passing the house a comprehensive transportation authorization bill in the bipartisan manner that has been characterized by previous house bills. as the house has failed to act, however, the senate passed legislation and must form the basis for our discussion. while there are several provisions i will recommend to strengthen the legislation i note that the senate bill reauthorizes the disadvantaged business enterprise program and extends the program to real programs. i strongly support these programs and ask for information from the united states department of transportation regarding the continued need for these programs. >> without objection we'll do that. >> let me also make clear as a ranking member of the committee on oversight and government reform i'll strongly oppose any proposal that might be raised to use our federal workers as a piggy bank to pay for a highway bill or any other legislation, particularly when we have refused to ask the very richest in our nation to invest one additional penny. that said time is short. i encourage all members network together with the profound sense of urgency and dedication to draft a final bill that is equal to our nation's needs and

do we work in a bipartisan manner and passed the transportation bill as we did in the senate or try to shift blame for the bill's failure. i hope we make the right decision that will help america grow and get people back to work and lay the foundation for long-term growth. >> we are going to hear from representative inhofe followed by representative nadler. >> i hope we can work together. and allow local governments to fund important projects. we ask the states to go with short-term extensions. and cancellation of many new project. anytime a transportation says emphasize the certainty of funding. you can produce a bill that will put people back to work beaters the reform programs that too large and less than bureaucratic red tape. we have three west virginians on this committee and a tremendous need for bridge repair and road construction. our state is one of the most beautiful state in the union but our terrain -- to build our roads. last year in charleston, with house chair ranking member, the sentiment of those in the room that day was washington slows the process. environmental rev

the senate bill. one of the things neither bill does is provide a long-term solution to how we will pay for aging infrastructure. we need to come up with solutions. it is very important. a lot of us believe like the senator from new york's said, it is something the federal government needs to be engaged in. i think the longer term bill that is paid for responsibly will best serve all of our constituents. i am ready to roll up my sleeves and get to work. thank you for the opportunity. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, madam chair. i t why for convening this conference committee to reauthorize our transportation service program. i look forward to working with you and our colleagues in a bipartisan matter to put americans back to work. this has been afforded a real opportunity to complete the largest jobs package in the 112th conference. -- congress. we must find common ground to complete this bill lest we waste another season. none of us have ever seen a perfect piece of legislation. this is very goo

vote for the senate bill. let us do this in a bipartisan way. >> the comments of congresswoman sheila jackson lee. the violence against women act did pass the house of representatives, primarily along father lines. 222-205. four members did not vote. now this goes to conference and you heard sheila jackson lee talking about the senate version which the democrats favor. the republicans favoring the hou version. at the pentagon, the chairman during a briefing discussing other matters also brought up the issue of ranger school for women. women make up about 16% of the u.s. army the army has begun to study the prospect of sending female soldiers to the prestigious ranger school which is another step in the effort to broaden opportunities for the women in the million tear. his announcement came today at the pentagon. a recommendation and a plan sometime this summer and while he has stressed no decisions have been made, the general has suggested that ranger school may be the next logical step for women in the militar

and matsui did in the senate process to get away the bipartisan billthrough the chamber and that's a model as to how we move forward. the question is, do we work in a bipartisan matter and pass a transportation bill as we did in the senate? or do we simply try to ship for the bills failure. i hope you make a bill to make america grow and get people back to work to make the foundation for long-term growth. thank you unamended chair. >> thank you knotted chair. we're followed by representative nadler. >> thank you, chairwoman boxer and chairman mica for this important meeting and i'm very pleased and honored to be on this conference committee. it is my hope is all of us have all of us have echoed that will work together to craft a reauthorization which puts people back to work and allows the local governments to fund important projects and move forward on them. we fastest a stick of a short-term extensions. it has resulted in projects, cancellation of new projects and every time we stick for transportation professionals they emphasize the long-term fundi

