ms. clarke for yielding and i yield back to her. ms. clarke: thank you. dr. howard, just following up on a couple of the questions that mrs. ellmers asked about the conditions, for the record what is the process by which you can add new conditions to the program? dr. howard: well, first of all the administrator has the ability to add a condition on his or her own motion. the other very common route that we have seen so far is the public can petition the administrator to add a condition. as i said, we received seven petitions so far. two of those we added the condition, the first one being cancer, the second one being a particular type of cancer, prostate cancer. the other five we have found insufficient evidence for. ms. clarke: i understand the statute outlines specific timing requirements to respond to those petitions. could you describe that for us? dr. howard: the administrator has 60 days to respond to a petition unless the administrator refers the petition to our scientific and technical advisory committee and then the time frame is 180 days system of f

ms. clarke, be given five minutes for questioning. the chair recognizes ms. clarke. ms. clarke: thank you, mr. chairman. we have been joined by congressman nadler of new york, original sponsor of the zadroga act and i wanted to yield some time to him. mr. nadler: i thank you for yielding. i thank the chairman for holding the hearing and the members. i simply wanted to say as someone who, along with mr. king and mrs. maloney was one of the three original sponsors of this this bill, we struggled for years and years to pass it, i'm glad and history has proven the necessity of this bill. i wanted to thank dr. howard for his wonderful service. i'm glad that the chairman has called this hearing and that judging from the comments at the hearing, there seems to be a lot of bipartisan support for extending this bill. we know the necessity of that. so i just want to urge that that be done and that -- i thank the chairman of the committee again. extension of this bill is essential because the diseases won't go away. this is for both the first responders and survivors in the communit

i thank ms. clark for yielding, and i yield back to her. >> following up on the conditions and for the record what is the process by which you can add new conditions to the program? >> well, first of all, the administration has the ability to add a condition on his or her own motion. the other very common route that we've seen so far is the public can petition the administrator to add a condition. as i said, we received seven petitions so far. two of those we have added the conditions, the first one cancer, the second a specific type of prostate cancer, the other five we have found insufficient evidence for. >> i understand that the statute outlines specific timing requirements for you to respond to the petitions. could you describe that for us? >> right. the administrator has six days to respond to a petition unless the administrator defers to our scientific and technical advisory committee, and then the timeline is 180 days. in terms of the first petition of cancer, we referred to that advisory commi

. >> judge judy: you saw ms. clark. what did you do?d at her, and i blew a kiss at her. >> judge judy: how? and blew a kiss at her. how? >> announcer: the final straw. >> she said she would be in the parking lot waiting for me, and i figured i'm not gonna back down from this challenge. i'm not gonna let her bully me anymore. >> announcer: "judge judy." you are about to enter the courtroom of judge judith sheindlin. the people are real. the cases are real. the rulings are final. captions paid for by cbs television distribution 19-year-old alexus jones is suing her former friend, 18-year-old shakela clark, for breaking out the back window of her car. >> byrd: order! all rise!

ms. clarke, be given five minutes for questioning. the chair recognizes ms. clarke. ms. clarke: thank you, mr. chairman. we have been joined by congressman nadler of new york original sponsor of the zadroga act and i wanted to yield some time to him. mr. nadler: i thank you for yielding. i thank the chairman for holding the hearing and the members. i simply wanted to say as someone who, along with mr. king and mrs. maloney, was one of the three original sponsors of this bill, we struggled for years and years to pass it, i'm glad, and history has proven the necessity of this bill. i wanted to thank dr. howard for his wonderful service. i'm glad that the chairman has called this hearing and that judging from the comments at the hearing, there seems to be a lot of bipartisan support for extending this bill. we know the necessity of that. i want to urge that that be done and i thank you, chairman of the committee again. the extension of this bill is essential because the diseases won't go away. this is for both the first responders and the survivors in the community. so i urg

consent, i ask that members of the full committee, ms. clark, give five minutes for questioning. chairf recognizes ms. clark.zadrog >> thank you very much, mr. o yield chairman. we've been joined here by congressman gerald nadler of new york, original sponsor and i ing an wanted to yield time tod him. >> thank you for yielding and long w let me thank the chairman for he holding the hearing and the members. i simply want to say that as someone who is -- along with mr.s proven king and ms. maloney one of the three original sponsors of the bill. we struggled for years and yearsor to pass it. i'm glad to -- and history has proven the necessity of this bill, i want to thank dr. howardpport for hifos wonderful service. i'm glad the chairman called this hearing, and that judging from the comments at the hearing, there seems to be a lot of bipartisan support to extend the bill.ant to we know the u necessity of that, so i -- i just want to urge that that be done and that -- and i thank the chairman of the committee again. the extension of the bill is sur essential because diseases do not

