concern that might be raised about this bill is the impact on federalism has many of the claims were brought under state law and in state court. senator lee did raise this to a degree. i want to understand why congress may legitimately stepped in and preempt these state rules? not only is there a long-standing and official federal interest in getting these claims resolved, but that federal interest might ask a government states from extending their statutes of limitations for holocaust-era claims. did i get that right? ms. peresztegi: yes. senator hatch: ok. ms. peresztegi: there was a stick in my, who tried to

issues by state legislation. and this legislation was upheld unconstitutional at the ninth circuit because it was encroaching on federal policy. california had, to enact the new legislation without carving out especially holocaust era looting. another issue may be the interstate travel of artwork. the thiefon where would drop the art, depending on where the art trade would take the art, looted art travels across state boundaries. this is something that needs to be addressed on the federal level. also the united states has a clear policy on restitution issues since 1943 up to the declaration of 2009, under which the united states undertakes the

obligation of addressing these issues. so i think it is proper to pass the here act on a federal level. senator hatch: thank you. thank you mr. chairman. senator cruz: thank you, senator hatch. senator franken. senator franken: thank you all for your testimony today. i was born in 1951. , as an american jew, i -- the holocaust was something -- my was profoundly parents taught me a tremendous amount about. this is a powerful subject for me and my family. , thank you for being here and for your tireless work on behalf of victims of the holocaust and their families. in your testimony, you reference

the prague conference and the review from june 2009 about different countries have addressed the issue of restitution of nazi confiscated art. they on this review in the practices of countries who have made major progress in this effort, what steps do you believe must still be taken in addition to the passage of the bill at issue today to ensure that the united states is doing everything they can to return works of art to their rightful owners? well, one of the issues is information. we need to have more information about what the museums hold. louisiana -- on average, a museum will present about 30% of their collection.

70% will stay in storage. the united kingdom had a wonderful project called "your painting," and now they are following up with another project called "your sculpture," which was started by the bbc and christie's also contributed to that project. it is to digitize and publish all paintings, now all sculptures, and watercolors is also coming. and it was possible. so 3000 museums -- yes, it in years, but digitization improved. you can publish all the artworks that he museum has. therefore, i can say that today, if anyone has any suspicion that a u.k. museum holds a looted painting, they can go on the internet and see for themselves. i think that this is also -- this could be also a project that serves not just restitution, but general culture.

why shouldn't people know what these museums have? why shouldn't scholars be able to find artworks that they can learn from? and share with the general public so i think -- learn from and share with the general public? lot toink there is a learn and i would be willing to work with you and anybody else in the united states on how to proceed. senator franken: so the digitization of this information, like all information come is helpful. , i understand that christie's has facilitated the restitution of a broad array of artwork that was misappropriated during world war ii, including some stone by parties other than the nazis. for example, christie's recently restitution a piece by marsden hartley that had remade with its rightful owner in germany for the majority of world war ii. weeks only in the final

of the conflict that it was , passed through the hands of their military administration and ended up in a museum in germany where it was exhibited from 1954 to 2008. can you discuss the extent to which other parties, in addition to the nazis, have been responsible for looting and the misappropriation of art during world war ii? with -- thankdeal you, senator, for the question. senator franken: sure. ms. dugot: the main goal of christie's, again come eyes to make sure that everything we saw has their providence. so we are at providences of everything that comes in. i would clarify that, although there are lots of museums that clearnot have providences, a lot of the work that has not been returned is in private hands.

and we come across it when these works get consigned to us. during world war ii, there was also -- you had looting by the nazis. afterwards, you had looting by theta stazi.s -- by collections, nationalized by the castro regime, we basically are doing thorough due diligence. we have a thorough due diligence program and looking at everything the work of our think it's consigned to us to make sure that it has clear providence. and when it doesn't or when there is a question, we aim to clarify that history of ownership. the difficulty of course is that the art market never really focused on these issues until fairly recently. years,he last 10 to 15 people would -- buyers would be

interested in the providence, if it belonged to a famous .ollector the providence research and getting a clear history of ownership was not a priority. as a result -- and there is a lot of spotty information -- and you have a lot of the sources that we use to do our providence research, like the history of the works or what ever we are using come up whatever we are looking at that might be played -- might be published, it might be published with the wrong information. so we are looking at everything that gets consigned. but it is difficult, again, because of the challenges of the passing of time, the eighth fact that the art market words not focused on these issues. and now, with access to information and the internet has been huge and opening up of archives in europe, in eastern europe, and books being written by various authors focusing on

collections, it has become easier to gain access to that information, which is absolutely key. i think the difficulty come again, is there a semi chip are made none of it is really centralized to so the work is extremely laborious and takes expertise and its menace amount of time. it is difficult for us because we work on a deadline. we basically -- works are coming in and we have to thorough providence research in a matter of weeks or months. so that's a challenge. that couldther thing be helpful in all of this, too, finding some sort of way to centralize all of the fragmented information that is out there. to make it easier for individuals to pursue their artworks without having to resort to specialists

necessarily more support, but being able to do it on their own if they have access to the information. senator franken: thank you. mr. goodman i think was to answer. but i want to thank you all. mr. goodman: i just wanted to add that the added complications involving all that was looted by the nazis, much of what they took was recovered by the monuments offices at the end of the war. the problem then became that they were not able to deal with individual claimants. so most of what was recovered by the allies at the end of the war was returned not to the rightful owners but to the countries from which they had been stolen. in my family's case, many of our pieces were returned to the new dutch and french governments, who then, in many instances, claimed they could not find the rightful owner and then auctioned these pieces. there's the worst case with the former yugoslavia who claimed all sorts of things had been

stolen from them. but what i am trend to say is that there are many works on the market today that theoretically have a clean bill of health because -- there is a case right now in california where a rush collectorussian legally bought a piece from the dutch government. the problem is they did not return that piece to the rightful owner. so there are layers upon layers of what the claimant families have to deal with in order to took that an actual theft place. a collector in the states today can argue fairly reasonably that it was bought legitimately from fromody who bought it an official government body. so try to give a bigger picture in a sense of what we are up against. senator franken: thank you. senator cruz: thank you, senator franken.