everything that he just said is in the senate bipartisan bill. we know how difficult it is these days to get the necessary 60 votes to do anything in the other body and yet here on this transportation bill, the senate was able to gather over 70 votes, 74 voetstes, i believe i was, half of them voted for this transportation bill. now, that should tell you that there's something here upon which both sides of the aisle agree upon. while the -- why the majority of the house of the representatives just won't accept this other body's bill is beyond me other than it's a political season and there are political points to be made. >> one more quote and then we'll get to the calls. in a piece called qutd the awful truth about the highway bills," mark on openmarket.org, specifically talks about the senate bill. let me lead you what he says. the senate passed what he calls the obnoxiously titled moving ahead for pro dwresz on march 14th in 74-22 vote, while passed in a by sart son fashion soon became clear in senate republicans who voted for it had no clue wh

in the house bill. the senate bill requires a university to implement prevention programs, teaching all students, male and female, how to help prevents sexual violence and dating violence, including bystander education. the senate bill also requires a university to make reasonable accommodations for a student who needs to change their living, working, or academicking situation as a result of being victimized. for example, if a young woman is a victim of an assault and her attacker lives in her dorm, what the senate bill would do is require the university to help that young woman find another place to live. unfortunately, these kinds of protections are not included in the house bill. the department of justice recently 12345eu9 smaited that 25% of college -- recently estimated that 25% of college women will be victims of rape or attempted rape before they graduate within a four-year college period, and that women between the ages of 16-24 will experience rape at a rate that's four times higher than the assault rate

the report open until 10:00 a.m. for full statements. we're going to now move to senator bill nelson for three minutes. >> madam chairman, our people are hurting on the gulf. and i think it's indicative that in the senate bill, it was sponsored by seven republicans and two democrats and then when we passed the bill, what is a near miracle in the senate, the vote with 76 to 22. and you wonder how since there are only five gulf states, how did you get the interest of the senators from 45 other states? and it was the very small but an important part, the land and water conservation fund, which is very popular even amonging a a churl interests. all of this cobbled together, allowed us then to have part of the bp fine money, and this could be substantial money, anywhere from what is estimated maybe five billion, all the way up to $20 billion. 20% of that money goes in to the oil spill liability trust fund and/or the treasury, and the 80% is doled out according to a formula that all of these republicans and democrats came up with. and then was embraced by 76 senators. and so i comme

the senate banking committee reported the public transportation title of 21 unanimously in early february, and it is now time to finish this bill. maintaining the investment under our nation's transportation infrastructure is a priority of mine and the banking committee. i want to thank our committee's ranking member senator shelby and subcommittee chairman senator fernandez for their help on the transit title. americans make 35 trips on public transportation every weekday. the transtitle of mac 21 -- funds for public transportation agencies. this will help present agencies address backlog repairs and it will create jobs the transit fund ago loan senate bill supports 386,000 jobs. map-2 also makes reforms like improving federal safety oversight for public transportation. these safety reforms have been stalled for two years. we cannot let politics foil or work to complete a final bill. in south dakota, a transportation bill will support 10,000 jobs and improve our highways and rural transit service. 1,200 of our state's bridges, of are deficient. our state needs of certainty federal funding that a completed bill will provide. we

is that what the senate bill says, though, voluntary? >> guest: we're talking about two different things. in one piece what the senate's talking about is core critical infrastructure. not everything that's out there. we want to make a clear distinction between that. when we're talking about the voluntary piece, there's a lot of other pieces of our infrastructure that are not core, critical infrastructure, and we start looking particularly at the roles we have state government, small and medium-sized businesses, we need to have their ability to help protect themselves as well. give you a quick example, if i may. if you look at a natural event, say an ice storm, a tornado, something that takes place, the governor, elected officials have to deal with that. the federal government at some point comes in and helps out, but they have to worry about paying overtime. and in these economic times if there's something we can prevent in cyber, what we care about. within those jurisdictions we have small and medium-sized businesses that if they can't s

