tv Public Affairs CSPAN June 3, 2013 12:00pm-5:01pm EDT
was similar to surveys done by other organizations. people say they do not mind paying for social security. of course nobody likes to pay taxes. they value what social security does. and two children and widowed spouses. the overall weight of agreement with back claim was 84%. it is consistent across part is ies. , 86% ofepublicans independents do not mind paying. other questions asked a little harder. agree it is critical to preserve social security benefits even if it means that create americans have to
more? we get widespread agreement, 82% overall. very similar large majorities, republicans, majorities, and independent. asked a verystion similar question of the last one. incident asking about working americans, it asked about wealthier americans. large majorities of democrats and independents agree. some differences among parties but in every case large majorities. this most recent study that we did in the wall of 2012 used in interact this exercise for participants to be able to rate various kinds of policy options as to how they would prefer to adjust social security long-term shortfall.
12 exercise included different policy options to keep the size manageable. there were for tax increases. of $113,000.e cap .wo raise the tax rate they stuck with in the current financing of social security. were benefit reductions including further rate from the retirement age. poor reducing the cost of living adjustment. there were four benefit increases in the size as well. the preferred package that came out of this exercise increase the tax in two ways. it increased to the benefit in two ways. it did not include any benefit cuts. it did end up eliminating the short term -- the long-term shortfall. this was preferred by seven in
10 americans. this is true across age groups. a fairly widespread agreement. of the details of a package, the interesting lesson is that all of the changes were gradual. all of the changes in terms of gradualreases were phaseout the cap on earnings to social security taxes over 10 years. graduallyars, very raise the rate from 6.2% to 7.2% for workers. those two changes more than eliminate the entire shortfall. they also increase the minimum benefit that is paid to people he left have long careers under social security. retire at 62 and not be poor if they have actually paid for 30 or.
this is slightly faster or has in recent history then that for the rest of the population. they spend more out-of-pocket or healthcare which historically has risen much higher than other expenditure items. to recap where these survey findings show, looking at them as a percent of gross domestic product if you will. current benefits cost about six percent of the economy. fivent finances cover only percent. this package that american seem would increase.
these changes were relatively modest in the overall scheme of things. the revenue increase raise income by 1.3%. it ends up to a slight surplus in the end. what these suggest, these may or may not be what policymakers choose. it is willing to cut party lines when it is used for social security lines because of people need it. people see much more except the -- much morein acceptable to phasing it in slowly. thanks. [applause] >> we do have some time for questions. these bring them forward. if you do want to use a
is to goe, one option over the table. is this microphone on? i was going to ask steve what is theans but instead low interest-rate policy a significant factor in the change in the current current financing from several years ago? that is a really good question. many metrics and many ways of trying to show the future financial status. this is just a matter of going in and taking all the different parameters and running 5000 different scenarios, allowing
all of those different parameters to move around probabilistically and look at the broad range of outcomes that comes in. while this did not have a significant effect on our balance this year or deficit, largely because -- what changes we are now seeing lower interest rates over the first 10 years of the projection. that in response to the fact that we have had such lower interest rates than has in expected. the trustees are now adopting some continuation. the deficit is the difference between cost and income and are taxable payroll over the 75 years. if you have lower interest rates, it makes the present value both bigger. if they are both bigger it does not change the ratio. another ratio is the unfunded
obligation. stay away from that pretty much does it is very hard to conceptualize what six dollars trillion or $10 billion over a 75 -- your time looks like relative to the way we usually think of things. or the size of gdp or investment in the country. the 75 year total relative to what we know today can be deceptive. the interest rates are lower. that does have an effect on some of our measures. the good news is it did not have to a stronger se degree on our actual visit projections. another question for steve. what will actually happen
2030 three1 and where the reserves have been down? does the government have to go into the market to reading the special operation funds? has it ever been done before? like very good question. clearly, it has been done before. there in the process of bringing down the reserves leading up to 1994 the program was bringing down the preserves. the entire social security 1977am leading up to the amendments was to bring down this very rapidly. what really happened is we have $2.7 trillion of reserves in the social security trust fund right now. this is debt owed by the general fund of the treasury to the trust funds. over the past 20 or 30 years, the trust funds have brought in
more tax dollars than were needed to pay for the program. those tax dollars were loaned it to the general fund of the treasury which allows the treasury to borrow that much less money from the public in terms of what we call "publicly held debt." there's arguably two $.7 trillion less publicly held debt because the government has ro that -- has borrowed that instead. we do indeed begin to reading those reserves -- reading those reserves and cash them in. owe social security less. unless we have massive changes in the rest of government cost it will have two borrowed that much from the government. the total debt subject to feeling is not affected at all
by that as we reading social security bonds. it is just a swap. it is not really make a difference. question here. first of all, i want to the particular work, particularly the survey you most recently did on the public attitude about social security. it is so powerful. we all need to do a better job to get the word out about that i have been reading that the disability insurance protect it trust fund shortfall. addressed and has been in the past by reallocation and the basis for the major part of that shortfall in then the increase
retirement age of 65 -- 66. i do not know if that is correct. itt impact would a have on overall? >> if we do have a real what -- it has really no effect on the combined old age survivors as a whole. we do have a memo available within our office that identifies the path that could be followed on this. it basically would trade off some of the revenues that are going to the survivors insurance program. right now our reserve depletion days are 2016. >> this real haitian -- rea --
reallocation puts it at tuning 33 -- puts it at 2033. that options will be considered and will be enacted sooner rather than later. it gives everybody more time to simulate what those changes will be. there's probably a pretty good chance of this like we did back in 1994. are you going to tell what effect the sequestration and other near-term austerity has had on your short-term economic projections? that is a really good question. it is not clear.
