mr. chairman. >> thank you. nd our next witness is debra gordon, who's the director at the carnegie endowment for international peace. and you're recognized for five minutes. >> subcommittee chairman woodfield, ranking member rush, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today about epca and oil transition. in my remarks i will discuss three key points. first the need to understand the changing conditions influencing today's crude oil market. second, the need for better information about the makeup and specifications of u.s. oil, and lastly, the need to deal with the environmental consequences from an unconditional lifting of the oil export ban. i explore these issues in greater detail in my wherein testimony, which i've submitted for the record. the bottom line is that oils are changing. a more complex hydrocarbon resources replacing oil. we need to understand the environmental impacts inherent to different oils. best way to position america for success amid energy abu

mr. chairman. mr. shimizu, how many people would need to die before you would be willing to do a nationwide recall? >> five people died from the incident. >> that's what have died now. my question is how many more would need to die before you do what nhtsa recommends, which is a nationwide recall? >> i don't think -- >> do you have a test? >> again, it's -- we are still doing additional recalls for e researching purpose and we haven't identified the root of the cause of the problem yet. but it's a chance to have -- it's minimal according to the data that we have. >> it's my understanding when the air bag explodes, it's metal projectiles, shrapnel so to speak, that has cut veins and led to some of these deaths, is that correct? >> once it happens, yes. >> so it's sort of driving down the highway with possibly a shotgun aimed at you behind the steering wheel or behind the glove box, i guess, and not knowing which air bag isguess, not knowing which air bag is going to explode and act as a shotgun would su

mr. chairman. mr. shimizu, how many people would need to die before you would be willing to do a nationwide ecall? >> five people died from the incident. >> that's what have died now. my question is how many more would need to die before you do what nhtsa recommends, which is a nationwide recall? >> i don't think -- >> do you have a test? >> again, it's -- we are still doing additional recalls for e researching purpose and we haven't identified the root of the cause of the problem yet. but it's a chance to have -- t's minimal according to the data that we have. >> it's my understanding when the air bag explodes, it's metal projectiles, shrapnel so to speak, that has cut veins and led to some of these deaths, is that correct? >> once it happens, yes. >> so it's sort of driving down the highway with possibly a shotgun aimed at you behind the steering wheel or behind the glove box, i guess, and not knowing which air bag isguess, not knowing which air bag is going to explode and act as a shotgun would such

mr. chairman. >> be sure to microphone on. >> next slide. what i'd like to do is sort of put all of this in context, and the first thing i think we have to talk about all of it is what is energy security? we describe it as a concentration, low-cost reserves and unstable parts of the world which tend to provide to risks to u.s. one, they can restrict output as far as higher prices that would prevail a more competitive environment, and two some these guys were caught up assist with more terrorism, even embargoes. also imposing price spike and large costs on the national economy. so one of the best ways to deal with this threat over this problem is to have a production platform in a stable part of the world which turns out to be north america. if you look at what's happened here in this slide you can see if you take u.s. and canada together which congressman barton to just spoke about, we have had a remarkable increase in production. it's important to look upon this through a north american lens becau

mr. chairman. and thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the ranking member as well for helping to make it possible for us to debate this most important of all decisions which congress must make, which a country must make. i want to thank you, senator i want to thank senator cane, as well. i think this is a very important moment in congressional history. i want to thank each of you for helping to create this moment and this debate. i voted for the authorization for the use of military force in 2001. i voted for the authorization for the use of military force in 2002. i never envisioned, nor did the american people ever envision, that we would still be engaged in conflicts related to those two authorizations so long ago. we now have had 2.5 million americans serve in iraq and afghanistan. 400,000 of them have served on three or more tours of duty in those two countries. 6,600 of them have died in those conflicts. 670,000 of them have now been actually classified as disabled. 270,000 of them are now, in fact, being treated for posttra