some of that lobbying has resulted in exemptions in the senate bill. is that a concern for the white house in terms of raising the bar to hide? >> we start looking at any exemptions out there now, that will be reconciled as the bill moves forward, but crafting core critical infrastructure may have some exemptions to that. >> you probably sell this. i want to get your reaction to john boehner scopes in the new york times. the white house believes the government ought to control the internet. government ought to set standards and government ought to take care of everything. they are in a camp all by themselves. >> i could not disagree with that more. it is quite the opposite. the administration specifically has worked very hard to make sure that internet governance is an international peace. we are not looking not to say, here is the government standards you have to adhere to. there is iso. private-sector has put forward a lot of these. that could not be further from the truth. we want to make sure it is available to everybody. having a collaborative effo

we wanted the republican house to simply take up the bipartisan bill that passed the senate. instead, they chose to bring up something else. it did not provide the same level of protections for women and for others as did the senate bill. and we don't think we should be taking a step back from the senate bill or a step back from current law. we believe it is important that we press ahead and that's why we're going to continue to insist that we take up what was the bipartisan senate bill. it is just another sad indication of what's happened in the house of representatives. so many bills that have passed the senate on a bipartisan basis, republicans don't -- won't support that approach in the house. >> bill: so the house republicans said we'll take the senate bill except we won't extend protection to native-american women to lesbian transgender women or to undocumented -- women who are here illegally. they're fair game? >> exactly. why wouldn't we want to extend the basic protections to these other women? and these other people who were put at risk? the violence is the same. the

but this is an important part of getting it passed through both the senate and house. if you look at the bill itself, it is primarily the bill that was put together in the senate so the provisions that the house added, one of which is keystone, are important in terms of getting it through the house. the senator's comments were very good in that he said, look, we want to get a highway bill done, which i absolutely agree with, very important, but, at the same time, he thinks keystone should be and will be part of it because it is important infrastructure and that is what a highway bill is all about. >> you reference to the importance of gas prices as a motivator. but gas prices are already starting to trend down. one analyst of this morning predicted that by midsummer it would be down to $3 a gallon. does it change the political dynamic? >> you have to look on a longer-term basis. over the last three years, gas prices have doubled. the reality is we can produce more energy in this country, particularly working with our closest friend and ally canada. we can produce more energy than we consume.

the senate bill with the perfecting amendments incorporated into it. and i hope we can get a bipartisan cooperation and effort to get that attached to that bill as a means of pushing this forward. thank you, mr. chair, for the couple minutes, and i look forward to our second panel. >> absolutely. and i don't think flood insurance should be controversial or partisan, either. it impacts everybody. i want to get started with our next panel. it's representing a broad cross-industry support for reauthorization reform of nfip. i want to thank you for being here ahaechd time. dr. david a. sampson is the president and ceo of bci, which represents more than 1,000 homeowners, autos, and business insurance companies that rate over 30% of this nation's property and casualty insurance. dr. sampson also served in the george w. bush administration. as deputy secretary of the u.s. department of congress and assistant secretary of commerce for economic development. welcome, dr. samson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's a pleasure to be with you today. i appreciate your l

bill sixteen zero eight regarding the eighty eight issues and i also have provided on a separate sheet for the public another summary of the senate bill sixteen zero eight by our caps. inspector inhouse richard how american and we are continually working with the small business administration here in the city we haven't had our first meeting yet which will include planning d.p.w. and other departments that will be an affected or need to work together to help the small businesses of teves some measures of eighty issues we also are providing in-house training on senate bills to sixteen i'll wait for the caps inspectors in-house in the latter part of may the first beginning of june and we will notify the commissioners of this training when it will be. in a in a nutshell what it is. we have a local well we have the attorney general's opinion on senate bill sixteen a and regarding what local building departments can do and can't do regarding the eighty issues and there's actually four major items where it number one is local building departments are not responsible for enforcing the access requirements of the americans with disability

