allbee: we think that a household can actually reduce

but you'll have to reduce spending across a number of departments. when i served in the department of justice in senior leadership positions, we were called upon to reduce our budget on several occasions, particularly to support the war effort. we did it gladly and it did not affect the overall mission. itsone area i would not cut any funds that would put any of our men and women in uniform in danger. they are doing a very important mission. their safety and security is critically important. >> let's go back to our earlier format of questions. the topic is abortion. the 2012 republican platform has athe unborn child fundamental individual right to

all of which would reduce access to care, unquote. so whether it's in medicare or medicaid, we violate commitments to seniors in this budget. talked about kids in education, their budget would allow the doubling of the student loan interest rate in july from 3.4% to 6.8%, making college less affordable. our budget makes sure there's not that doubling. and we had an earlier conversation with ms. moore about the impact of people in poverty. and i will give you one example. in the category of the budget that helps women, infants and children program, this is the program that helps pregnant women and women with very young children get nutrition assistance, in that category of the budget, they double the sequester cut. and then they tell us it's not going to have any impact, not on that, not on doubling the sequester cut, on the national institutes of health and the research they do. somehow magicically all of that will be funded, even though you double the sequester cut, more than double it in that category of the budget. so their budget,

man: sewer systems are installed to reduce public health problems. now what you're doing is transferring the problem, you're transferring it to downstream cities. in addition, cities and towns above pittsburgh were doing the same thing. and then they were affecting the water intakes of pittsburgh. 90% of this region gets its drinking water from those same rivers that we have overflows occurring. hecht: we have sewage overflow with as little as 1/10" inch of rain. and our average storm here is a 1/4" storm. lichte: over a year's period, 16 billion gallons' worth of combined sewage and stormwater overflows into our rivers. tarr: it's not a problem of point "x" and point "y" alone. this is a watershed problem. a watershed problem. lichte: the watershed encompasses many municipal boundaries and it doesn't know any local politics. narrator: in the pittsburgh system, 83 cities and towns use the same sewage treatment plant -- alcosan. so all 83 municipalities have to work together to address the problem. schombert: we know we have billions of dollars that w

yes, we must and can steadily reduce our deficit and reduce and stable lies the debt but we should do that in a way that immediately reduces the job deficit. rather than a budget that immediately makes that job deficit worse. unfortunately, this republican budget fails that very simple test. the nonpartisan independent congressional budget office has shown that the approach taken in this budget will result in 750,000 fewer american jobs just by the end of this calendar year. twill reduce economic growth this calendar year by one third. we cannot afford to do that. and an analysis yesterday estimates that next year 2014 it will cost us 2 million jobs. so the issue is not whether we should steadily reduce our long-term deficit but how we do it. we believe that our budgets should be blueprint force economic growth that lead to greater upward mobility rising middle class wages and shared prosperity. we believe we should share responsibility for reducing the deficit rather than providing tax breaks for the very wealthy while balancing the budget on the backs of the middle class, on the bac

who are prioritizing innovation to reduce gun violence. we have a subcommittee that will quickly review those opportunities and then, syndicate investment in those opportunities. we can build some huge companies around this issue. and then, the third effort is the sandy hook innovation challenge which is a prize effort that jim pitco will tell you more about right now. thank you. >> thank you. and i want to thank the individuals and families from sandy hook promise and from our local communities came all the way here today to join us. and i had a chance to meet with some of the families last evening and was deeply moved by their courage and commitment to inspiration to me, and i hope that it is an inspiration to all of us. i am the chairman of the sandy hook promise technology committee to reduce gun violence. we are a committee composed of technology experts. spanning hardware and often wear and interprize applications and internet technology and gun safety technologies. we came together right after the tragic shootings in newtown to supp

there's talk about reducing breast cancer. profit 8 cancer can reduce psa.delivered. there are no risks by drinking pomegranate. just have a glass and enjoy it. i personally like it. there's no risk. >> i like it, too. >> we need further studies. it comes from egypt way, way back they used it for medicinal reasons, including getting rid of tapeworms. >> or move to persia. >> both of you are correct, of course. >> great advice. thank you.