mr. chairman.at -- okay. joe, you are recognized for five minutes. they had not instructed me who a all was speaking, so i recognize the gentleman. >> i do want to talk for a couple of minutes. i can give some of my time back. thank you, mr. chairman. we have a number of members in this committee who probably were not alive when we passed the energy policy and conservation act of 1975. in that same time period and i believe in that act we put into place a ban on the export of crude oil from the united states. now, in the mid-1970s mr. chairman, the opec oil cartel had had an oil embargo against the united states in western europe. and it devastated our economy. i can remember living in crockett, texas, and i could buy ten gallons of gas on odd days. i could go to the gas station and buy ten gallons of gas on odd days based on the last digit in my license plate. that was not fun. there were gas lines. there were plant closures. we were producing -- i can't remember exactly -- but we were probably pr

mr. chairman. >> no.aye. mr. polis aye. mr. chairman? >> no. >> mr. mendment is not agreed to. >> i move that the committee make an order and give the necessary waivers for the amendment, the house amendment by myself and representative walter jones number five, which would provide that no funds may be used to carry military operations related to operation inherent resolve, that's iraq, syria and the region until congress authorizes such operation. >> heard the amendment by the gentleman from massachusetts, further discussion? seeing none, the vote will now be on the amendment, those in favor signify by saying aye. no by saying no. nos have it. >> i have an amendment to the rule. i move the committee make aal rule and give the necessary waivers by the house amendment by myself and walter jones that provides that no funds may be used in continued deployment in afghanistan after march 21st 2015 unless and until congress authorizes such mission. >> for discussion, seeing none, the vote will now be on the amendment from the gentleman from massachusetts. th

mr. chairman and for your good work on this. i think the witnesses for being willing to answer these questions because we are trying to get to the root cause. mr. waxman just mentioned that term and mr. shimizu i want to go that direction with you. specifically to the november 19th, "new york times" article that tries to get a time line or chronology. but what we're doing about this and how we have got into this mess in the first place. and why. and that is covered in some parts of "the new york times" article and i would like to submit this for the record is speaks to both of our questions. >> without objection. >> thank you. mr. shimizu, a jury from the article is said by 1989 researchers in michigan from takata were pressured by executives developed a propellant on that nitrates but the engineering team raised objections to base a propellant on such a risky compound. let's talk about that for a minute. i also found a takata chemical engineer said it was a question that came up ammonium nitrate propellant will that blow up? and

mr. chairman. >> if the gentleman could hold on just one moment, please. the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you. i worked very hard in a short time frame. i just saw the bill last night, stayed up most of the night trying to get through it. but i did come up with four amendments that i think would approve the bill. ranging from -- and i'll start with something might be more controversial to the ones that i don't think should be controversial at all and i'll briefly go through the four of those. the first one, the most important, and maybe the most controversial is the most important one. i didn't know i'd have the opportunity to do this again, this congress. now i am offering %0l/hr-15 as an amendment to this rule that would allow for immediate consideration of hr-15 which i'm very excited about because this would -- i know i've heard from a couple of my colleagues they wanted to stop this executive action. this would do that, unlike the republican proposal. and instead, there would be a law that

mr. chairman. i just want to underscore how proud i am to be a member of this committee under senator menendez and senator corker. this committee has operated in the best conditions of the senate relations committee in the united states senate and i think we're a stronger nation as a result of it. i thank both of you for your extraordinary leadership. i just want to underscore a couple points. first president obama and former presidents would probably agree that they don't need congress to pass any further authorizations that they have all the power that they need. so i look at this resolution as carrying out the appropriate oversight responsibility that we have. one of you mentioned vietnam and the expanded u.s. involvement in the war. i think this resolution helps prevent that because president obama's interpretation of the 2001 authorization would allow him to use our military force including ground troops pretty much anywhere in the world against any extremist. and i think that's why it's impor

mr. chairman. i share in the opt imism of the panel. there are things i want on the record. what type of impact would lifting the crude oil ban have on climate change? are these precautions or conditions to congress should consider? >> it's a great question. the reality is as my testimony stated, we just don't know enough about the height tight oils that are coming out of america. what we do know is like i said they're lighter oils. refineries are set to run heavier crudes. we're setting ourselves up to be a refiner as we export possibly if they're not flaired, lower gas leans to others. control what we're doing what handing off our oil. think are real questions from a climate perspective. what are these oils? what are we giving away? >> is there any other panelists would like to comment on this? are there any other panelist that's would like to comment on this? let me ask you, mr. evans, in your written testimony, you state that lifting the ban on crude oil exports would boost economic wages and e