it's a two-year, $109 billion bill approved by the senate in march. but a point of contention remains, the keystone excel pipeline. house republicans want to include a provision in the bill speeding up its approval. a portion of the pipeline has been put on hold by president obama to review its impact on the environment. this is just over 2 1/2 hours. >> welcome, everybody, it's been seven years since we've had such a conference, so it's an exciting time in history, and we're very pleased to have you here. as per a long-standing agreement between the house and senate, we alternate back and fort between the two bodies on taking responsibility for chairing the transportation bill conference. so i'll begin by recognizing chairman micah, who will be a key effort to complete the conference to nominate the chairman of this conference. chairman mica. >> well, thank you and good afternoon. as you mentioned, senator boxer, the house and senate alternate on chairing the conference. the last bill and conference was chaired by congressman don young, who's with us

bill. the bipartisan senate bill received unanimous vote from the public works committees centers. and 75% of full senate supported it. it provides certainty the communities need to plant and begin construction. invest in highway jobs without adding a dime to the deficit in fact, our official scorekeeper is cbo says it reduces the deficit.

bill for people that are along the oceans in the gulf. this is a bill for the entire united states, it's a bill for the taxpayers for heaven's sake, and senator tester, thank you for your leadership and senator vitter i appreciate senator moran coming on. i don't have questions because the questions i would have asked what have been asked while i was listening. thank you very much. let's keep this up and let's redouble their resolve to actually get an accomplishment for the taxpayers and for the american public. islamic we certainly appreciate your long support and working on this bill. it's been critically important, and i think you are right. it is a good bipartisan win and it's something that we needed to help do a lot of good things for a lot of good folks out there and plus fixing the fiscal problems this program has. so i just want to thank this panel and the previous panel for their testimony. the hearing record will remain open for seven days for any additional comments anybody might want to add or any questions that folks want to submit for the record. with that, thank you all very much, and this hearing is adjourned. the movements t

affected, will need to work together to help the small businesses achieved some measures of ada issues. we are also providing in-house training on senate bill 1608, for the cab's inspectors in- house, in the beginning part of june, and we will notify the commissioners of this training. in a nutshell, we have the attorney general's opinion upon senate bill 1608 regarding what local departments can and cannot do regarding the ada issues. there are four items. no. 1 is local building departments are not responsible for enforcing the access requirements of the americans with disabilities act. however, they are required to enforce state and local building codes which have incorporated the federal requirements. would our state is doing is trying to make their requirements match the federal requirements. they have not set a date to do that by and they have not quite achieved that yet. no. 2 was local departments are not authorized to a letter to enforce the federal access requirement, however, they are required to enforce state and local building codes which have incorporate the federal requirements. so if there is a part of our state code that ag

eye-catching ticker that actually tracks the postal service's losses to the dollar, since the senate passed it's billsh? >> i think it might help the senate get off its duff. it formed a committee about six months ago. during that period of time we have introduced bipartisan legislation, voted on it, debated on it, passed it in the senate and now we're waiting for the house. every day to delay, the postal service loses about $25 million, they already owe about $13 billion to the treasury. and this situation can be fixed. this is not an insolvable problem. this can be fixed. the situation is serious, but it can be fixed. rather than just complaining and criticizing what we have done in the senate, pass your bill. >> congressman darrell issa proposed a bill that would end saturday delivery within six months which president obama supports for $3 billion in annual savings. so why keep saturday service going? what's the idea behind that? >> well, as it turns out, there's really only one enterprise in the country that services every community and goes to every door in the country, five, six, times a week,

to the floor of the senate to prove to the critics this is a reform bill. no other committee in the house or senate has voluntarily undertaken programmatic and funding reforms in this level in this budget climate. this is not a reform bill. it strengthens and preserves farm risk management, conservation, research and rural community programs, strengthened and prevd the crop insurance program that is the number one priority of virtually every producer that testified before our committee. number one. without question. any reach than we went to. every hearing we've had. crop insurance on behalf of farmers and ranchers and the ag community, number one. we've streamlined the programs reducing the complexity for the producer. updated the acreage upon which support based to reflect nor recent crop patterns and that's a point i want to discuss more. 's in recent days it's seems there's been a little confusion leer in the capital region that seems some think we should write farm safety net programs and allocate funding by commodity group organization. if all you did

