mr. duffy. >> i just -- any questions that people have for the department. i do see the roof deck and i think that would leave that all interior work. it would be correct on the original permit, in my opinion. it has taken place within that actual unit. if the roof deck had to remain, we would have had to do something with that. both lots would have to be on if there was a roof deck on the top of the building. commissioner fung: the revision permits has, in its entirety, this permit with the exception of the roof deck? >> could you say that again. commissioner fung: they filed it for a revision permits and it has been granted. the scope of work within that permit, is everything in this appeal permit with the exception of the roof? >> that is correct. >> and that revision permits is under suspension at the moment, is that right? >> i.t. -- it is an issue permit. >> it is on appeal to the board. >> i am not sure. i know there is no work taking place. the notice of violation that was shown is standard procedure for dbi when we get a request from the board of ap

>> that would require an application for a revised permit. >> mr. duffy. >> on the revision permit, i did not see the skylights. there was an existing skylight on the original permit and it was to be made bigger on the original permit. they did have an existing skylight before this all started, just to point it out. it is really unfortunate that we do not have the revision permits or plans in front of lust. i do not know why they are not here. i have not a clue that was approved. we are talking about something without seeing a plan. that is difficult for everybody. commissioner fung: in your opinion, the relevancy of the revision permit -- are there elements of its that can be covered by conditions done by this board to the original permit? >> no, i think you are right in what you're saying. it could have been a simple board putting conditions on the original current. the only thing that hasn't come into play about the revision permits is adding skylights. the roof deck was removed on the revision permit, but then they added scalise. i do not know what sk

mr. duffy? >> i do not have much to add either. the real hyper code would be 42 inches high. -- the rail height per code would be 42 inches high. i do not see a problem with the gas grill. i think it is far enough from the property line to make code. i am available for any questions. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? president garcia: what you think about it? >> i am tina bartlett hinckley -- president garcia: how many people intend to offer public comment? three minutes. >> i am tina bartlett hinckley, and i live at 2775 hilbert street. hopefully you received a letter from me. you will see that the lot is on baker street. i am on filbert street. it isn't unusual cottage at the rear of the law. when this building was offered for sale, they did tout the opportunities of a roof deck. the plan was that the upper unit would get the roof deck and the lower unit would get the backyard. i did go and see the property, and when i went up there i was horrified that i could look out of the back -- can you see this? you c

maybe mr. duffy has additional information about the past records, but that is what we have. additionally, the permit holders briefed there was some mention of the use as an office. just to be clear, the use of this office independent of a dwelling unit would be illegal. it would be a separate commercial use. you are about to have a home office as part of an accessory to a dwelling unit, but not separate from a dwelling unit. i am available for any questions. >> i do not know that you can straighten this out for me, but in exhibit b, i assume this would be the permit holders brief, it appears as though there are six units in this building? and the tenant has the right of first refusal? i do not think it has any bearing on whether or not we agree to jurisdiction, but i am just curious. >> exhibit e is the agreement for premises. i do not recognize this as a city document, an official city document. whoever prepared this, maybe this was a tic agreement. but it is not something that we would use as reference for establishing the number of legal units in a building. president gar

if you need to address the board or mr. duffy -- >> i can speak to the architect myself. i just thought i would mention it. it is a tripping hazard, actually. thank you. president garcia: i will probably go along with moving the rails somewhat. i think it is reasonable to move the grill. and want to say this as nicely as possible. if your neighbor is going to barbecue, even if it is three stories below you, given the wind blowing the right direction -- it is not a safety issue. the light, air, privacy -- i do not know. it seems as though most of this is upright. i do not know if anyone is guaranteed a view, like, or even air. as for privacy, and hope to make this as gentle as possible -- that is pretty much what window treatments are for. at any rate. do you want to make a motion, commissioner? do you have any comments, commissioner? commissioner hurtado: i think i am in agreement with commissioner garcia. it would have been nice to have reached a compromise. i would support a motion to move the grill, but that is about it. commissioner fung: is there a motion? president

sanchez, mr. duffy, you are up. >> i thought there were going to do a duet. commissioner hillis: you never know. >> there we go. mr. boscovich, i do not know. i will talk to him tomorrow. i let him away early. i was a little bit confused when i saw the brief in regards to the property line. there is a complaint that it complied with the dbi about 2323 hyde st. about these windows and the legality of them. i went to look at the complaint and tried to get myself appointed for today. there is something going on with regards to this easement and the area because the property line is not really shown on the plans. i believe that has gone through some sort of core process at this time. it is the first phase of the work. i do not know whether the building code would require this wall in this location. because this is the first part of the permit. i do not see the rest of the permit. there is not enough information for me to say that. if anyone has any questions, -- president garcia: why was a permit issued for a wall? >> you can apply for a permit like that if you wa