mr. chairman. i believe we will, because i have your word on it. i have the word of other leadership. i'm ready for that fight. i personally they we ought to have it today. i think it's that important. because our constitution and the separation of powers continue to erode. as a river erodes a bank, eventually that bank falls in. this constitution and this government lasted longer than any others. i don't want to see it go away. i believe in it that much. i believe in this institution, the legislative branch and congress. i appreciate you giving me time. many would say we're wasting the time of the rules committee by being here on an amendment that is not going to pass rules committee and it's not going to be part of the funding bill and we're wasting time. no we're not, because it's that important. o set the stage for future fights or have the fight today. but the fight is coming. i appreciate the gentleman from south carolina, mr. mulvaney, who showed leadership on this issue. i support the mulva

mr. chairman. >> mr. meadows. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to follow up on some of what you were just sharing, mr. kallman. you talked a lot about technology and where we are. we see an aircraft sitting in front of captain moak there. it is possible to put in the type of technology or can you expand on the types of technology that would increase safety but yet not require an aircraft license as the gentleman to your right is advocating that would keep us safe. what other technologies are out there? >> i mentioned two very important ones the geofence technology which is very common in the industry and can be used on vehicles as small as the ones you see here. the management functionality et gets to a lost link also loss of gps so that should the vehicle no longer be able to make itself aware of where it is it knows how to land safely. there's a lot of really great research going on right now here in the united states and other parts of the world that professor roy talked about on sense and avoid technology. that's going to be a critical

mr. chairman. the issue of foreign fighters joining isis and other extremist groups in syria and iraq, poses a grave threat to global security and deserves this congress's full attention. >> the ri the rise of isis has been truly unprecide unprecident. isis broke away from al qaeda. isis has not just focused it's efforts on the battlefield. it's developed a propaganda machine which is spreading it's message to nearly every corner of the earth. isis producing pamphlets videos et cetera. with twitter and you tube, isis has a direct line across the world and in a grotesque display of disregard for human life, isis has used brutal beheadings of americans as a propaganda tool. young men and women from the middle east, north africa, europe and beyond have signed up to join the fight in syria. estimates now put the number of foreign fighters at over 16,000. three years ago, we were first alarmed by reports of fighters coming into syria from other countries in the region, mainly from saudi arabia and north

mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. waxman. now recognize the vice chairman, mr. lance. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i'm interested in the time frame moving forward in answer to the congresswoman's question you said it might be weeks or months. i'd like a little more specifics on that. your november 26 letter, there was a response on december 2, a response with which you fundamentally disagree. and i would imagine i disagree as well. what is your next step? >> thank you, vice chairman. our next step -- my team already began once we received that -- the information from takata on monday in response to our special order and yesterday in response to our recall demand, we are did iing into that data. we are evaluating their arguments. we are marshaling our evidence. >> is their argument in the three-page response that they gave you? >> that is the extent of their argument. >> rather weak tea, in my judgement. >> i agree. >> what's the time frame? because the american people need to be assured that their automobiles are safe. what is your next step, when will

mr. chairman. >> mrs. lowey, thank you very much. it's very clear, not only your participation, your wishes, some of the things that you wanted, some of the things you didn't get but working together the benefit of the team. i appreciate you very much. chairman klein, perhaps a new submission but not a new idea. and but one that's a bipartisan idea and one i believe is good for us to know about and hear about is your hard work with mr. miller on pensions. obviously our country has gone through five years of a very difficult time, and the average american that gets up and goes to work, plays by the rules, does the right thing, they should not find themselves on the bad side just because of timing. and i know you have taken a lot of time to include this. and i'm delighted the gentleman's recognized. >> members of the committee, thanks for the opportunity to to speak on behalf of the klein-miller amendment. i don't know how many of those there's been, george, but i'm pleased to be here today. this bipartisan amendment provides a legisla