they estimate that the budget would reduce economic output by $1.4 trillion and reduce private domestic investment by $820 billion. we don't know exactly if these figures are exact, but we certainly see the trend here. and the trend is a negative consequence, not a positive consequence. so it just -- i think these statistics emphasize the fact that the entire mind set behind this budget seems to be how can we find more revenue to fund more government spending rather than how do we grow the economy? our goal here ought to be grow the economy, not grow an already bloated government with more taxes to pay for more government spending. and this budget never balances the budget. we will never reach the point where our states have had to reach in balancing their budget. the majority of our states have had to pull themselves out of a hole, and they have done so because they are constitutionally mandated by their own state constitution to balance that budget. families have to balance their budget, and businesses have to balance their budget. only the federal government under this plan never bal

you reduce the service and in reducing the service and you have done this so many times before from years and years as you reduce services as the buses get more conjested, more people travel in cars because they have no alternative. the idea that san francisco ans which has a fairly large aging population is going to get on a bicycle to go to their doctors appointment is absurd. so you've got to find a different way of measuring things and if you want to be proactive about service and reducing cars, then you've got to find a lot better things than measuring things than saying well in the past you know the buses weren't used so much and we're going to reduce them and for an measley -- which is nothing on your best of my knowledge on your budget. so look at new ways to reduce the cars. >> any word on the directors report? no one coming forward i guess? >> good afternoon. i was born and raised in this city in 1940 i've never seen such a shamble in my life. they block all the traffic. people are trying to jump in the left lane why don't they make cut outs on sunset i don't understand it maybe

if we reduce the back log it reduces the work load. over time it should actually reduce the cost of government. i appreciate senator warner's leadership on this. we have beent add, -- you and i would not be impressed by the volume of the case work. we need to see greater improvement and i appreciate you working with me on this issue. >> i would congratulate senator warner, i think this is a good government reform and i know he has worked with others across the aisle on this and i know you and senator johnson are working on that so thank you. >> i would add my support on that. i think this is an amendment that really calls attention to breakdown in our government service. we have a lot of employees that spend a lifetime dedicated to public service and this is a tribute to really looking at a way to solve the problem. i support this amendment as well. thank you, senator johnson and you for your work on this. we will hold a vote shortly after the lunch hour. we'll return to our republicans, which amendment do you want to offer first? >> t

and is this, i think that there is definitely the need to reduce the backlog and i see the need for this. but i am wondering if you could talk a little bit about how your prioritizing the need for data analysis, unit, and the implementation of the housing dashboard? >> thank you. >> yeah, that is a good question, we talked a lot about that. we initially pulled some of those position into his this request as well. but in discussions with the mayor's budget office and the budget analyst office. we thought it more appropriate to focus this particular request in the supplemental in the backlog in getting that addressed. what you will see in a couple of months is our proposed budget for next year, which is does have additional positions for public out reach for the data analysis group to do those monitoring groups and that sort of thing. so we are proposing that in next year's budget. but there was a feeling among all parties that this proposed supplemental should only address the backlog. >> and will you be meeting with the advocates that brought the housing dashboard, the community advocate

but let's reduce that deficit. let's reduce that deficit. and it's important to note that this debate happened in a week that we will be taking up the continuing resolution. four days since the sequester went into effect. the continuing resolution that the republicans were putting forth is a bill that reinforces -- reinforces the sequestration. so what does that do federal reserve chairman ben bernanke, take it from him, he told congress last week that the cuts of this size made this quickly would hurt hiring and income, slow the recovery, and cost the economy 750,000 jobs this year, and keep deficits larger than otherwise. so we are not reducing the deficit by what is really happening on the major legislation coming to this floor last week and this week in terms of sequester and continuing resolution. that's what we should be doing is figuring out a way to get rid of the sequestration. what does sequestration mean? whatever its latin roots, it equals job loss. 750,000 by the estimate of the chairman of the fed. and why are we -- what is the