. >> i'm mindful of the stamina of this jury, a jury i have confidence a lot more it seems that ms. clarkand that they will find as the record stands now that i did not, could not, and would not have committed this crime. >> four days later, the end is finally in sight. >> you have heard all the evidence. >> no more witnesses. no more delays. just closing statements. first up, lead prosecutor, marcia clark. >> let me come back to mark fuhrman for a minute. just so it's clear, did he lie when he testified here in this courtroom saying that he did not use racial epithets in the last ten years? yes. is he a racist? yes. but the fact that mark fuhrman is a racist and lied about it on the witness stand does not mean that we haven't proven the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. >> how this this country -- >> then comes defense attorney barry scheck. >> there is no doubt fuhrman is a liar, and a genocidal racist. there's no doubt about that. but there's really no doubt either that they played with the sock, is there? and if that can happen, that's a reasonable doubt for this case. perio

the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from massachusetts, ms. clark, for five minutes. ms. clark: thank you mr. speaker. imagine waking up every morning with the dread that you will face hundreds of violent threats as soon as you get to work. imagine while you are in your office people threaten to sexually assault you, and they know where you live, when you are home, and who your family members are. maybe they even show you the weapon they'll use in the future to harm you. we would never tolerate this in our offices, but this is a daily reality for women online. right now, millions of women and girls online navigating their personal and professional lives. yet women will be targeted with the most severe types of online threats and harassment at a rate 27 times higher than that of men. although these threats occur online there is nothing virtual about the devastating impact on women's lives. meet jessica, a journalist who founded a site that features topics like women in the media, women's health, and lgbt rights. the price jessica pays for creating this form and expressing a

the chair recognizes ms. clark. >> i would like to request unanimous consent to submit a written statement of the car rental association and the consumers for auto reliability and safety into the record. >> i will recognize myself for one follow-up. i dwelt on the ammonium nitrate as a propellant, and this question is for -- i was a physician, and i remember airbag deployments with sodium azide and i remember burns and injuries from the bag, but i also recall that there were environmental concerns about sodium azide. there was concern about the sodium azide just eventually getting into the environment. are there any other propellants that are being worked on? is there a purely gas propellant? carbon dioxide? nitrogen? something that wouldn't have the characteristics of ammonium nitrate or the toxic characteristics of sodium azide? >> there are a wide variety of inflator's out there. you have a small igniter and the gas comes out. there are some hybrids that have gas and a little bit of a propellant that heats it up

ms. clarke: while not a member of the subcommittee, i am a member of the full committee. congresswoman clarke of new york. i wanted to thank chairman pitts and ranking member green for holding this hearing and allowing me to sit in this very important hearing. also i want to thank our panelists. it's good that you've shared your experiences and remind america of the importance of renewing this very important program. this is a great first step toward re-authorization in a time when the american people, the scept-- are skeptical about the work of congress, i'm happy that this committee is working in a bipartisan fashion to move expeditiously to renew this important health program. congress must move forward to ensure first responders and survivors of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the world trade center, the pentagon and shanksville, pennsylvania, continue to receive the care they deserve and they so sorely need. with that, mr. chairman, mr. ranking member, i yield back the time. mr. green: mr. chair, i yield back. mr. pitts: the chair thanks the gentleman. now i recognize t

ms. clark? >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you for being here mr. secretary, and i appreciate your personal story and the empathy that you bring to these issues, and i also appreciate the concerns with things my colleagues have raised with the smaller schools and the problems they're having providing healthy school meals. i am open to your approach. look at flavored milks, trucking and how we can do better by rural communities, but what really strikes me is that in the richest country in the world, nearly 16 million children struggle with food insecurity. that's one in five american children. and we know this brings lower academic success, increased health factors, obesity. cardiovascular disease and increased health care costs. so in three minutes, i'd like to know our strategy for solving childhood hunger, and i really would like to have your opinion on where do we need to focus? is it expanding eligibility for nutrition asis tax programs like wic? is it expanding accessibility to proposals similar to adjunctive and community eligibility or is it