theainly embedded with in overall experience that we have so far as we have measured it. there would be some effect. on thecise effect earnings level as not really registered. smallwill be some reduction in earnings levels for some federal employees and perhaps for some contractors. we do not anticipate that will be large. we are hoping that congress will get back on this. tobably this relates more the broader budget and social security. it is in the broader the jibber they probably have a larger effect. , some trustees report
generations are going to be receiving a net positive benefit over the course of their lifetime in terms of the benefits they receive. some generations will be the opposite. can you describe what factors are playing into that gap? background is something important to understand about social security and medicare and we do operate in a pay-as- you-go world. and at all the benefits everything we consume in a given day. that is a result of the fruits of the labor of people today. we are not able to put aside the product and save them up for later. we depend on the irking age
people to support us once we get to be old. working age people to support us once we get old. the system which we might call it event funded. you were doing all of your retirement claimant with a 401(k) when you put aside money when you are young and you have that saved up and you're going to live off of that when you're older, you would probably have pretty large assets available for you in the future. be done with social security. look at the taxes they play -- benefit.red to the because it is pay-as-you-go, it is not a reflection of why the cost are what they are. the cost in the future for the working age will be larger because the future generations will come from generations were
there were lower birth rates. imagine the world when all the elders had on average three children. that means whether they are being supported through social security or directly, they have three kids to share the cost of two elders. when we shift in a world to having two children for couple, down the line we will have two people of working age for every pair of elders. the cost for working age will be higher from the point of demographics. whether we try to save up in the future for that or whether we are working on a pay-as-you-go system, the costs have to be covered one way or another by the workforce of today. one more question and then we will be thrown out of the room. quick question for virginia. i think i saw that one of the
ways you propose to increase benefits was by a measure of escalation -- inflation specific to senior citizens. is there a measure of that that exists? what would the impact be? that is an excellent question. there is a proposal to use a price index for the elderly. right now there is an experimental price index that reflects consumption patterns of the elderly. the labor department has said it .ay not be robust estimates based on that price sedex indicate the prices ride two. >> part of the base is historically for people arguing cpie may not be as
robust going forward as france's -- as for instance the cpiw. the elderly were a relatively small portion of the overall sample. going forward that will not be true. we are at the point where the elderly are almost at the level of the sampling portion that is for the cpiw. by 2020 they should be equalized. cpie isestion that the not appropriate because of the small sample is not really relevant anymore. >> i think we have to stop. i would like to mention that this survey which some of you have the full copy up is also available online provides a lot kind ofmation on the thing with her wishes asking asking about. thank you all very much for coming. [applause]
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> sad news from capitol hill as flags are flying at half -- at half mast to the life and passing of u.s. senator frank lautenberg. he was 89. reaction from his colleagues and saying, robert mendez "frank lautenberg left his job and the people who elected him five times, who trusted him to always be on their site, and he always was." congressman said " his work on issues like gun
violence prevention, improving our nation's transit systems and transportation transfers structure -- infrastructure, will be recognized for generations." -- across the aisle, mitch mcconnell sharing his condolences saying -- he was 89 and the oldest member of the u.s. senate. >> both the house and senate will capital in at 2:00 p.m. eastern today returning from their weeklong memorial recess. it is expected to resume policies over five years concerning nutrition programs.