in fact, jcom expects to reduce reliance on fossil fuels by 80%. that would reduce the total d.o.d. electricity demand in hawaii by 34% and save the d.o.d. $42 million per year in electricity costs. this $42 million could be put to better uses. these are savings that can be replicated on a service-wide scale and will save far more money that could be used to support o & m than the toomey amendment will. the military recognizes this. this is skwr general james mathis stated" i remain committed to unleash the burden of fuel from our operational and tactical commanders to the greatest extent possible." end quote. these investments are about improving our national security by changing the way we power our military. advanced biofuels is an investment in that goal and one we should continue. as u.s. marine corps general john allen has said -- quote -- "operational energy equates exactly to operational capability. let's all work this hard together." end quote. so i urge my colleagues to vote against the toomey amendment. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from colorado.

they could reduce the size of the programs by reducing deficits. slashing funding would have devastating consequences for the millions of seniors and nursing homes. people with disabilities and pregnant women and low income families that rely on medicaid for life-saving care. seniors and those with disabilities make up 25% of those who rely on medicaid and account for nearly two thirds of the medicaid costs. without medicaid support, more than responsibility for caregiving falls on families families and primary caregivers like myself. we need to provide that care. funding falls further behind. the need for services for seniors living on limited income will likely face serious difficulties getting the care that they need. in new mexico, the most recent person to receive medicaid services under the medicaid waiver program was on the list for eight years. hoople getting on the list today can expect to wait for 11 years. these are people in desperate need of services. which of the current entity hospice for personso with cancer or his occult therapy fo

it has the ability to reduce our costs. the number of calls coming in to 311 has diminished tremendously because of real time transit information. people no longer have to call asking where is the next bus. they can actually get it on the mobile devices and in other mechanisms like 51 1. so, that is a result of this information. ~ so, i think it's really kind of an incremental effort on agencies and this

we will have to reduce spouse deployment services and reduced victim advocates support for domestic violence victims. these are all critical issues. we do not want to reduce them, but we have no choice because it is a combination of a civilian furlough and reduction that causes this as well as the reduced funding translations. for us, it's absolutely critical. it's a very difficult situation for us right now. we're trying to pick the most critical programs, trying to sustain them, but even when we do, we're going to have to reduce the capability within the programs. >> this is an absolutely fantastic question, thank you. i hope you know no one cares more about families than the people sitting at this table. women get together, our conversations do not start talking about airplanes, ships, tanks, we talk about the soldiers, airmen, marines and the difficult. they have been doing. the problem we have right now is that at every installation, they're looking at how we mitigate the impact of these things and how we preserve the readiness programs, child care support, all of the things that are so

it should be something that creates jobs and reduces the deficit. understand the difference between investments for the future and just across-the- board mindless cutting. that is what is called the democratic process. they have a view of anti- government ideology that says cuts no matter what for the sake of cuts. we do not share that view. that is the debate we are engaged in. i would say that it is a false economy to think if you cut education, that you are born to reduce the deficit. nothing brings more money to the treasury, nothing, than the education of the american people. these are investments. innovation begins in the classroom. our competitiveness depends on that. and so i think -- i do not know if they understand the role of government is and how the budget plays into that, but we agree we have to reduce the deficit and we want growth with jobs and we have these spending cuts. i will go back to my endangered species, where we were two weeks ago, they did not give a hoot, these endangered species, when president bush was racking up this d

reduce the cost of government. i appreciate the leadership on this. >> you and i would not have been impressed with the caseload. we need to see greater improvement. >> i would congratulate senator warner. >> this is an amendment that calls upon the breakdown of the government service. they spent a lifetime and this is a way to solve that problem. we will hold this amendment as we will all of them for a vote after the lunch hour. which amendment do you want to offer first? >> the balanced budget amendment, is there a number on this? basically, what this amendment would do, it would not raise taxes, and keep the tax rate and tax revenue levels as they are today. hopefully we would have tax reform and simplification as we go forward. if we keep the revenue levels at the same rate, it would control the growth of spending and maintain the growth of spending each year at 3.4%. the net result of that would be our budget will balance. we can increase spending at 3.4% and still balance the budget. this would remove the tha

