federal land would be different on federal property. federal park services, federal buildings, i joked about how you will be arrested. this is federal property. you may be in jeopardy up here, mr. chairman. but, what i was pointing out is the park land and federal property is to be treated the same way here as in other parts of the united states. isn't that true? >> that is correct. >> yes, ma'am. >> i mentioned when 20% of the land was federal property there were any number of states -- you had gave me some of the nevada, alaska where the entire state virtually is owned by the federal government. does that create any particular difficulties with respect, for example in alaska where they have decriminalized marijuana, has the fact that much of the alaskan federal land creating particular difficulties and enforcing federal law on federal land? mr. o'neill? >> i am not aware of any particular difficulty arising from the percentage of federal land in a state like alaska. as you pointed out, we are going to approach marijuana enforcement in

that said that federal law would be any different on federal property. federal park service property, federal buildings. i joked about how you would not be arrested. yes. this is federal property. you may be in some jeopardy. but what i was pointing out is that park land and federal property is to be treated the same way here as in other parts of the united states. isn't that true? >> that's correct. >> yes, ma'am. >> i mentioned when that chairman pointed out 20 percent of the land was federal park land of federal property, there were a number of states, nevada, utah, alaska where the entire state virtually is owned by the federal government. how do you -- does that create any particular difficulty with respect to -- for example, in alaska where they have decriminalize marijuana. as the fact that so much of alaska is federal land created a particular difficulty to enforcing federal law? >> i am not aware of any particular difficulty arising from a high percentage of federal land in a state like alaska. as you pointed out, we are going to approach mariju

fps is not responsible for all federal facilities, its role is central to protecting federal workers and visitors to federal buildings nationwide. attacks of our country has taken steps to prevent and be better prepared for terrorism and other threats. unfortunately, public buildings are a proven target. whether because of their symbolism or because of the number of federal employees and visitors that use these facilities, the threat the federal government has a long history. in 1995, timothy mcveigh and his co-conspirators used a truck filled with homemade explosives inbomb the federal building oklahoma city, killing 168 people, including 19 children. targeted aperson building in austin, housing 200 irs employees by crashing a plane into the building. active shooter incidents have been an ongoing threat as well. this includes shootings at the navy yard in washington, fort capitol building, and united states holocaust museum. because of these threats, and the steps taken since the oklahoma city bombing, we should nearly 20 years later have significantly improved the security of publi

on federal land. i am colorblind, but they tell me that they green that you see, there is a great deal of territory that, in fact, is federal land. i asked the question of staff, but if i am standing on the mall which adjoins -- i guess it is independence avenue with 1 foot on each side of the roadway near , what the impact of enforcement would be. no one can tell me. there are many questions that have been raised by the district , adoption i'm a bill that reduces the penalty for marijuana possession from a criminal offense currently punishable by jail time to raise civil offense punishable by a $25 fine. again, it is in conflict with some of the federal statutes. currently we have marijuana as a schedule one narcotic. currently we have different levels of enforcement and penalty for its use on federal property of which you can see we have a great deal and the district of columbia. so that is one of the reasons we're here. again, some people, including a witness to my question our party. let me just r

is federal land. thes unclear as to how criminalization will affect marijuana position -- possession and consumption on federal land. i'm colorblind but they tell me the green you see, there is a great deal of territory that is federal land. they asked the question of staff what if i am standing on the mall which joins the avenue with , what then each impact of enforcement would be. no one could tell me. many questions that have been raised by the district's adoption of a bill that reduces the penalties for marijuana possession is currently punishable by jail time to a civil of the its. it is in conflict with some of the federal statute. currently we have marijuana as one narcotic. ofhave different levels penalties for its use on federal property which you can see we have a great deal in the district of columbia. that is one of the reasons we are here. we have some people including our witness question. remi review the of your teeth. -- let me review the authority. isicle one section eight very eviden

and came to the federal government. whereas the essence of being a private business doesn't give you anything cu can go out and fill foyers of or rise as the case may be. most of the downsizing of the postal service had been done by cats. i much prefer us the chairman indicated the innovation to be the rule to the feature the postal service. every time i see on television and innovative tool that the tow postal services using i say wow because i had become used to and yet i do see those and i'd like to ask about some of those. the new products in particular, since some of you have been involved with those products. one of the success tories have been the every door direct mail. i was interested that it apparently is hoped the post office generate more than a billion dollars. mr. cochran, is that not correct? >> that is correct. >> apparently this product has been a great success for the business community. i like to know how the postal service understood that this was a product that would catch on with the business comm