also on the near-term agenda, airy read has said he is hoping to considerable consideration of a bipartisan immigration bill. legislative, business will start at 4:00 p.m. eastern. lawmakers are working on five bills including one establishing a natural system for pharmaceuticals. also begun writing bills to fund the federal government for the next fiscal year. to those construction veteran affairs have been approved by the house appropriations committee. they are expected to be picked up by the full chamber later this week you're in for more of the agenda, we spoke with a capitol hill reporter. >> court challenges could tear down major pieces of obama care. underalthcare law is attack in in the court even as the administration springs toward its full implementation.
>> thanks for being with us. what is this all about? >> legal challenges are not finished. there are a handful of lawsuits and some in the pipeline that are closer to getting to the higher courts and other. irs settingn the up programs. if that ever got to the supreme court that could be struck down. irs has been in the news lately. a couple other issues. these are battles that are beyond those. it will probably take more than a year to get to. the legal challenges of obamacare are ongoing. >> there is one point with
s illegallyhe iress incrementing these new studies to help people buy insurance. there are new hearings. bedanny were full will testifying for the house appropriations committee. that is just the beginning of the hearing. the ways and means committee will be hearing from conservative group and their experience of being targeted and then later in the week we have an oversight committee will be highlighting a new audit about spending by the agency that they said was already inappropriate. we will get more details about how much wasteful spending was spent. the focus will be on the irs.
blame ony're putting part on the bush administration. guest: it goes back a long time. that is his message. there is a lot to be done at irs and reforms that are not tied to obama's administration. host: jennifer martinez has the headline -- you can get this online at thehill.com. one key player is my you explicitly warned the chinese president that fiber attacks will not be tolerated by the u.s.. they accuse china of cyber espionage. this could be a little
bit of an awkward meeting be tween the president and chinese leader. the u.s. government believes it has enough proof that over the years the chinese government has been involved in these hacking incidents. the fact that they might be setting up some type of new member random or process were certain things are not allowed formally, it is an indication there could be progress. the chinese government has denied what the u.s. has said. host: july 1 is the deadline before student loan rates increase. we heard from the president on friday at the white house. if this sounds familiar, it is. about a year ago democrats in congress and president of -- and president obama challenged
republicans to keep the rate at 3.4%. pressure theyl caved. now republicans say they will not cave this year. they want to tie it not to an artificial number. they have passed legislation in the house that would tie it more to market rates. a white house veto. senate democrats are working on their own bill that they hope to get to this week that would freeze the rate at 3.4% for two years. they say the house version would raise rates. democrats say they do not want to do that. they say they will stand strong. between now and july 1 there will be a lot on that. a couple of other agenda items. first of all, the farm bill. where does that stand in the senate? guest: the farm bill will be the first thing that the senate addresses this week.
they started before the last recess. they will be working through various amendments. that is a bipartisan bill. that is expected to pass the senate. it passed the senate last year. they got out of the committee in the house but not on the floor. now if you talk to house members who are pushing the farm bill, they are optimistic they they will get a full vote. of the contour goes to what is called "snap." the funding is very different and republicans want to ratchet that number down. there is more hope that a form -- farm bill could be set into law early next year. there is a long way to go. host: a major centerpiece remains immigration.
senateppened before the judiciary committee. two different approaches on this legislation in each chamber. guest: very much so. they have reported a bipartisan bill. bill will probably go on the senate floor next week. conservative critics are planning to tell us to ramp up the opposition to that. will it passed the senate? it likely will. there is a bipartisan group that has struggled to get a bill. they say they're getting very close to releasing a bill that would move through the judiciary committee. in talking to various conservatives, they do not like that kind of bill at all. they are saying no matter what the senate does, the house is not going to pass that bill. that is something that speaker john boehner has said.