mr. chairman. mr.shimizu, how many people would need to die before you would be willing to do a nationwide recall? >> five people died from the incident. >> that's what have died now. my question is how many more would need to die before you do what nhtsa recommends, which is a nationwide recall? >> i don't think -- >> do you have a test? >> again, it's -- we are still doing additional recalls for e researching purpose and we haven't identified the root of the cause of the problem yet. but it's a chance to have -- it's minimal according to the data that we have. >> it's my understanding when the air bag explodes, it's metal projectiles, shrapnel so to speak, that has cut veins and led to some of these deaths, is that correct? >> once it happens, yes. >> so it's sort of driving down the highway with possibly a shotgun aimed at you behind the steering wheel or behind the glove box, i guess, and not knowing which air bag is going to explode at what time and act as a shotgun would with shrapnel. in the pas

mr. chairman, will be gone. but we know enough now to begin our legislative work. mr. airman, last april i joined representative schakowsky to introduce hr-3364 the motor vehicle safety act of 2014. there are many important provisions in this legislation that would address problems that the committee found in our investigations of takata's explodeing airbags and the gm ignition switch failure. in both cases, auto manufacturers and auto parts manufacturers, failed to provide key information to the federal agency, nhtsa, in a timely fashion. and we learned last week of another major auto safety failure, for over a decade honda failed to report to the nhtsa more than 1700 claims of injuries or deaths caused by accidents in its vehicles. our legislation improves the early warning reporting system by making more information public and ensuring that nhtsa receives significantly more information from manufacturers on any fatal incident involving a safety defect. additional data and greater transparency will help nhtsa identify deadly safety defects sooner. in both the gm and t

mr. chairman. my point is that there are -- in a free market economy like the united states, there are almost no commodities or products that we have a ban on. we are the free market nation in the world. they banned exports of crude oil to the united states in the '80s. and we retaliated. and also requiring that no crude oil with few exceptions could be exported from the united states. that made some economic sense and some strategic sense in the 1970s. but this isn't the 1970s. one of the key questions he already asked. what would happen if we are repealed the ban? what would happen to domestic gasoline prices? i haven't seen any study that says they would go up. and, you know, the reverse question would be what would happen if we don't? what happens to domestic oil production in the midterm and long term if we keep the ban in place? the key issue there is the market for domestic crude oil. u.s. refinery capacity, i think, is around 12 million barrels a day. is that correct? >> domestic crude oil

mr. chairman. mr. gruber, you also did some work for the congressional budget office, correct, the c.b.o.? >> i was on the c.b.o. advisory council. >> when did that start? >> i don't exactly remember. it was probably -- >> 2011, correct? >> yes. >> when did you stop working for the c.b.o.? >> i did not. i was on the advisory council until i think through 2008. i'm not entirely sure. >> you mean 2011, is that correct? >> no. i did not go to -- >> were you on the advisory council until 2011? >> i honestly don't know when they took me off it, but i did not attend any meetings -- >> were you on the c.b.o. panel in 2010? >> i have not attended any meetings in 2010. >> but you were part of that organization. did you have any communications with the c.b.o.? >> yes. >> so you didn't attend any meetings, but you did have communications? how many times did you attend -- how many times since president obama took office did you go to the white house? >> i don't recall exactly. >> was it more than 20? >> no, it was

mr. chairman. we put an end to this debate by passing some kind of reform. apparently many on both sides of the aisle agree with the policy and so instead of arguing process, let's get on with comprehensive immigration reform. but in the meanwhile, it's been acknowledged 11 million people are potentially subject now to deportation. congress has spoken and has not appropriated anywhere close to enough money to deport everyone as my colleague from california has said. and so ms. hanicapie, we have to establish some policy as to priority. what's wrong with the policies articulated by the president? >> so there's nothing wrong with the policies announced by president, in fact, they are based on congress' will over the years to say that we should respect family unity. and that the fact that the administration has decided to focus on the parents of u.s. citizens and lawful permanent residents is good policy and the administration gets to decide, they have that executive n low-level priority so that they