this year, a you'll hear, we anticipate approximately $2.7 million in federal cuts. while that is smaller than in the past few years, it is still a potentially devastating hit to our care and prevention services and it is critically important that we once again step up and backfill all of those cuts. and, so, we called for this hearing today so that we could discuss the cuts and talk about how we get those cuts backfilled. so, first i want to call up greg wagoner from department of public health who can give us an overview, and then we'll have some questions for the mayor's budget office after the dph presentation. mr. wagoner. >> thank you, supervisor wiener. good afternoon, supervisors. greg wagoner, chief financial officer, department of public health. supervisor wiener covered a lot of the context in those introductory remarks, so, i won't belabor it, but i'll just go through a couple of numbers. the department of public health currently spends about $59 million per year on hiv health services, hiv prevention, and hiv epidemiology and research. as you can see fro

but the federal government can't walk away from this. it needs to rethink it's role but remain an investor and the projects have the biggest bang for the buck. absolutely vital to the nation's economy and the flow of commer commerce. >> professor, i'm sorry, i cut you off. >> what were you about to say. >> i was going to say privatization is not necessarily the way to go in the united states, but public private partnerships where the federal government, the state government, localities have a role together with the private sector can be very effective. in miami one of the best projects that i know of that will have huge positive economic impact when the panama canal with the port of ships is the . it is a $1 billion project coming in on time, and with under budget. it's going to move truck traffic from the port of miami away from the interstate. it will open up development in downtown miami, and it's going to help move goods it will help with financing and has the concession to run the construction of the tunnels. but the public sector i

. >> next, a house subcommittee hearing on security on federal buildings, including the head of the federal protective service at homeland security with officials from the gao, american national and association of security companies. this is one hour and 40 minutes. >> this meeting will come to order. today we are examining the federal protective service and security of our federal buildings and facilities. with 1300 personnel, including law enforcement officers and 14,000 contract guards, we are charged with protecting over 9000 federal buildings and nation,es across the owned or leased by the general services administration. while fps is not responsible for all federal facilities, its role is central to protecting federal workers and visitors to federal buildings nationwide. since the 9/11 attacks, our country has taken steps to prevent and be better prepared for terrorism and other threats. unfortunately, public buildings are a proven target. whether because of their symbolism or because of the number of federal employees and visitors that use these facilities, the threat the federal gov

the federal reserve has also taken a number of regulatory steps, many in conjunction with other federalagencies to continue to improve the resiliency of the financial system. most recently, the federal reserve finalized a rule implementing section 165 of the dodd-frank act to establish enhanced prudential standards for large banking firms in the form of risk-based and leverage capital, liquidity and risk management requirements. in addition, the rule requires large foreign banking organizations to form a u.s. intermediate holding company, and it imposes enhanced prudential requirements for these intermediate holding companies. looking forward, the federal reserve is considering whether additional measures are needed to further reduce the risks associated with large, interconnected financial institutions. while we have seen substantial improvements in the labor market conditions and the overall economy since the financial crisis and severe recession, we recognize that more must be accomplished. many americans who want a job are still unemployed, inflation continues to run below the fomc'

state instead of federal?>> i was pointing out that the crime rates are more tied to state policy because the vast of defendants are sentenced so the government has limited effect on the crime rate. crack reductions, there was no increase in recidivism for those offenders either? ourn texas we have seen crime rates lowest since 1960. our probation and parole recent of his rates have fallen dramatically. it is because instead of building more prisons we took that money and put it into strengthening probation, lower caseloads, more treatment programs. i think the federal government can learn from that. question ask my final to mr. otis. the media chooses how to portray the face of crime. it can choose to paint the face or someoneal as one of color. law-enforcement decides which neighborhoods and crimes to focus on. they can decide which cases are president for prosecutors and frequently decide who is charged with mandatory penalties and who is not. are you saying that it is or --ible for bias unconscious or not