the senate, there's a provision dealing with oceans. and frankly ocean policy should not be in a hide away bill. and lastly, it was particularly egregious for the senate to put in highway bills in new automatic spending in the next two years to buy more land through the water conservation fund. the mandatory buy in of more land under lwcf is a fiscal dereliction of duty. because since the government can't afford to maintain the lands it already owns, the maintenance backlogs of american federal lands registered in the multiple billions of dollars. we should be addressing this backlog, not adding to it. while the lwcf does not expire until 2016, the senate's proposed highway bill doesn't even extend transportation funding as long as the lwcf would be as currently authorized. in main dating their bill, this congress has done absolutely nothing to ensure new areas of natural gas drilling. it was nearly three years to go until it expires and the fact that not committee in neither body has helded a hearing on lwcf, there is to reason why i it should not be part of this conference report. with that i y

seeing now sort of being put together and developed in the senate what do you see as sort of holes and those plans yeah unfortunately the senate bill has a greater problem the republican version in the house was terrible but the senate bill isn't that much better you know it still has significant portions of what's been known as sort of an internet kill switch that allows the government to nationalize internet companies and take control over the internet is likely in the united states under vaguely defined conditions of national labor regency so you know this is just not the kind of thing that's reasonable for the government to be passing with under a national emergency declared by the president they can just use control of the entire internet it seems to me erin that this would be a really good time for a company with that with a bunch of investors to come forward and start you know an internet company or a telephone an internet company that promised people it wouldn't work with a government that promised people that you know your privacy would be protected why are we not seeing this happen. well actually there's a fantastic proje

bill that passed through the other chamber, that passed overwhelmingly. almost more than 2-1 and is not like this bill and there are members that would like to incorporate the senate's provisions in the house bill and i know we would appreciate it if we'd be given that opportunity to offer that on the floor as an alternative and if the gentleman would take that into consideration, perhaps talk to mr. dreier about making such amendments in order, we would very much appreciate that. of course, we would also appreciate perhaps if you wanted to take up the senate bill as a substitute, we think we would have overwhelming votes for that on this side of the aisle. and in light of the fact that you and i have been working in such a bipartisan fashion lately, perhaps that would be a good way to continue that process. i yield to my friend. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman. it has been a certainly improved sense of cooperation and i appreciate that on the gentleman's part in trying to deliver results and trying to make sure we get america back to work. i would say to the gentleman, as he rightly noted, that this bill has traditionally been re-authorized and what the approach

conversion of assault weapons into a way that you can fire these magazines without much effort. >>> the senator's bill is in the cross hairs of this man >>> i am not sure if a legislator has the appetite to buy about something so large >>> this man runs the cal guns foundation and created the bialek bike and >>> i created because of of the way for quite dangerous on the range >>> he said if magazines are fixed than bullets can jam >>> the bullet button allows you to remove the magazine and clear the jam >>> essentially keeping the rifle much more functional. since the ar-15 is the most popular selling firearms in america they're not protected under the constitution >>> the second amendment is because general gage wanted to take bostonian firearms. >>> he says he is ready for battle it will never be easy but at the end of the day in sacramento we want to help people protect the general public and and as my priority >>> senator you will introduce his bill monday and we ask the state department of justice for comment but it declined allen martin cbs 5 >>> typically the worst case scenario for distracted

so i'm optimistic, the conferees will reach agreement on this bill and the reason is, again, we are starting from a very bipartisan senate bill, map 21, which passed 74-22. it has many proposals the house supports including an expanded tiffia, which as you well know, is a leveraging mechanism we use that will create a million new jobs. we also have program consolidations, we have given the states more flexibility. a lot of reforms. no earmarks. these are all things the house wants to see happen as well. the conference was up and running in record time, because this bill is so important to our workers, our businesses and our economy. and we have a june 30th deadline. that's critical. that's when the current transportation ex-tentension exs and we all know extensions are a death mill for jobs and businesses in our country. there's another reason i'm quite optimistic about this, and i'm going lay it out for you to see. two days ago the chamber of commerce wrote an op-ed piece in politico, and they wrote a, frankly, a powerful, powerful piece that i think speaks to every member, and they talk about how -- i'm quoting, dracon