mr. chairman. i yield back. >> i now recognize mr. brooks. >> thank you, mr. chairman. as you can discern from the comments, representative edwards and mr. rohrabacher, the nation for sls and orion is certainly a concern for this committee and for congress as a whole. mr. gerstenmaier, it seems you are uniquely situated as associate administrator for human exploration operations to answer some of these questions about sls's mission. it is one thing for us to test whether sls and orion components work. it is another thing to actually get sls and orion a substantive, a real mission. such as going to the moon or mars, capturing an asteroid, space station resupply if that's what's necessary, or whatever. in your opinion of what should sls's first real mission be? >> i think the sls and orion's first mission will be to this proving ground of space that i described around the moon. we call it the destiny of the moon. that's a very necessary step for us to move forward. as we push human presence into the solar system. so it's a place for us to hone skills, to understand techniq

mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to start by saying welcome to our panel is just a who is interested in hearing your testimony and your views on this issue. i sure mr. lobiondo's views on safety. safety is in the sky simply paramount. that has to be first and foremost so we in congress are very interested in uas. in the last that we directed the faa to save integrate that into our airspace by september 2015. the uas industry cannot develop unless it's proven safe, and based on the opening statements by the chairman and the ranking member, republicans democrats are united in our views about the priority and importance of safety. we also understand the uas are an exciting technology with the potential to transform parts of our economy. i'm intrigued by how uas might improve our mode of transportation. for example, uas might be used for certain kind of bridge inspections without closing lanes for traffic stopping before requiring workers requiring to climb up to hide space. the uas answered 180 acres of land in l

mr. chairman. good to have you all with us today. mr. rotunda, let me start with you. some defenders of the president's unilateral actions have asserted that his actions were merely an exercise of prosecutorial discretion. are these assertions correct or is there indeed a fundamental difference between prosecutorial discretion and many of the president's unilateral actions? >> the short answer, if i can be short, is prosecutorial discretion the cases refer to criminal prosecutions. refusal to not prosecute somebody who enters the united states fraunlly in violation of criminal laws. the office of legal counsel said 1990 opinion it says the president's powers do not permit the president to which statues to enforce. it says obviously the president cannot refuse to enforce a statute he opposes for mere policy reasons. they don't site it. and there's a whole series of other ones where they don't site it. we know the -- in gal vin, the supreme court said congress is the authority on immigration matters,

mr. chairman. >> mr. meadows. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to follow up on some of what you were just sharing, mr. kallman. you talked a lot about technology and where we are. we see an aircraft sitting in front of captain moak there. it is possible to put in the type of technology or can you expand on the types of technology that would increase safety but yet not require an aircraft license as the gentleman to your right is advocating that would keep us safe. what other technologies are out there? >> i mentioned two very important ones, the geofence technology which is very common in the industry and can be used on vehicles as small as the ones you see here. the management functionality it gets to a lost link also loss of gps so that should the vehicle no longer be able to make itself aware of where it is, it knows there's a lot of really great research going on right now here in the united states and other parts of thm-ykykykml9 professor roy talked about on sense and avoid technology. that's going to be a critical piece for enabling

mr. chairman. >> thank you mr. waxman and i now recognize the vice-chairman mr. lance for five minutes. cnet thank you very much mr. chairman. i'm interested in the timeframe moving forward and in answer to congresswoman schakowsky's question is that it might be weeks or months and i'd like more specifics on that. your november 26 letter there was a response on december 2 which you fundamentally disagree than i would imagine i disagree as well. what is your next step? >> thank you vice chairman thank you vice chairman parent next step ended back my team began once received the information from takata on monday on special order in yesterday in response to her recall demand. we are digging into that data. where marshaling our evidence. >> the argument in the three-page response that they gave you? >> that is the extent of their argument. >> it is rather weak tea in my judgment. selected timeframe because the american people need to be assured that their automobiles are safe and what is your next step? >> our next step after evaluating that information would be to issue an initial decision