state instead of federal? was pointing out that the crime rates are more tied to state policy because the vast of defendants are sentenced so the government has limited effect on the crime rate. crack reductions, there was no increase in recidivism for those offenders either? ourn texas we have seen crime rates lowest since 1960. our probation and parole recent of his rates have fallen dramatically. it is because instead of building more prisons we took that money and put it into strengthening probation, lower caseloads, more treatment programs. i think the federal government can learn from that. question ask my final to mr. otis. the media chooses how to portray the face of crime. it can choose to paint the face or someoneal as one of color. law-enforcement decides which neighborhoods and crimes to focus on. they can decide which cases are president for prosecutors and frequently decide who is charged with mandatory penalties and who is not. are you saying that it is or --ible for bias unconscious or not to s

the clerk: the federal loan home bank to become members of a federal home loan bank and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from west virginia, mrs. capito, and the gentlewoman from california, ms. waters, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from west virginia. mrs. capito: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials for the record on h.r. 3584 as amended, currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. capito: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. capito: i'd like to thank mr. stimbers and mrs. beatty for their efforts on this. the capital access for small community act is bipartisan. it passed by 55-0 earlier this spring. this bill will provide meaningful regulatory relief for privately enissue -- insured credit unions by allowing them to become members of the federal home

you're receiving federal dollars and there should be oversight. some of those strings are ridiculous and some are costly. i do want to emphasize, and i think john touched on this, i think we have seen a trend to see the funding at the federal level in terms of direct grants has declined. to me i think we've seen that accompanied with a number of mayors really taking the forefront. so i think it's a positive thing that today the really urban renaissance is being led by mayors. that's who should lead it. and john touched upon that far too many in the past in my opinion spent their time lobbying in washington when really what they need to do is lobby their community. where my concern going back to lots of funding is the tax dollars come from somewhere. i would rather have the mayors do the tough job of explaining to their own constituents why they should raise their taxes and pay for those amenities rather than come to washington for the money. >> mayor castro has done some of that with the 20/2 20/20 visionh enormous community-widen gaugement, figur

these are federal dollars for a federal nutrition program. if we're going to spend all these billions of dollars -- >> they're saying, the schools are saying the money coming from the federal government is not enough to do what the federal government is asking them to do. >> i'm sure you know where this program started. harry truman started the school lunch program because too many young people were being rejected from the military because of malnutrition. if there's a supporter bigger than the u.s. military for this program right now, i don't know who it is. we need to get healthy meals in their schools. >> i understand that. >> why on earth where you're giving $80 billion a year in food stamps and you have parents buying food for their children, and they're buying -- >> this is not food stamps. >> those are federal dollars -- guys, you are talking about -- we're talking about federal dollars -- >> we're talking about school lunches. >> federal dollars for food. right? that's what we're talking about. >> let's talk about the program from the

it goes back to federalism. we need to get control out of washington about the we do need to remind american because we don't want the federal government to do it means we want it done. >> you were in when the devastating whirling out of nowhere, john roberts rules obamacare tax that's rendering it a law of the land and now here we are today tried to unwind this thing. the question on our minds is cannot be unwound? even today, this is overcome the is settled. l. daley, former white house chief of staff is on the networks today stated over. this will never be undone. they are even seeming republicans will take control of congress. we will still not in the republicans is that they are saying now. what do we do? >> i hope it is not true because in some ways it is giving up on what is essentially american to accept socialized medicine. that is the design of obamacare is we know what is going to basically fell apart in the private health insurance market cannot work under this regimen. so in a matter of not coming y

the free application for federal student aid. that is a federal form that you can fill outonline. it asks you a number of questions about your family situation, your income, your asset ofs and through somewhat complicated federal formula the government calculates what your stilted family contribution ought to be and from there you qualify, you can qualify for a number of different federal student eight options. for low income borrowers or students, pell grant is an option which is money from the federal government to go to college. obviously it's a grant. you don't have to repay it. then for subsidized student loans, the government subsidizes the interest while you're still in school. those are, need-based so if you qualify for a subsidized loan you can get that but for all student borrowers they can borrow up to a certain amount for undergraduates and actually an unlimited amount for graduate students. >> host: dividing lines a little bit differently for this conversation this morning. recent graduates, we want to hear from you. 20-585-3880. call all other call us at 202-585 of 3