mr. duffy's recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> just quickly so i'm clear, it is the role of the secretary to implement the policies and priorities of the administration, is that correct? >> yes. >> yes. >> and i come from the neorthwet corridor of wisconsin. and one of my concerns is the skyrocketing oil prices of late. they've nearly doubled since the president has taken office. and i guess to you, is it your position that the administration has supported policies that would actually lower energy costs? >> i do. i think so over time. as the president said many times, there's no quick fix to this. and you know, you said prices have doubled, but that's really unfair to history because they were really low in 2008 because -- >> but i don't have a whole lot of time. your position is, yes, the administration is supporting lower gas price policy. and i want to run through quotes that you may recall and in 2008 as the president was a candidate, in san francisco, in regard to cap and trade he said, "if somebody wants to buil

mr. duffy? >> thank you, mam mr. cordray, just to be i was in here for a pretty decent part of theof it. it's fair to say that the rules that com ocfpb that apply to big banks will also apply to smaller banks as well, but just implemented by a different regulator? is that fair to say? >> they will apply to all banks, and that's one of the reasons why have i said that we should consider carefully whether they perhaps should apply in a different way to smaller banks that don't have an army of compliance officers and may have different simpler processes and cannot afford to bear some of the same transitional and other concerns. >> yes. >> i have a lot of small community banks in my district. the way it seems today is the rules are still going to apply to them, and they don't have the resources to hire new compliance officers and new attorneys. even though you may not be enforcing them, someone else will be enforcing those rules on them. it's also fair to say that we could have a consumer that is seeking out a certain pr

joining me to talk about that as well as volume in a cnbc exclusive is mr. duffy himself.t's always great to see you. >> thank you, maria. it's great to be here. i love the canadian banks and the canadian sports. i'm a big hockey fan and they are smart business men as well. >> thank you for that. thank you for watching, you guys. all right. you have new expanded roles. what is behind these changes and tell me how your life changes. >> my life gets busier. for craig, he spent 23 years at the firm and benefiting at the cme and benefited by having craig there. there always comes a time where you go through changes and it's been a good transition for everybody. a lot of people don't know pupender gill. gill has been an operational guy but it's been craig, gill, and myself making most of the strategic decisions together. now they are going to see a lot more gill. i'm going to be involved in more day to day operations and i thought it was important for gill to take the title of ceo, which was regulatory work and things of that nature. >> tell me about the market and how you deal

campbell and mr. duffy, mr. amash, mr. mulvaney make as members of the joint economic committee. we are here as a matter of law. established in 1946 as the congressional counterpart to the president's council of economic advisors, the joint economic committee has provided timely insight on economic issues to the congress for more than half a century. we helped lay the intellectual groundwork for the tax cut in 1964 and in 1980, plugging in the supply side established the credibility of supply side economics and paved the way for the reagan tax cut in 1981. the joint economic committee examines economic development and evaluates the economic ramifications of policies being considered by the congress such as this budget. in work by the g.e.c. republicans received national attention during the debate over president obama's plan to nationalize health care in the 111th congress. since then the full employment and balanced growth act of 1978, the joint economic committee has performed an important function in this, the annual budget process. advising members of congress on the potentia

mr. brian shunaman who is the legislative director for the sea farer's legislative union. ms. duffy you are free to proceed. >> thank you, mr. chairman. members of the sub committee, thank you for inviting me to testify today -- i'm president and ceo of clea, sitting with me is any vice president. michael is a retired captain who served 24 years in the coast guard. bring begin my remarks, let me just state also that the cruise industry and clea work closely with and depend to coast guard and we wish to express our sympathies for their loss they had last evening. i would certainly prefer to be with you today on very different circumstances. the concardia incident has had a pro found impact on our entire industry and i speak for all of our cruise line members in expressing our deepest condo condollences to everyone effected by this accident. we are commitmenting to working to make sure that recommended measures are adopted. my remarks today will not focus on speculation over the causes of the concardia incident. there are on going investigation ises by italian maritime and law enforce