and will create seven million american jobs and reduce unemployment to 5% and yet still reduce our deficit by $4.4 trillion. it will strengthen medicare and medicaid and provide high-quality, low-cost medical coverage to millions of americans. that's what the people voted in november. that's the budget we should be putting forward and that's the budget that the progressive caucus puts out today. with that, mr. speaker, i would like to yield back the remaining time i have. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, i rise to recognize a wonderful and unique community in my district, the advent christian village at dowling park, florida now in its 100 year. scriptures says much who has given, much is required. they had this in mind a century ago when he turned the lumber business. mr. dowling set aside some of his property that he was developing for th

feet reducing hospital height from 265 feet to 2 26 feet. the hospital growth floor area will be reduced by approximately 174, 560 gross square feet. the number of proposed parking spaces at ka thea dylan ratigan hill campus will be reduced by 237 spaceses, from originally planned 5 13 spaces to 276 spaces. ~ there will be no changes to the building footprint, circulation, access, landscape or streetscape improvements previously proposed at the cathedral hill campus. [speaker not understood]. the replacement project at st. luke's campus will be increased from 80 beds to 120 beds. the hospital building would have an additional two floors, increasing from five floors to seven floors or 43 feet, increasing hospital height from 99 feet to 142 feet. the hospital's gross square area will be increased by approximately [speaker not understood] gross square feet. however, there will be no changes to the building footprint, parking, circulation, access, landscape or streetscape improvements previously proposed at the st. luke's campus. the planning de

and when possible reducing the amount of space for automobiles. so i am very much in support of this project. and i hope you support it as well. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners, i live a few blocks from the project in the beautiful dolores neighborhood. i want to thank supervisor weiner and the staff for a great job on the proposal. and i am glad they spared no expense with the graphics. the video was something else. i wanted to address a couple of points made. first of all, the 14-foot bulb out will slow traffic down. and when you are talking about pedestrian safety, that's the important thing is slowing people down. slowing people down by a second might seem like an inconvenience to the people driving, and perhaps that is true. but it enhances pedestrian safety. the cdc did a study of our pedestrian safety in our city and what they found was that if everybody slowed down by 5 miles per hour, you would see a reduction in pedestrian injuries and fatalities by half. so every little bit counts. there is some questions about the traffic an

and the rest goes to reduce the deficit. unfortunately, rather than seriously considering the credible path that we have presented in our budget plan, some republicans have decided to play some games with the numbers, and they just are not telling the truth. instead of subtracting the sequestration replacement portion in the investment package from the $975 billion in total revenue, they're trying to say that you should somehow add them all together. they are taking one side of the ledger, combining it with the other side of the ledger and coming to some conclusion that makes absolutely no sense to us. mr. president, this would be like handing over $2 to buy a cup of coffee and having someone say, well the price was actually $2 plus the value of that coffee. it doesn't make any sense. and, by the way, you don't have to take my word for it. fact checkers and reporters have called this claim false and a step too far. and "the washington post" fact correcter even gave it two pinocchios. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to

>> yes. >> reducing maintenance and preventative equipment? >> that introduces a level of risk where we might face delays in restoring services if a piece of equipment breaks. >> thank you. >> mr. shuster. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the controllers are in an organization called the air traffic organization, and that is a line of business? >> correct. >> its operating budget is $7.4 billion a year? >> yes. >> and the five percent cut would be $370 million? does that sound about right? >> for total, that sounds about right, yes. >> could you find $30 million a month savings in a $7.4 billion budget? >> as i mentioned, our focus is starting first with the hiring freeze and then focusing on contracts, and in discussing the contract it is important to point out that our largest contract is the telecommunications infrastructure, so that is very important for maintaining the operation of the national airspace system. likewise we are focusing on other contractual areas and taking significant reductions in things like training, travel and consulting s