federal contracts. my amendment would deny federal contracts to those who violate the federal labor standards act to deny workers the pay they have earned. the amendment ensures that those in violation of the law do not get taxpayer support. we should only reward good actors. taxpayer money must be spent wisely and as the largest purchaser of goods and services the federal government must find a way to make sure that funds are going to companies that treat their workers fairly and accord to the law and give -- and according to the law and give every family a chance to succeed. more importantly it signals to working americans around the country that wage theft will not be tolerated. low wage workers are fighting back. they are demanding they be treated fairly. and now it's time for congress to stand with these low wage workers and say clearly that wage theft is not anything that we're willing to tolerate. we may not agree on the minimum wage and on a lot of other things but i believe that americans on bo

he worked for the federal government. he worked in a federal prison in pennsylvania. he lost his life. because of overcrowding there, right. one of the things is if we are going to imprison more people than any other nation on the face of the earth, that we have to do it and we can't do it on the cheap. we have to have facilities that are well staffed. he so that our guards, the people that work for us are not put in unsafe circumstances. this political nonsense -- this is a new theme of some of my colleagues on the other side. we can't pass immigration because the president might not do something or might do something. we can't do this prison that we have already invested money in because the president might do something or not do something. so it's kind of like this hyper concern about what the president may do, we should do our job. our job is is that if we are going to take the prison census from 20,000 to 220,000, that we have to have the facilities. we can't stand on the floor and vote for prison sentence that is go out years and decades t. have people try the d

so is it time for the federal government to get out of our schools? hi, everybody, i'm david asman and i'm a little ticked. welcome to forbes on fox. let's go in focus with steve forbes, michael, sabrina schafer, rick unger. you have kids in school. are parents losing control of their kids to the government? >> they are. our education system is a travesty. people don't realize that spending has been going up for four consecutive decades and our test scores have remained flat in reading, math, and science. public schools spend 93% more than the median private school. i live in arlington, virginia. we spend $26,000 per student, washington d.c., $28,000 per student. so where are the results? >> and rick, i mean, for parents when they try to speak out they get kicked out of the meeting and get locked up sometimes. >> not just kicked out apparently. arrested. that's just inane although it did give me the idea we should have the same rule for politicians when they're debating during presidential debates. we can get them all off the stage. >> that i can get

in the federal courthouse in, no, the judge is in charge.hat happened in guan tan morning the military commissions are such that the government is in charge beyond the judge, and while there can always be pressure on the judge, guantanamo, they intervene on what happened. and sharing evidence and communications with the defense attorney. problem with the military commissions as opposed to the federal courts, they're not proceeding. we're still waiting for the 9/11 trial to happen. it's more than 12 years after 9/11. what's happening in the obama administration, they have put the debate aside and said, let's look at the future. guantanamo is the future, and we're going to have terror suspects that we as a country want to try. it is now moot point. they're coming into court and we're going to have these trials. one of the questions we haven't weighed in on here is do we know for certain that these kinds of terror suspects will come to federal court all the time. or will the military commission, despite the fact that they haven't been able to t

mccain-feingold federalized all elections through introduction of a new term, federal election activity. which subjected local activities such as voter registration to federal regulation. the implementation of this concept has proven rocky. when passed, it was claimed to be a narrowly targeted measure. defense of the law followed suit and minimize the reach of the new law. after the law was upheld, in mcconnell versus fec, supporters changed their tune and argued that the federal election commission, the agency charged with enforcing the law, was not reading the new mandates broadly enough. additional litigation ensued and courts instructed the f.e.c. to rewrite and broaden the rules. for example, under recent f.e.c. redefined definition of get out the vote, essentially all public communications undertaken by a state party committee, even those made totally independent of any federal candidate involvement, are subject to federal law. merely by extorting the voter -- to vote for state or local candidate. therefore, if a party committee wishes to air a television or radio ad to vote for s

of federal aid. have the bulk of those programs within the department of education. federal student aid programs, grants, work-study, loans. you have other agencies within the federal government, including particularly now the veterans administration with educational benefits of the g.i. bill and then the department of defense which has a very sizable tuition assistance program. that is the way the federal government interacts with us, and the federal government has historically tended to prevent funding without provisions that may strike a lot of people as common sense. policy mayin federal be contributing to tuition hikes. host: we're talking with barmak nassrian, the director of federal policy at the american association of state colleges and universities. we want to get you involved. if you have a high school degree, call 202-585-3880. college degree, 202-585-3881. postgraduate degree, 202-585-3882. first call from washington, d.c., high school degree. caller: i have a daughter who will be attend