mr. chairman. >> without i recognize mr. stivers. >> mr. want to thank you for exception in this consent for me to sit on this hearing. i appreciate your leadership. it has been an honor to serve with you in congress. i know other than going to the university of michigan, you had a distinguished career, happen to be a buckeye. i wish you would come to ohio. [laughter] i really do appreciate the way you have treated our veterans of the way you treated this committee with respect and really worked with oocytes accompt a common ground. thank you for allowing me to be here. i have a couple of questions for mr. walters and then i want to do one question with mr. hallinan. mr. walters, i appreciate your new october 1st draft of regulation that would deal with next of kin. g6ajx2#÷ homeless4obç veterans and folks identified because they had servetugyw in a conflict much further bacc1$e)s7l in our

mr. chairman. >> senator heller. >> thank you mr. chairman.i appreciate the committee's attention to this important issue. i didn't realize until this hearing we had three television channels. we were able to watch our warriors are san francisco 49ers and the giants play. i know there are some here in this room that may question why congress is involved in this issue but i would like to explain why. every minute in united states 20 people experience domestic violence. last night more than 20,000 phonecalls were made to domestic violence hotlines. one in three women will experience physical violence for my partner sometime in their lifetime. children exposed to domestic violence are more likely to commit domestic violence later in life. as a husband and father of two wonderful daughters this is simply unacceptable in something that must be changed. these numbers are just victims, their people. their wives, mothers daughters sisters and friends. a witness before his represent the most popular and commercially successful sports leagues in the wor

mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much. each time mr. rogers comes up, he is always accompanied by you. and while i don't presume there's a 100% agreement, i do know there's 100% teamwork. and hal has, i believe, always dealt fairly with me and as a colleague. and i know he would do the same for you. and we're delighted that you're here. the gentlewoman's recognized. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. for the opportunity to be here today. i'm very pleased to be here with my friend and my partner chairman hal rogers with the spending package before current funding expires tomorrow night. i'm deeply relieved that we seem to have avoided the antics of last year when a vocal minority in this body was able to hold the entire government hostage for reasons they couldn't articulate. it wasn't fair to the american people. i hope we'll never have to go through it again. throughout the process, my goal has been to avoid another costly shutdown. make adequate investments to grow the economy, enhance our security and protect the most vulnerable. i am

mr. chairman. and thank you, mr. chairman and i thank the ranking member as well for helping to make it possible for us to debate this most important of all decisions which congress must make, which a country must make. and i want to thank you, senator paul, as well, for creating a dynamic by which we have begun this debate. i want to thank senator cain, as well. i think this is a very important moment in congressional history. i want to thank each of you for helping to create this moment and this debate. i voted for the authorization for the use of military force in 2001. i voted for the authorization for the use of military force in 2002. i never envisioned, nor did the american people ever envision, that we would still be engaged in conflicts related to those two authorizations so long ago. we now have had 2.5 million americans serve in iraq and afghanistan. 400,000 of them have served on three or more tours of duty in those two countries. 6,600 of them have died in those conflicts. 670,000 of them have now been ac

mr. chairman. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. snyder. >> thank you, mr. chair, and again i want to thank the witnesses for joining us today to specifically talk about the threat of foreign fighters going into syria vis-a-vis isis. looking at the numbers that were presented to us and the source or location of where many of the fiders are coming from, of the 16,000, roughly 5,000 are coming from north africa as mentioned earlier. about another 2,500 from europe, 40% of those from france. and then from the gulf states you have another 4,000 roughly. so my general question, and i'll ask a couple questions and leave you to answer. my general question is are there any common threads attracting these fighters from these different regions? are there specific regional trends that draw those fighters and how do we deal with that? those are my general questions. ambassador, you mentioned peter kn newman who released a study in the spring and identified a muss lick clai muslim cleric with