the f.d.a. user fees bill when the senate convenes tomorrow. we're working on an agreement for amendments to the bill. we hope we can reach an agreement and avoid filing cloture on the bill. if there is no further business before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow. to be track drugs different bottles of drugs with a serial number as they pass through the system. we're going see some amendments on prescription drug employation and giving the fda more power to investigate things and give the employees lower protection. >> what's the overall purpose of this fda reauthorization? >> the purpose of the user fee program is to give them more money to conduct and review the products like drugs and medical devices. they get money from the companies who are applying to get the drugs or producted arrived. the fda said they need the money. they count on it to be able to do the thicks they do to approve the new productings. >> let's cig a little bit deeper in

the only people that i heard from in my district were against the house bill and really in favor of the senatee probably really surprised that this bill came from the senate, that hasn't happened very often that we get a bill to come over for us to address. and it was a bipartisan bill, there were all of the women on the senate side that voted for it. i think they did the right thing. >> thank you so much, congresswoman juldy big ert for your time. >> ladies on the panel. we are talking a couple things. one is of course the latest moves here on the violence against women act. also worth mentioning before we end the show is joe ricketts release add statement saying he is neither the author or funder of the so called ricketts plan, he intends to work hard to help elect a president that shares his commitment to economic responsibility but his efforts are and will focus on questions of fiscal policy not divisive social and cultural issues. >> good to know. probably take your name off of that plan. >> if we look at this, this kind of a jeremiah wright stuff, the strident i would say in some cases b

i'm also a cosponsor of the two bills authored by senators grassland schumer. all three of these bills are contained in the amendment that we're offering with senator portman. these drugs can kill and if we don't take, a, action, they will become more and more prevalence. they are available on the internevment the federal government has to make sure that they are illegal fl beam buy these drugs that have numbers like 2-ce. they don't really know what they are. they get them and they turn out to be deadly. that's what happened in blaine, minnesota. i hope we ban these drugs as part of our debate on the bill. we know that the d.e.a. has been take action on its own and they've temporarily banned some of these drugs. but most of the substances covered in our three bills have not been banned including all the stawnses in my bill. that is why in fact we are offering this amendment of on the state level, roughly 40 states have banned some synthetic drugs including my state where a major law regarding synthetic drugs tooct effect in july. we need a federal law. this cro

they're playing by the president's rules. >> what about the structural differences between the house bill and the senate bill? the different lengths, different dollar figures? >> well, first, you have to keep in mind that the senate would be only, was the only two chambers that actually passed this bill. a two-year $109 million measure. it keeps funding levels for roads, for state projects and about the same where they are now. the house tried to push a five-year $260 billion bill, the length of which was certainly preferred by states and municipalities that actually do road building. they like the longer bill, but the gop and the house was never able to muster up enough votes to pass it. they won't be able to take that vote into the conference, but a number of high-ranking members, like john mica, who chairs the house infrastructure committee, going back to hr-7, that they weren't able to pass, and look for kind of a goal post

what is all the stuff in the senate bill about? why not just pass the simpler house version? >> well, you know i think we first of all have to stand against domestic violence period. i don't care, whoever it is against. we have to be against it. all people need to be in. no one should be out. that is the problem we're seeing today. three women in the united states are murdered every day by an intimate partner. 4.8 million are battered or assaulted or raped every year. that is something that we have to continue to stand against. stripping gays to me is particularly cruel because 5.3 million men are victims of domestic violence every year. so i think that at the end of the day we have to make a decision that culturally and legislatively we'll stand against violence against anyone in our homes. jon: but, this isn't the violence against men act, anglela. this it is violence against women act. >> jon, so sad controversy surrounding this bill, basically in 1994 passed overwhelmingly with bipartisan support. has nothing to do with violence against women. it has to do with getting ou