they don't even recognize the federal government. and these tea party militia fox trotters are a bunch of ne'er-do-wells, they aren't people that have legitimate businesses on the land. you wouldn't get ranchers to stand next to bundy. people in the mining and oil and gas business on federal land, they wouldn't stand next to these people because they make a living on that federal land and they listen to the rule of the land. >> so the ulterior motive is to make the bureau of land management, the boogeyman here. these people are really upset about any closed trails or any a it tv access issues. >> well, they might be, but there are millions of other acres that they can go to.>> we there are millions of other acres that they can go to.tv ac. >> well, they might be, but there are millions of other acres that they can go to.>> we there are millions of other acres that they can go to. 0% 30% of montana is owned by the government, 80% of nevada. there are places all over the west to rec create. some allow atv, some don't. some allow huntin

you tell the federal government is going to do with. and so the question for the day is one might a waiver which is a lot harder to get, be an appropriate mechanism, state and federal perspective to effectuate the medicaid expansion? again, i want to remind you, the state has requested and the federal rothman has to approve it. both parties have to believe that a waiver is more appropriate your than a garden variety netiquette expansion. and tying back to the language of experiment pile of a demonstration there have to be some kind of learning going on. we have to be finding something out that we did not know before. i would loosely place it in four categories of learning. there is overlap, but i think even with the program operates it's a decent starting place. a lot of times and on all health care providers will react to a certain change, the shape of the market in the delivery system. we are certainly interested in knowing how people's access to care utilization changes based on program parameters. there is of good deal of interest i

the federal protective services has four alarm facilities that monitor federal government security alarm accounts. the centers also have the law enforcement function of dispatching federal protective service officers on emergency call. has your agency ever done an analysis on what the overall operation cost is to maintain facilities and whether he would be more cost effective for the taxpayer to move the alarm monitoring function or -- functioning to a commercial center? >> we have not looked into that. notm monitoring is inherently a governmental function so i think that is something that someone could look at. that goes to the issue of response. 's see a problem they also -- should always contact the mega-center. in terms of operation, whether it can be privatized, we have not looked at that. >> with that be something you would seek to do from a cost-saving standpoint? is there a concern that there would be a breach in security or a diminution of security by doing such a thing? >> i think in this type of centers act as the more in a management function, fps would want to retain control

mccain-feingold federalized all elections through introduction of a new term, federal election activity. which subjected local activities such as voter registration to federal regulation. the implementation of this concept has proven rocky. when passed, it was claimed to be a narrowly targeted measure. defense of the law followed suit and minimize the reach of the new law. after the law was upheld, in mcconnell versus fec, supporters changed their tune and argued that the federal election commission, the agency charged with enforcing the law, was not reading the new mandates broadly enough. additional litigation ensued and .e.c. tonstructed the fa rewrite and broaden the rules. for example, under recent f.e.c. redefined definition of get out the vote, essentially all public communications undertaken by a state party committee, even those made totally independent of any federal candidate involvement, are subject to federal law. --ely by extorting the voter merely by exhorting the voter to vote for state or local candidate. therefore, if a party committee wishes to air a television or rad

this makes our price point be above what the federal agreement is. this is one of the marriage issues. we are moving to eliminate those supplemental benefits in year two, which will bring the price point back down into alignment. if i were king for a day i might try to add them to all the benefits but the rules requires to us go with what the state chose as an essential health benefit. >> i think it's important to remember that the medicaid enabling legislation was passed in 1965, and it hasn't changed much. and so the list of mandatory versus optional benefits would surprise you, i think. surprises me when i look at it, and i've look at it for 40 years it hasn't changed so farmly is openingal to the no state would mike it optional and then the nonemergency transportation. and as for healthier michigan program, one change we made might have been as significant as any, we included dental in the managed care package, and for the traditional program it's been carved out and we pay low fees and we have access challenges, and we got a mixed bag. we do com

