. >> my - and commissioner keane yes madam chair mr. mr. chair, i think it best if we took them separately and discussed them each on if decided by us we want to go ahead on each of them because they're very discrete and in different ways we likely want to make a motion regarding it for example, like the first one is something on the ballot and discuss that and do or not do whatever and move to the second one taking them all 6 together would be hard to make decisions between them what we want or not want to do. >> okay. any of the other commissioners have thoughts. >> i agree with our suggestion i think we'll take them one at a time and i'll propose we have the commission discuss and make a vote who they want to say that's something they want to have done and prioritize because maybe we can't do all 6 but after saying we want to do all 6 let's put priority. >> great, thank you okay. so the first proposed idea would be applying the city contribution limits and bands to candidate control committees not associated with the candidate election and the

chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: madam chair, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the democratic whip, mr. hoyer. the chair: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. hoyer: thank you, madam chair. this bill is complex and could be discussed for a long period of time. mr. scott doesn't have a long period of time and i will be brief. but i want to point out that when we passed at the request of president bush no child left behind, which everybody has recognized does not have some of the components that it ought to have and has some components that it ought not to have and mr. scott's substitute fixes that which is broken. but i'll point out that that bill passed 384-45. this bill has essentially been on the floor before and got no democratic votes. how sad as an issue so important to our country that we don't have a bipartisan bill. now, this bill had no hearings, notwithstanding the fact there are 63 new members. i'm very pleased, and i thank mr. scott that the democratic alternative includes the full service community school program that i've been promoting for years. these full servi

madam chair. i claim time in opposition though i'm supportive of the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. row key tea -- mr. rokita: thank you, madam chair. i want to thank the gentleman for his hard work on this amendment. currently teacher attrition costs the united states $1 billion each year. many teachers -- mr. young: many teachers leave in the first five years. providing these teachers with evidence-based training thru a pay for success model will not only save the government money, it will help to retain top talent in the classroom. this amendment will do just that, give schools the ability to participate in this finance mod tole retain the best -- to retain -- model to retain the best teachers. it allows investments to scale up scientifically proven social and educational programs. because the projects are focused on results, government money son-in-law paid out to private sector investment -- investors when desired outcomes are met and only in accordance with the value assigned to those outcomes. this social impact model has the potential to fundament a-- fundamentally transform our educational p

chair and then we can come back. madame vice chair? >> thank you very much, mr. chair. this question is for mr. jones. and it kind of follows up on the direction in which the commissioner has been headed. but it would appear that the custom and border officers are critical players in this immigration process, and the screening and the selection and the training of those individuals would be equally as important. i'd like for you to talk to us, please, mr. jones, about the selection, the training. of your officers and the supervision that would go along with that. and then, i'd ask you to detail any problems that have arisen. the kinds of disciplinary actions that have been taken or could be taken in connection with problems that arise. and then after you answer that, i might have another follow-up. but go ahead, please. >> thank you, ma'am, thank you, vice chair. the selection process is we advertise for border patrol agents if you will, probably twice a year. we have a federal floor in terms of the number of border patrol agents that we have to have on duty at any given time. i think the number is 21

chair: pursuant to house resolution 78, the gentleman from michigan, mr. conyers, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: thank you madam chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. madam chairman, my amendment will preserve the ability of agencies to quickly respond to emergencies that threaten america's health and safety by striking one of the most pernicious elements of this legislation. section 5 of h.r. 527 contains one of the bill's most problematic provisions. as drafted, it could undermine the ability of agencies to quickly respond to health and safety risks. so this section repeals the authority under current law that allows an agency to waive or delay the initial analysis required under the regulatory flexibility act. in response to an emergency that makes compliance or timely compliance and practicable. rather than leave this critical exception under current law in place, section 5 replaces it with a provision empowering the chief counsel for advocacy to issue regulations about how agencies in general should comply with the act. without any provision allowing agencies to respond to emergencies through expedit

mr. up dike did testify he was going to incorporate our recommendation in future amendments to the administrative code for the board of supervisors' consideration. >> if i may madam chair through the chair mr. rose did the department of real estate give you the additional appraisals that they're referencing in terms of the properties they have been looked at? >> to my knowledge they did not. that was done orally to the committee on the last hearing of the committee held. we have not looked at any subsequent data. >> okay. thank you. thank you madam president. if i may through the chair to mr. updike. i have a fundamental problem with this item because what you have here is you have a proposal for the city originally to pay $16 million. now the amount is down to 15.$4 million to buy a property that our own appraisal through the process that we completed noted is worth 11.3 million. in other words we will be paying more than $4 million more of taxpayers money than the appraisal that we requested shows. i just don't think that we should be engaging in that kind of a transaction where we are using taxpayer money to over pay for a property to the tune of $4 million, and so can you explain to us what happened here? how is it that we got to this point? because on its face this just looks horrible. >> thank you supervisor campos. through the chair john uplike director of real estate. i appreciate the ability to clarify where we stand on this item today. i would take issue with the potential that we're over paying so as the budget analyst noted there is more recent data that we be

chair will remind members to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president. the chair -- the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings. mr. hastings: thank you very much, madam speaker. i'd also take the opportunity to encourage the previous speaker to read the jefferson manual because some of the things he talked about about rules are not at least my understanding. so i expect his expertise on certain matters but what we can do in the minority strike me as strange. madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from texas, mr. veasey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. veasey: thank you, madam speaker. and thank you -- i'd like to thank the gentleman from florida for giving me this time and i want to talk about the rule against keystone. i'm rising today against the rule and although i believe that a pipeline is absolutely the most safest and environmentally conscious way that we can transport natural resources in north america and natural resources, for that matter, that are going to be developed. it doesn't mayor what the carrier ultimately is, these are resources that w