ms. clarke for your questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thank our panelists. the day before this subcommittee's hearing in december, takata sent a letter to nhtsa in which the company rejected a national recall. part of the stated reason for rejecting the national recall was takata's contention that it was not required by law to make a good faith determination of whether its product contained a safety related defect or to conduct a recall because takata is not a manufacturer of motor vehicles or of replacement equipment. mr. kennedy, this question was asked of your colleague in december. but i want to hear from you now. do you agree with that statement made by your company in december? >> it sounds like a lot of legal talk to me. i'm certainly not a lawyer. >> it's not legal. it's very simple. it says here that it is your contention that you are not required by law to make a good faith determination of whether a product has contained a safety related defect or to conduct a recall because takata is not a manufacturer of motor vehicles or of replacement equipmen

ms. clark? >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you for being here mr. secretary, and i appreciate your personal story and the empathy that you bring to these issues, and i also aappreciate the concerns with things my colleagues have raised with the smaller schools and the problems they're having providing healthy school meals. i am open to your approach. look at flavored milks trucking and how we can do better by rural communities but what really strikes me is that in the richest country in the world, nearly 16 million children struggle with food insecurity. that's one in five american children. and we know this brings lower academic success, increased health factors obesity. cardiovascular disease and increased health care costs. so in three minutes i'd like to know our strategy for solving childhood hunger and i really would like to have your opinion on where do we need to focus? is it expanding eligibility for nutrition asis tax programs like wic? is it expanding accessibility to proposals similar to adjunctive and community eligibility or is it simp

ms. clarke, all persons who were original co-sponsors of the legislation. and i'm grateful that they chose to allow their names to be associated with it and i'm grateful to all of the members of the house of representatives who voted for it, some 421 members. let me now just focus on the legislation for just a moment and remind everybody that this in a metaphorical sense is not the end, it's the beginning. in a metaphorical sense it is not the closing argument, as we might have in approximate a trial. it is the opening statement -- as we might have in a trial. it is a opening statement. as a christian, it is genesis, it's not revelations. there are many other things to come. in fact, we have a piece of legislation. the cam tip act that is currently pending before the house, and it is my hope we will get some additional co-sponsors on that piece of legislation. as to this piece of legislation, let me announce that what it does is simply provide encouragement to law enforcement agencies to know that consensus of the house of representatives is that you have b

ms. clarke of new york, all friends and all supportive of this resolution. mr.speaker, this resolution, as has been indicated, is the beginning. i don't see it as the end of a process. i see it as more of a preamble with the constitution to follow. i see it as a lawyer might see an opening statement, with the closing statement yet to come. and of course as a christian i see it as a part of genesis with many revelations yet to come. it is a good first step and it is the good first step in the right direction. i don't see it as the end of the process but i do want to commend and thank those who have helped us get to this point. and i may cite, if i may a justice department report. this report styled "police officer body-worn cameras" found that body-worn cameras increased transparency. people have the opportunity to see what takes place. it makes a difference. because it will increase police legitimacy. officers don't have to get into disputes about what actually occurred. the impeercal evidence is there by way of the camera's eye. it will help police and citizen

you very much and representative clark covered the additional questions so i appreciate it very much and i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentlelady from indiana ms. brooks, five minutes for your questions, please. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i have to say when you've testified, dr. rosekind, that nhtsa was working hard or you testified that doing testings in your own facility of your own so you can verify the work takata is doing. can you give us a status update on the validation activities and is there a new nhtsa testing facility for these airbag inflators, can you just share with us what is happening with that progress? >> thank you for asking about that, because previously what nhtsa did was to arrange to have data available to us but this provides us another resource to actually verify the testing, and any testing, so whether it's takata's or the independent coalition, we'll be able to look at all of that. we have a facility in ohio that allows us to do some testing but because of the inflator rupture, we talk about ballistics testing you got to blow them up and have them rupture. battel is helping us do that and we have a plan outlined so