federalizing all elections. federal election activity with subject to traditional motor activity. the limitation of this new concept has proven rocky. it was claimed to be a narrowly targeted measure. it minimizes the reach. after it was upheld, however, supporters changed their tune and argued the federal election commission was not reading the new mandates broadly enough. additional litigation ensued and courts instructed the fcc to broaden rules. for example, under the recently redefined definition of get out the vote essentially all publications undertaken by state party committee, even those made totally independent of any candid involvement are subject to federal law. therefore the party committed -- committee wishes to air an ad that tells voters to go vote. federal law mandates this advertisement be paid for entirely or in part with federally regulated funds. today parties are governed by federal law whereas the nine party group could run the same advertisement free of such limitation. in addition under the get out of the definition if they send out a mailing and informs t

so now we're a state federal partnership exchange. actually don't think we could have done our private option if the state had not had control over the plan management function to be able to marry the medicaid program and the privae marketplace. in some of the legislation surrounding the private option legislation was the establishment of an independent healtha marketplace board that think likely will advocate to move from a federal state partnershipw to a state-only exchange, probably not the before calendar year 2016. i think timing is too tight to get to calendar year 2015. >> the exchange isn't exactly in my wheelhouse but i guess what would i say is this. both the house and senate at different times chose not to act in an affirmative way on either a state-based exchange or a partnership exchange and at this point i don't know what the political will would be. i know there's some regrets in some quarters that we didn't move forward with that but i'm sort of an open question and i'm not really sure, you know, what the future will h

seeking, even though there is no contact with a federal agent, federal of rnment, foreign entity any kind, it's not there and it needs to be there. unfortunately, when i raised people ring hole, the who negotiated this bill, my friend jim sensenbrenner from wisconsin and i think bobby scott, they were a bit defensive, gee, we have our deal, and so you can't -- we kvent allow an amendment, even -- we can't allow an amendment even though it's got wide, bipartisan support. and if one goes back and looks at how the vote on my amendment it was very passed bipartisan. we had some folks that would be considered very liberal democrats along with some of us who are considered very conservative. but the united concern that allowed my amendment to pass was about having terms clandestine intelligence activities, that would allow the federal government basically to get an order to go snooping on fishing expeditions based on very little and certainly nothing to do with terrorism. they had no link whatsoever to terrorism. if they wanted to do fishing ex pe dishons. ann, ashured by a text he ashured

there are over 660,000 vehicles in the federal fleet. by supporting a diverse array of vehicle technologies in our federal fleet, we will encourage development of domestic energy resources including biomass, natural gas, agricultural waste, hydrogen, renewable electricity, and ethanol. when i was in brazil a few years ago i saw how they diversified their fuel by greatly expanding the use of ethanol. when people drove to a gas station they saw what a gallon of gasoline would cost and what ethanol would cost and could decide which was better for them. they can do this in brazil, we can do it here. we can educate people on using alternative fuels and let consumers decide which is best for them. expanding the role these energy sources play in our transportation economy will help break the leverage over americans held by foreign government-controlled oil companies and will increase our nation's domestic security and protect consumers from price spikes and charges in the world's oil markets. congresswoman ileana ros-lehtinen and i have a bill

federally, it's still illegal.ou can't use it, even though the state of colorado says, "yes, you can, from a medical standpoint." they are making quite a bit of money, and it is a big tax revenue, but at whose expense? >> one of the big fears that i keep hearing over and over again is, "what kind of signal are we sending to our young people?" >> what kind of signal does it send to your children when you have a fully stocked refrigerator with coors light or with, you know, budweiser in it, and then the campaigns that are behind those alcohol products have the half-naked women? i mean, what kind of signal is that? we're not talking about some reggae concert or you being stoned in your dorm room. we're talking about a whole emerging business here, with responsible people. >> people like 23-year-old samantha sandt. >> how have you been? >> great. how have you been? >> she jumped at the chance to get in on the ground floor of the pot boom, selling seeds. >> we have a new strain out for you. we're a new enterprise. there

limit federal spending. limit federal taxation. limit the federal bureaucracy, promote free enterprise, protect private property, grant the states authorized to directly amend the constitution, grant the states authority to check congress, and protect the vote. professor william green, an instructor in political science at south texas college e-mails in: mr. levin, why do you continue to claim that james madison opposed nullification when he clearly stated in that document you referenced that thomas jefferson's idea of the rights of nullification is the natural right? what is nullification? >> guest: this happens from time to time. there's a relatively small fringe effort out there to push an agenda, nullification and others -- even a little secession movement going on -- i would ask the professor, can he opinion to one place in madison's notes where nullification is mentioned? he chance. can the professor point to anywhere in the constitution where nullification is mentioned? he can't. so, what he does and others do, they try to c