number one, that take a balanced approach and reduce debt because we need to reduce debt. but do it in a balanced way. number two, that protects the middle class because the middle class is still struggling, make sure the middle class is protected. number three, that make the right and smart investments in the right and smart priorities. that don't ask us to foresake research in cures and diseases for disease, that don't allow china to move ahead of nuss research and engineering and science and technology, that keep us competitive in the world. we want budgets, solutions-based budgets -- mr. van hollen: i yield the gentleman another minute. mr. israel: we want solutions-based budgets that aheave these three critical priorities and the way we do that and that is compromise. it is the ability of both sides of the aisle to pursue these three priorities in a balanced way. the budget before us right now is not about compromise, it is about ideology, it is not about commonsense and solutions, it is about extremism. the american people have sent us here to get things done, to fin

yes, we must and can steadily reduce our deficits and reduce and stabilize the debt. but we should do that in a way that immediately reduces the jobs deficit rather than a budget that immediately makes that job deficit work. unfortunately this republican budget fails that very simple test. the nonpartisan, independent, congressional budget office has shown that the approach taken in this budget will result in 750,000 fewer american jobs just by the end of this calendar year. it will reduce economic growth this calendar year by 18/3. we cannot afford to do that. an analysis yesterday by the economic policy institute estimates that next year, 2014, it will cost us two million jobs. so the issue is not whether we should steadily reduce our long-term deficits, but how we do it. we believe that our budgets should be blueprints for economic growth that lead to greater upward mobility, rising middle class wages, and shared prosperity. we believe we should share responsibility for reducing the deficit rather than providing tax breaks for the very wealthy while balancing the b

to reduce the debt.emplate that i think will work, if it is coupled with very significant spending restraint, which significantly -- is significantly larger than the tax. >> you think the president would go along with lower rates? >> well, i think he does if you maintain the rate structure as equally progressive. in other words, under the simpson/bowles plan, you still have the top 20% of american income earners paying 87% of the taxes in this country. and whether they pay it at a 35% rate or a 25% rate, if they're still paying all the taxes, that's what the president and his party wants, which is a progressive system. and -- but if you reduce the rates, by reducing deductions and exemptions, then you get money invested more efficiently, and people invest for the purposes of return, rather than for the purposes of avoiding taxes. and you actually energize the economy and although it won't score, you get more economic activity and as a result, you get more revenue. >> i hope he's right. senator, you make

it does not reduce the deficit in 10 years. when you impose deep cuts on medicare and gut programs that help the middle class and then turn around and give huge tax breaks to millionaires, that's a value choice. but congressman ryan is also claiming a different kind of balance. he says that by 2023 his plan will bring outlays in revenues into total balance and reduce annual deficits to zero. what hasn't been focused on is that that's just that true. -- not true. would his budget truly achieve balance? only if you believe in magic. the truth is congressman ryan's fiscal plan relies on a lot of budgetary sleight of hand in order to create the illusion of a balanced budget. the document is filled with deceptive gimmicks, far-fetched assumptions and phony arithmetic. the d.p. -- dpcc has put out a report, it's called paul ryan's hocus pocus budget. the house g.o.p.'s five magic tricks that create the optical illusion of a balanced budget. among the magic tricks ryan performs, presto, he proposes that more than $4.5 trillion in tax

reducing the immorality. we could have the wealthy instead of paying 12% or 13%, on average, pay what middle class people pay. that certainly would cut the debt an receive did -- deficit significantly, redeucing, once again, the immorality. but it's interesting, talking about immorality, the pible certainly speaks to that. in amos, the prophet amos if you look it up, you'll see that amos speaks about god's little ones, the little ones then were the orphans and widows because of the condition we're in. it was very difficult for them to survive. we then, or at that time, the israeliites, were going to be judged on how they treated these people. that carries forward into the new testament if you look in matthew, matthew 25, how are we going to be judged? how are we going to be jummed? jesus makes it easy he says, whatever you do to the least of my brothers, you did to me. he goes through a litany of things. he said, when i was hungry you gave me to eat. when i was thirsty, you gave me to drink. when i was strang