mr. chaffetz. >> thank the chairman. mr.gru ber, you also did some work for the congressional budget office, correct, the cbo? >> i was on a cbo advisory council. >> when did that start? >> i don't exactly remember. it was probably. >> 2007 correcting >> mid towels. >> when did you stop working for the cbo? >> i did not -- i was on the advisory council until i think through 2008. i'm not entirely sure. >> you mean 2011. is that correct? >> no, i did not go to meetings at the advisory council. >> were you on the advisory council till 2011. >> i honestly don't know when they took me off it, but i did not attend the meetings. >> were you on the cbo panel in 2010? >> i've not attended any meetings of the panel in 2010. >> but you were part of that organization. did you have any communications with the cbo? >> yes. áÑ yes. meetings but you did have coáájt(urjj es since obama took office did you go to the white house? >> i don't recall exactly. >> board and 20? >> no. >> i believe it was. how many times you think it was? going to

mr. chairman. >> mr. larson. >> thank you mr. chairman. i understand because of the number of folks you have and the folks we have that we'll go two to your side and one to our side and get through this. i want to yield a little bit of time to mr. defazio who has a question, then i'll take the rest of the five minutes. >> i thank the gentleman. try and do this quickly. when we see these things in the new york air space have we found anybody operating illegally who was putting people at risk? i mean, you've talked about some commercial violations. have you caught anybody who has like put people at risk with one of these things? >> i can't make the corerelation to some of the reports we had. >> right because we don't know who is operating them who owns them, anything. how about a system where we require registration, licensure the user fees go to help you with your deficiencies in your budget and you vary the license according to the uses and the weight and the capabilities so that the cost for, you know, would be appropriate so it won't be

mr. chairman. >> thank you. chair recognizes mr. barber from arizona. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for convening this hearing, and thank you, mr. secretary, for being with us today. i want to start by just saying how much i appreciate, and i think i'm going by other members on both sides of the aisle of this committee, how much i appreciate the forthrightness with which you approach the questions and the concerns that we have, and the leadership you've provided to the department over almost the last year. as you know, mr. secretary, you visited my district within a month of your appointment, your confirmation. and you saw firsthand, you heard firsthand from people who live along the border, work along the border, what their hayne issue is. they are concerned about people coming here illegally, seeking work. but they're even more concerned about the traffic of drug smugglers, and the potential violence that comes with them. that's one of the reasons i co-sponsored along with many members of this committee the border security results act which passed unanimously here. it's i

mr. chairman. >> senator casey. >> mr. chairman thank you and i want to thank the panel for your work on these issues. i will start with mr. bogle not only because of his pennsylvania residents and his impact in our state and our country. i want to ask you about the basic dynamic that has played out over a number of decades n now, the shift from defined benefits benefit to defined contribution and implications of that. as you noted the transfer of trillions of dollars in savings and risks to individual investors and from corporations. give me a sense if you can as we try to design policy around the question of giving those individual investors the tools they need to deal with that basic change. the question of educating investors, what more can we do, what model works in terms of giving them at least the opportunity to become better educated? >> to begin with what we have to do is make what was designed the 401(k) for example turn it into a retirement plan. if we can just think that one through we will get close to where we

mr. chairman. i don't have an opening statement to make. i understand we're going to do this on a voice vote. >> yeah. >> and would be supportive of doing so. >> mr. chairman? >> yes. >> could i just have a statement included in the record at this point? >> you may. without objection. >> in the interests of maintaining a quorum, i ask other senators to withhold comments on the nominations until after the vote. statements may also be entered into the record. without objection, we will now vote on the nominations of miss castro ramirez to be assistant secretary of housing and urban development and miss teresa mcmillen to be the federal transit administrator at the u.s. department of rule in its current form. >> what would be the interaction with and impact on the cost to powers of the proposed frame work and the proposed eligibility requirements? >> we're evaluating those. one of the reasons we ultimately ended up coordinating the comment period for the gc input and the mortgage insurance eligibility

mr. chairman? >> the gentleman from maryland. >> i want to take vacation to thank the chairman for his service on this committee and in this house. we appreciated his leadership and wish them well. >> thank you. i appreciate that. we are adjourned. yes. thank you. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] qnexa confirmation hearing for three of the present transportation safety nominees. administrator nominee mark rosekind assistant secretary for transportation policy nominee carlos monje and ntsb member nominee bella dinh-zarr appeared before the senate commerce science and transportation committee. this is an hour and 35 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> the committee will come to order. today we'll hear from individuals nominated by the present to fill three positions critical to transportation safety and policy. we have mr. carlos monje, to serve as assistant secretary for policy at the department of transportation. mr. monje is currently concert u.s. transportation s