what it is is, when criminals are convicted in federal court, federal judges impose fees and fines on that criminal and that money go into a fund that is designed to go to victims of crime. great idea. let those criminals pay the rent on the courthouse, pay for the system they have created. $10 billion is in that fund. but less than 10% of it gets spent every year. why is that? because more money keeps coming in, those federal judges are nailing those criminals, more money come into the fund every year. it's $10 billion, now we're only spending a little bit of it for victim's services and the reason is, this is my opinion, fuzzy math in the accounting procedure. if more money is spent for some reason, that's counted as an increase in spending. even though it's not taxpayer money. the money belongs to victims. funded by criminals. and so because of the accounting procedure, we're only abe to spend a fraction of the money each queer. we want to spend more of the money, more keeps coming in, it's immoral that this money is not being spent for victims. that is in this fund. so we understa

to take immediate action of our own in federal court to prevent loss of valuable trade secrets and federal law enforcement cannot act quickly enough. therefore we would also like to thank senator kuhns and hatch for introducing the trade secrets act and your efforts to establish the right for a company to file an application in federal district court in order to seize property contained in trade secrets stolen from a company. we look forward to working with the senators on the bill and supporting your efforts to encourage congress to work quickly to pass this important legislation. we're also encouraged that the new laws under the discussion if passed strengthen overseas trade secret enforcement by raising awareness of the issue and promoting cooperation between u.s. and law enforcement and empowering trade negotiations to similarly raise the bar. in conclusion we applaud your efforts to highlight this issue and strengthen u.s. trade secret laws and there by help protect assets. thank you for your time. >> tha thank you, mr. hoffman. you're next witness is pamela passman, president and ceo

in addition, the federal reserve works for financial stability. focusing on identifying and monitoring vulnerabilities in the financial system and taking actions to reduce them. in this regard, the committee recognizes an extended period of low interest rates has the potential to induce investors to reach a yield by taking on increased leverage, risks, or credit risks. some behavior might be evident in the lower rated corporate debt markets. issuance have anything high yield bond that has continued to expand briskly. underwriting standards have loosened further. some financial intermediate or's -- intermediaries, it appears modest today. more generally, valuation for the equity markets as a whole and other rod categories of assets such as residential real estate remain within historical norms. in addition, bank holding companies have improve the liquidity positions and have raise capital ratios to levels significantly higher than prior to the financial crisis. for the financial sector more broadly, measures of short term funding continues to be fa

what is the federal government and only the federal government make those controlling issues? it does not have to be that way and it's probably not the best way to do it. host: let's go to st. joseph, missouri, republican caller. no matter how you feel about this rancher in nevada, what happened exposes what this government, especially this administration and the blm, have been up to. they are out to seize more and to pleasein order their environmental extremists out there that want us to have nothing, basically. reidor people like harry who sell out to their special buddies, it will give their cronies lands to hand over to them. you take a look at what is happening in texas right now. even though the supreme court said back in 1923 that land the texas andhe state of that people who have land titles, here we go again to the blm. they want to grab up more land and throw wrenches off their land. -- ranchers off their land. i think it's part of revenge since they shut down drilling and mining on public lands recently. a lot of the states have private land producing this oil like

it's been too long sings the federal minimum wage -- since the federal minimum wage kept that promise to america's workers and their children, and that's why we need to raise it today. i thank the chair, madam president. thank you. mr. markey: madam president, i am proud to stand here today to support raising the minimum wage. no person should work full-time and not earn enough to be above the poverty level. the poverty level in the united states in 2014 is about $23,000 for a family of four. today if someone works for the minimum wage for 40 hours a week, they are still in poverty, and no one should work 40 hours a week and be give an salary that does not lift them and their families up out of poverty. that is just absolutely wrong. and millions of people in our country have been trying to climb into the middle class, but no matter how hard they work, they are stuck in the same place. in america today, nearly half of those who grow up in families in the bottom fifth of income earners will stay there as adults. tiges of millions of americans -- tenses of millions of americans can neve