that's how we can reduce our deficit without laying off workers. i don't think that is too much to ask. it is the kind of approach i proposed for two years now. a majority of the american people agree with me, including a majority of republicans. we just need republicans in congress to catch up with their own party and the rest of the country. i know there are republicans in congress who would rather see if tax loopholes closed than let these cuts go through. there are democrats who would rather do smart entitlement reform than let the cuts go through. there's a caucus of common sense throughout. i'm going keep reaching out of them to fix this for good. american people are weary of partisanship. this is america. we don't bounce from one manufactured crisis to another. we make smart choices. we plan, we prioritize. i'm going keep fighting for the real challenges facing american families. i'm going to push that makes minimum wage is a wage you can live off of. i'm going push to repair our transportation system and keep our children safe from gun viol

how do you reduce rates? this is the kind of logic we need to get into our minds as we deal with the difficult choices facing america. i think you put us on the right path in saying that we need to be careful before we start down the half of tax reform that should be an overall tax reform that we are out of in the end. i am confident we will continue this debate. but the vote has been called and i would just ask your committee members if we vote and go back to the two votes, we will be able to offer an amendment on each side or we could just come back at 2:00 after your lunch. i prefer that we come back after lunch. >> ok. we will begin voting on the eight amendments that have been offered at 2:00. , there will be a minute to debate on each side. we will continue to offer amendments after that. please make sure you are here at 2:00 so we can get started on that. >> the senate budget committee the final vote was 12-10 along party lines. it now goes to the senate floor for consideration. later that day, senate

we're looking at reducing the field by 80%. >> i'm legala and i head up the solar project. met saul when i was at m.i.t. we worked at the same lab and i came to saul and i was like how can we make solar that's cheap. and he said, you know, i have this idea that's been moving around a little bit. i haven't done anything with it. why don't you see what you can do with it. a year later we have a department of energy grant and partners and we're ready to make it happen. >> it's all over the news, there's a lot of people who are intrigued with the notion of using natural gas as a transportation fuel. how do we drive our cars with natural gas. incredible advantages, not only in national energy security, in terms of the amount of carbon travel, you would reduce it by half. restore natural gas, in tanks like gas cylinders and the gas cylinders don't fit very well into a car or truck. we had to look at the problem and came up with an interesting idea. instead of using huge tanks to use very small tubes, pack them in like an intestine. i call it our gas intestine project. showing an

we have already reduced the front height by one foot. we have modified our rear roof design from sloping to flat. we have also reduced the rear roof height by 9 inches. we have relocated our south egress stairs to the front of the building. these egress stairs now come through the middle of a bedroom. we also created entire length side setbacks as opposed to simply matching mr. low's lightwells. in addition to this we have made multiple attempts to work and communicate with mr. low. we have sent him seven letters dating back to september 2011. we have extended three offers to meet and discuss the project, none of which he accepted. we had one meeting which was being arrangeedth and facilitated by elizabeth in the planning department which was both agreed to and scheduled for november in 2012. mr. low canceled this meeting on one day's notice citing that he opposes this project carte blanche and he thinks the meeting would be a waste of time. mr. low maintains significant golden gate bridge views even with our current proposal. i apprecia

no. 3, i like the visibility and the idea of being able to see action and reducing 20 percent. you won't be as visible and being able to see it and as the dirt builds up in these circles, they are getting smaller and smaller and the visibility will get less and less. i don't think it's a good idea. i think mr. clark has some great ideas, but i don't think this is a good one and i think we should reject this idea and keep the glass. thank you. >> thank you, are there any other members who would like to speak on the this item? seeing none comment is closed on this item. we have an amended resolution. are there any comments from the board on this item? >> would it be helpful to have mr. clark to speak on these issues. on the maintain ability, i think there were some comments that might speak to that. >> can you please address those questions? >> absolutely. fred clark. let me talk about etfe because it was also raised at the last presentation. we looked very hard at e tfe. it's a wonderful material, a plastic material. if you remember the swim cube at the beijing olympics, that wa