the bill out. we'll have to go through this exercise again. i believe in the end that they'll have to accept pretty much what the senate bill looks like. >> eliotone would think that given the bipartisan support in the senate, something closer to the senate version would be the result of a conference committee. that's pure speculation. the republican argument about not specifying that lgbt are not covered. if they're not already covered, why not make it explicit and clear. the argument does not make sense to me. >> the argument does not make sense. they're also saying that that's tangential. that's not what we're trying to address here. single-sex coupled should not be eligible for this. domestic violence course against men and women. and regardless of sex oregon yentation people should be able to avail themselves of these services. >> eliot: they said we would induce fraud if we permitted people to take advantage of the statute and gain protection of the statute, it would induce people to make false claims. is there anything anywhere that would suggest that that would happen. >> there is no eched. that's why that is per flexing as well. when a

house rolling back the violence against women act, instead of accepting the strong bipartisan bill that passed in the united states senate. and whatever they want to say about student loans that they want to solve the problem in the bill on the floor today. the republicans in the house have the 6.8% increase -- from 3.4% to 6.8% increase still in the bill. we still haven't been able to come to terms in order to make college more affordable. and this is indicative of something even bigger than the interests, although the interest is important to students with their loans and their families. this is also in the context of making college more affordable for america's working families. and what they do in terms of pell grants and the rest that may put up obstacles to more students having the opportunity to attend college. it's really a problem for our country, because investing in the education of our children is the best investment a family can make in its children and its family. it's the best investment a country can make in its people. so with that, i would just hope that we can go into a phase whereas the president is s

on the floor after the present one, whatever that is, the senate reauthorization bill with some noncontroversial perfecting amendments that have been worked out since committee. so it looks like that next bill on the floor will either be an fda reuser authorization or small business tax bill. neither of those is highly partisan or highly controversial. which ever comes up i'll be proposing as an amendment with perfecting amendments built into it. i hope we can get a bipartisan cooperation and effort attached to that bill as a means of pushing this forward. >> absolutely. i don't think flood insurance should be controversial or partisan either. it impacts everybody. i want to get started with our next panel, representing a broad cross skri stri report for industry reform of nfip. i thank you for being here ahead of time. dr. david samson is the president of bci, which represents more than a thousand homeowners, autos and business insurance companies that write over 30% of this nation's property and casualty insurance. dr. sampson served in the george w. bush administrat

bill for people along the oceans and the gulf. this is a bill for the entire united states of america. it's a bill for the taxpayers, for heaven's sake, and so senator tester, thank you for your leadership and that of senator vitter and i appreciate moran coming on too. i don't have questions, because the questions i would have asked had been asked while i was listening, but thank you very much, and let's keep this up and let's redouble our resolve to actually get an accomplishment for the taxpayers and for the american public. >> well, thank you, senator wicker, we certainly appreciate your long support in working on this bill, it's been critically important, and i think you're right, mo brought it up, it is a good bipartisan win, and it's something that we need to do that will help do a lot of good things for a lot of folks out there and plus fix some fiscal problems that this program has. i want to thank this panel, i want to thank the previous panel for their testimony, the hearing record will remain open for seven days for any additional comments anybody might want to add for that or any questions that folks want to submit for the record. with

>> fda officials very much want the senate bill to come through. they have worked out agreements with the industry. they have worked out agreements with lawmakers. they been working on this bill for two years now. they want the agreement to get through as quickly as possible. the authorization doesn't expire until september 30th but they're trying to get this done as quickly as possible so there is no doubt whatsoever that this will be done and fda will continue to receive its funding. >> we're seeing the house bill being developed significantly different from the senate bill? >> there are only a few places where they're different. overall very similar. there will probably have to be a conference committee iron out the differences. we've seen issues for example with the antibiotic it is language and development of new antibiotic that is different between the two bills but it is not too far apart. there is nothing incredibly different that would keep it from being able to come to a final agreement. >> when do you expect the senate to finish work on i