mr. duffy: i appreciate the gentleman from arkansas yielding. i want to take a couple steps back in this conversation and first talk about the national debt. . >> we are well over $15 trillion in national debt. this year alone, we are going to borrow $1.3 trillion on top of a trillion dollars last year and the year before that. there are trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. and last year, the house republicans put forward a budget that showed a path to balance telling the american people how we balance the american budget at some point in the future. now, last year and this year, the president put out a pugget, neither of which were ever balanced, never telling the american people what it is to balance the revenues. a couple years back when the president and this house passed the affordable care act or obamacare which the c.b.o. now states that over 10 years, the rosiest of projections will cost the country $ trillion more. even when they put out that proposal for health care reform, they aren't willing to put out a budget that sa

mr. duffy. >> thank you, madam chair. mr.it is fair to say that the rules that come out of the cfpb that apply to big banks will also apply to smaller banks as well, but implemented by different regulators. is that fair to say? >> they will apply to all banks. that is one of the reasons why i said we should carefully consider if they should apply differently to smaller banks to do not have an army of compliance officers and maybe have simpler process tes. >> that is one of my concerns. we have a lot of smaller banks in my district. the way it seems today is that the same rules still apply to them. they do not have the resources to hire new compliance officers and attorneys. even if you will not be endorsing them, someone will be endorsing those rules on them. is it also fair to say that we can have a consumer who is seeking out a certain product and you deemed a product fair, but it could also be deemed abusive as well. is that correct? can be fair and abusive? >> we have this discussion earlier. congress define the terms to

mr. chairman. >> ms. brown? >> thank you. i think i'll start with ms. duffy. i have a couple questions. one, you mentioned operation and i know that you are conducting a policy review. when do you think it's going to be completed? i know you are changing the muster drill. but other safety recommendations. >> the process will be ongoing. so as we identify areas for best practices, we want to be able to proceed right away and announce those and have those implemented. so as long -- and i should say that this work, while very the incident was a catalyst for announcing this particular operational safety review, within clea, we have at least 25 standing committees that meet on a regular basis throughout the year. focused on issues of safety, security, environmental, all different aspects that brings different cruise line members together with the clea technical and regular team that we have in place which are all ex-retired coast guard, people with lots of expertise in these particular areas. so this is a process of continuous improvement all the time. >> having been a former member of heard

mr. cummings. >> would you get that for me? >> sure. not a problem. >> clearly, ms. duffy, we learned something from this, did we not? >> yes, sir, we have. >> and what did we learn from this incident? let me ask you why i'm asking. this is not a setup question. clear to its credit decided that beginning on february 9th that they were going to have this mandatory muster drills. and so that tells me we learned something that caused clia to act so fast. and i'm just wondering what did we learn? and how was that decision made? >> i think what we learned as part of the incident was that the muster policy, while the regulation allowed for that to be conducted within 24 hours, that we would better serve our passengers and safety by conducting the muster prior to departing the port so that people immediately have the safety information and know where to go and what to do in the event of an emergency. >> and i'm asking this of all the representatives of the cruise lines. do you believe that the experiences that we heard about from the couple an hour or so ago could occur on a vess

mr. speaker, i've come here to the floor tonight with my colleague, representative duffy, to talk about therisis facing medicare. and to talk about the independent payment advisory board. some call it the ipab. it's a part of the president's health care law and this house is going to address it this week. but i want to start out by talking a little bit about the crisis that we're facing in this country over medicare and what it means to our seniors. my mother is 71 and she's a medicare recipient. she counts on medicare. she paid into it and is now using it to take care of herself and we've got to make sure that future generations are able to rely on, count on medicare. so i want to start out this first chart here, mr. speaker, it shows what a significant portion of the federal budget, medicare consumes -- budget medicare consumes. we have it here, $555 billion. and that is per year. this is a yearly budget for the federal government. it is widely agreed upon by democrats and republicans that medicare is going bankrupt. some estimate it seven years, eight years, 10 years. but most everyone a

mr. schoeneman, how many siu members were in the industry? >> i believe it is between 2000 and 3000. i will have to check. >> can you do that for me? >> not a problem. >> clearly, ms. duffy we learned something from this. did we not? >> yes, sir, we have. >> what did we learn from this incident? and me ask you why i am asking this. this is not a set-up question. clea, to its credit, decided that come up beginning on february 9 that they were going to have this mandatory muster drills. that tells me that we learned something that caused clea to act so fast. i am wondering, what did we learn, and how was that decision made? >> i think what we learned as part of the incident was that the muster policy, while the regulation and allowed for that to be conducted within 24 hours, that we would better serve our passengers and a safety by conducting the muster prior to departing the port so that people immediately have the safety information and no where to go and what to do in the event of an emergency. >> i am asking and -- asking this of all the representatives of the cruise lines. d believe that the experiences we heard about -- from the couple an hour or so ago, that occur o