mr. roe: i thank the chairman. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of the multiemployer pension reform act, contained in the underlying bill. this bipartisan legislation will strengthen and in some cases save retirement benefits for more than 10 million americans who are enrolled in a multiemployer pension plan. let's say that again. this legislation will save retirement benefits. while many multiemployer plans are in strong financial shape, the number of financially distressed plans is a cause for great concern. among these troubled plans is essential states plan covering 410,000 participants, which the pbgc projects will become incol vent in the next 10 years. the pbgc's own finances are in dire straits. the report released just last month shows that its multiemployer program has a deficit of more than $42 billion, an all-time high. the agency also believes that there's a 90% chance it becomes insolvent by 2025 without change. taken together, these financial challenges pose a clear and present danger to the retirem

mr. chairman. >> thank the gentleman. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. cook, for one minute. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you know, it's a sad commentary on what's going on in the world right now. just when you think you put down one terrorist group, there's another one that rises from the ashes and it's something that underscores the fact that we must stay ever vigilant and quite frankly, we have to have a military that doesn't have its budget cut to the bone and is what is called a c-1 readiness. because you never know what's going to happen tomorrow. i have been on this planet a long time. ted, i saw that smirk on your face. and it's probably, in my opinion, the world is probably most dangerous it has ever been since i have been involved in those things. i've been in combat, been in war and now you strive to go forward and make the world safe, not only for your country, but for your kids and your grandchildren. so thank you for having this hearing, i think this is something

mr. chairman. a couple of things. mr. gruber, you have apologized for the intemperate you said insulting remarks. it is unfortunate this debate about health care is so fundamentally important to this country. we had a partisan vote and strongly differing points of view about it. unfortunately, the remarks you made provided clear ammunition for opponents to use that to indict the entire bill. when you start commenting about what you expect might be a legal outcome do you have training as a lawyer? >> no i do not. >> when you comment on the equality of mind in the american people which i think all of us here have a great deal of respect for the people we represent you would i take it apologize for any insulting remarks you made? >> it was inexcusable. >> i talk about folks who had a bad experience with health care bill. some people have had good experience and some people have had bad experience. it really is profoundly important to the american people that they have security about health care. and is it your view going bac

mr. chairman. >> come to order. thank you very much. distinguished panel that is here. i will go to to where the light comes on. you will recognized. >> thank you. i appreciate declining to intervene in the district of columbia on two matters. the other is new. it prohibits the district from acting --unds on an law.ing a marijuana i want to put on record the alternative view to the republican appropriation view. their view is that -- their version blocks the marijuana legalizes very small amounts of marijuana for personal usage the way other states to. i wanted to come here and put on the record that there is another is notd that the view the view of the entire house. in order to preserve the view of and the effect on the city, in case my amendment is not adopted, my amendment is bill on a reading of the of the ordinary principles statutory interpretation. the original amendment contains language that is not in the bill. it was taken out of the bill. and has to do with carrying out marijuana policy

mr. chairman. >> thank you. chair recognizes mr. barber from arizona. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for convening this hearing, and thank you, mr. secretary, for being with us today. i want to start by just saying how much i appreciate, and i think i'm going by other members on both sides of the aisle of this committee, how much i appreciate the forthrightness with which you approach the questions and the concerns that we have, and the leadership you've provided to the department over almost the last year. as you know, mr. secretary, you visited my district within a month of your appointment, your confirmation. and you saw firsthand, you heard firsthand from people who live along the border, work along the border, what their hayne issue is. they are concerned about people coming here illegally, seeking work. but they're even more concerned about the traffic of drug smugglers, and the potential violence that comes with them. that's one of the reasons i co-sponsored along with many members of this committee the border security results act which passed unanimously here. it's i