the impact of money on our elections. led by senator whitehouse, we have introduced the disclose act. this bill would shine a light into the dark corners of the campaign finance system. and senator bennet and i have introduced a constitutional amendment which currently has 22 cosponsors to overturn the disastrous judicial opinions that have led to the broken system we have today. in january, 2010, the supreme court issued its opinion in citizens united verizon f.e.c. two months -- versus f.e.c. two months later, the speech now versus f.e.c. case was decided. these two cases gave rise to the super pacs. millions of dollars now bore into negative and misleading campaign ads and often without disclosing the true source of the donations. but our campaign finance system was hardly a model of democracy before these disastrous opinions. the citizens united and speech now decisions renewed our concerns about campaign finance, but the court laid the groundwork many years ago. we can go all the way back to 1976. that year the court held in buckley versus falleo that restricting independent campaign expen

the u.s. senate is about to gavel in. more work expected on a bill that would prevent the doubling of student loan interest rates. lawmakers may take up a bill reauthorizing the u.s. export-import bank. and now live to the senate floor here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, the protector of nations, hallowed be your name. give this day to the members of this legislative body such self-discipline that they will choose not what they wish but what they ought. give them also the strength of will so that they may accept the right, however difficult it is, and refuse the wrong, however attractive it may be. lord, give them the wisdom to pray for each other, not only for those with whom they agree but also for those whom they might disagree. impart to them a unity of spirit as they deal with the diversity of ideas. we pray in your gracious name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance

why was the senate a bill to cut short -- [unintelligible] guest: your question is about the filibuster in the u.s. senate. you should know that the senate has a feature called on limited debate known as the filibuster. it allows any senator or group of the minority side to talk theoretically forever. guest: when you talk filibuster, make sure you know how the senate can end it. a closer vote of 3/5 majority -- hard to reach today. host: cleveland, ohio. caller: hi. i would like to give a shout out to my government class. what are 527's and what is their role in the presidential election? guest: in the media, they are calling them superpacs. in our class, we are treating them as the same thing. this is an independent expenditure group which means they are outside of the traditional campaign finance limits. this allows corporations and individuals to give unlimited amounts of money to these 527 groups. they can not be coordinated with a campaign of the candidates. that is the clear distinction. this is an independent expenditure group. guest: one of the misnomers in campaign finance is t

back to the sanctions bill. senator menendez you did a great job as you always do on things like this. the reason that i found about this and got so concerned is section 603 is something that wasn't in the base bill, and, again, it says nothing in this act or the amendments made by this act shall be construed as a declaration of war or authorization of use of force against iran or syria. one, nothing in here has anything to do with syria and i'm okay to say that. i swoant dweent this to be a declaration of war. i want it to be a good sanctions will. bill. -- bill. but if you don't have the other means available to stop the iranian program as the president has indicated all options on the table, that has to be said because we would be leaving a gap in our policy. so just as senator menendez and senator reid, all i'm asking is that we insert a provision that basically echoes what the policy of this country is, all opgdz on the table, not just sanctions. and we will get a lot of votes for this. mr. mccain: finally, i know

bill through. i look forward network my colleagues both house to and the senate on this crucial legislation. maintaining the 21st century infrastructure is critically important to our nation's economic competitiveness. however, given our current budget environment, we need to ensure that this bill makes more efficient use of taxpayer dollars without adding to the debt. this is the new reality. as a member of both the committee of transportation infrastructure and on committee of science and technology i've had an opportunity to witness how removing unnecessary red tape and bureaucracy can improve our nation's infrastructure and how prudent investments and research can yield game changing innovations to make our nation's roads and bridges safer and more durable. i look forward network with charman mika and chairman hall and all of those in the senate to update our transportation systems and from vied the world's best infrastructure at a strong value to taxpayer and ensure transportation research projects deal long term benefits. i would like to thank chairman hall for his leadership on the res