and i will continue to work with hss to form this group. hss will report back to the board of supervisors march 31st, 2016 on their negotiations, progress and outcomes for this advisory group. i do believe we as a board owe it to our residents as consumers to gain more insight into health care costs that we continue to shoulder the burden of more and more. so they can begin to move towards more competitive pricing structure. transparent marketplace as we all know are inherently more competitive and more competition will lead to driving down costs, something we can all agree on we're seeing here at the city and county of san francisco. i look forward to your support as that comes forward. the second item is unfortunately an in memoriam for reverend anthony turney here in san francisco. reverend turney was joined by friends and family on july 4, 2014 in the coming home hospice in san francisco following three years living with cancer. he was 76 years old and his death came on the 30th anniversary of him becoming a u.s. citizen. reverend turne

and i will continue to work with hss to form this group. hss will report back to the board o

our hss rate increase has been below the local and national average the last four cycles. catherine has put in so many processes in place, [speaker not understood] working on transparency together. while most employees are seeing 8 to 9% cost increases year over year hhs aggregated a decrease of 2.8% yearv over year through innovation funding blue shield, care organization ms. dodd is incredibly responsible for in a very good way, in working with kaiser to have the premium costs accurately reflected. when kaiser offered 2-1/2% rate below based on lower utilization, the hss board vote today spend $8.8 million balance on profits to buy down the rate increase. this is a huge victory for the city of san francisco, for our workers, for the city as an employer. overall savings our health system achieved this year is over $20 million. and something that is going to affect so many things in our city and also our long-term liability as well. i look forward to working together with ms. dodd, the whole hss board on transparency, resolution we will be voting on later today to make sur

. >> is it a policy of the hss not to ask the status of those people whom you are placing the child. >> is that a policy? >> we don't ask. >> is that the policy of hss of this country. >> yes, that is the case, yes. >> and wesly lowery is a political reporter for the washington post. the president asked congress for throw.7 billion to support a plan at the border to deal with the crisis, wes, you described the path forward with congress as very tough. walk us through what that path looks like, will it get anywhere, this request? >> everyone is talking cautiously about it right now, but it is a tough path forward. with the position of president obama and republican members of the house it is a tough path forward much less on immigration and funding for immigration. they think it would help but not solve the problem. they would like the president to make the alteration for the law that determines that these children coming in are different than children from mexico. it may help deport these children quickly and not hold them as long. there is skeptism on the hill which this money which

hss will place them with their families, just the way we're doing that. we just want to add the preliminary hearing before, and that judge, and an experienced judge, will make that decision. >> congressman, harry reid came out, 24 hours after this bill was proposed and said he's not going to support it. are you worried at all you may be just giving republicans cover saying this is a bipartisan bicameral bill and not truly understanding the democratic caucus? >> listen, i represent my district. i will always stay a democrat. looking at the legislation, i released the photographs before anybody said there was a crisis. i've been working on this and talked about changing the law before anybody started talking about this. so, again, this is just from my thorough work that i've done, working with border patrol, getting ideas from them, talking to other folks. talking to the mexican consulate to the central american countries. i'm doing what i think is right and all we're trying to do is provide a due process where they can get a hearing before faster. that's t

border ares agents, hss worker ares and volunteers are told see, nothing, hear nothing, and speak nothing. the press are given strict rules of what they see and ask and can report. which leads me to ask. a president who thinks he can suspend the first amendment or commriant or press cops that goes along with the abuse of office. i understand no elected official is not pointing a gun. no law said that a person has to ask questions or grants introduce especially if the reporter is biased but public facility are run by public. os are the public's business. when a iy fort sills in oklahoma, he was told he couldn't come. but he was then said he could but given a long list of restriction. we elect congress to ask questions and have oversight over the way our money is spent. saying to a congressman that he can't do his job and enter a federal facility in his own district ought to outrage every journalist in america. where is the outrage and if the press will not practice the first amendment they will lose. it i am not a journalist and i don't play one on tv. i am a partisan who ran for and held

argument straight up legally and the argument is jon, the statute delegates the authority to irs and hss implement regulations and law and going to the law books. and under the chevron case in 1984, if the interpretation is not unreasonable it will be upheld. they will take it to the len member court. >> because we also got this decision out of virginia circuit court next door and they upheld the same thing. they didn't agree. >> they didn't. i agree with doug on that. the judges have to decide whether to take it or not. and who everloses there will appeal to the the supreme court and it will end up in the supreme court. >> and fact that the court of appeals for the fourth circuit went the other way. when there is a split in more than one circuit it is more likely and ripe for the review by the supreme court. >> to resolve the split. >> dc circuit court, they are likely to hold it on bond. that is the circuit which president obama and harry reid blew up the rules of the senate to allow those three justices that the president wanted to take seats on that court. and so democrats outnumber

and i'm not even doing it hss. anyway, taylor says the only difference is that one longs to a halfway house. they are both nuts and their hatred blinds them. tom, in new hampshire, really? is in new hampshire or new jersey? and you say it's a waste of time trying to take legal action against this president. we seem to have no problem with this president taking liberties against us. a double standard? know, but just a realistic one. if you think suing the president is the answer, you better have around. so can we impeach you, send you back to where you came from and thank you between the a's come covert op from which you strong. so i do want to tell you, how about we just take a pass on this president and this shoe heel and always with the corpulent comments. and for the last time, the camera at 75 pounds and for those of you who have met me in person, please go along with the dig. and jennifer and kentucky understands the frustration. from mca president who let millions of people invade this country for a better li

they come in with a child or a family unit and taken over to hss and processed and sent to different of the united states. that law has to be changed in the fact that we need to treat everybody the same and give border patrol the authority to have expedited removals and voluntary removals just like we've been treating mexicans for many years and nobody has said anything? >> is it true roughly 25% of those detained they don't show up for their administrative hearing. is that accurate? or 75%, rather? >> well, the large numbers are -- first of all, they won't show up. number one, the second thing is when i sat down with the head of the office of immigration review, he also said that even if they ged an order for remo l removal. this takes years to go through the process. years. even if they get an order of removal, i.c.e. will look at this and said we have priorities. we're going go after the criminals. therefore if this individual or child does not have a criminal record, they're probably not going get picked up. you know if you leave people here for a period of time, final families h

thpalpa n d x >>ais nter a wti t medi she l veanding cuse hi ae b tdaheyk awlduo fly hea tin dto follohe hss e tmar offrgsscoionsi spn ena oiingih ouldn the sh m eepicku an dia ws btooe.>ezotr d heredodoopnju t l ou see ait'sd rethsam wolf hele f o'ed t g in.fathne op sfar a anman owest. r, l th bhe cwntouo de 57d tatown 4orni a ghighestuuina i 77 il and u 7r ationthse is iy th pu itoeey coud pch therand ooverahe hitrat d lowesuunar t wnd e t morn clhno ght indr c th nw tmo4yafcast, o ra lit a n thndnnggsadenuratg anci ti ocveco 6an "actth ,shd ra lit a n thndnnggsadenuratg anci ti ocveco 6an "actth ,shd arno hl de h the ba d. a de h ay.male ame t tt'k for whe. [server]?r]ay.err]r mer, eveuay t thceewyvirumeca