i think that is right. unless there is enormous political pressure, the house is not going to take up the senate a bill they would either move this partisan -- bipartisan house bill or, he will move a series of individual bills through the committee and then on the floor. one area we see the house move, they are not going the "on one big bill like the senate. votehey'll are not going to g on one big bill like the senate. they will vote on narrow bills. two political notes about mitt romney trying to resurface again in 2014 and remain relevant among republican party circles. could we see him on the campaign trail? or will he be a behind the
scenes player raising money? guest: he is very good at raising money. no doubt about it. he is a very big name. after the 2012 election, he said he would not go away. the candidate who wants his help will ask for it, especially on the money side. i do not think we will see him everywhere every campaign across the country. certainly president obama and perhaps michelle obama will be on the campaign trail more than romney. wantnk if candidates romney, he is clearly indicating he will show up. ,ost: as we begin a new month eyes on a special election. a special election to replace john kerry. is key forying he the republicans a retaking of the u.s. senate in a tough race. what are you looking at? guest: this race is going to get
nastier as we get closer to the election. aveteran of the house, he is sickly the favorite. but he is not a huge favorite. that is where republicans think they can pull another type of scott brown. they are not saying he is another scott brown. he saying, i am my own person. --has compared himself to to try to get the independent vote. this is key. senate republicans need six seats to take back the majority. this is a key race. that is no doubt about it republicans winning in massachusetts would be an upset just like scott brown was. thank you very much for being with us as congress returns this week. we appreciate your time. guest: thank you.
>> the senate at 2:00 eastern today. also, congressional scrutiny of the irs continues. a lawmakers investigate the agencies targeting of a conservative group applying for tax exempt status. the treasury inspector general -- you can watch live coverage of that hearing on c-span 3. it gets underway at 3:00 p.m. eastern. investigations into the irs conduct is just one of the topics we expect here. a live look inside the white house rests -- press room. they may discuss that the private dropped documents onto the internet and into enemy hands. he is on trial court the biggest leak.
herell have live coverage on c-span when it gets underway. while we wait, a discussion on the democrats agenda from "washington journal." host: we see the leader outlining a dizzy june that is highlighted by a procreation's. we are seeing legislative members on the agenda. what is on your agenda? guest: jobs. when i go back to my district in texas, and texas has done well, almost one/three of the jobs have been created in texas. we emphasize a lot on the job creation.
that is what we need to do as a country. we do have other issues. immigration reform is something we need to do. of course, the appropriation bills. feel that of all the bills we handle, we should first deal with the appropriations the and then work with other things. in washington, we do things backwards. host: the new york times says as congress returns, there is competition between legislation and these controversies. that is a politicized word. how should the focus to be are you concerned about them getting sidelined? guest: without a doubt.
we have to set certain goals and one of those should be creation. if you look at the days we are here and go down the counters, we only have a few days. it is not monday through sunday. and things come up and we spent time on the investigation and that is part of the oversight, i agree congress needs to do that. we cannot lose focus of the main things we should be working on. how can we make the economy better? it is getting better. that should be the emphasis. host: a democrat in the senate talking about how that should be moved through. congressman bob goodlatte talked about this on fox news. let's take a listen. [video clip] we think it is better to do a by a step-by-step approach. we will continue down that path.
the final outcome will be in terms of the form of the legislation is not yet known. host: what does that mean to you? what is the step-by-step approach? guest: apparently that is what he wants to do. i disagree with him respectfully. we can do this. congress was mainly democratic. it is not beyond our control. i think any immigration reform should have three major wings, strong border security, a guest worker program that works, and what do we do about the 11 or 12 million undocumented persons we have right now? it would go piece by piece. they are going to take the easy ones first, more border security. as you get to the second or third phase, it'll get a little
harder. that is where we need to do free full comprehensive immigration. commerce men henry cuellar is our guest. democrats, (202) 737-0001, (202) 737-0002 republicans, an independent (202) 628-0205. caller: there is no resistance 48 stories as it went down. why hasn't congress forced the national institute of standards of technology to explore the possibility? host: what do you think about immigration reform here in houston? caller: immigration reform would
start with the labor reform. we have a system that condones illegal immigration. back to my original question. guest: keep in mind that texas has the largest border of any other state. we have 1200 miles out of the 2000 miles we have. i live on the border. i understand what it is like to live on the border. when you look at the border, look at the statistics. the crime rate we have is a lot lower than the national crime rate. in my home town of laredo, for 100,000, the murder rate is lower than here in washington, dc. when we talk about immigration
reform, we have to deal with reality and perception. host: our guest represents the 28 register of -- district of texas. he sits on appropriations committee on homeland security and state foreign operations and related programs. he remembers the blue dot coalition. what is the strength of the blue dog coalition? guest: it is a reflection of what is happening in the united states. we're seeing less of the twin districts. the democratic districts are becoming more democratic and republican districts are getting more republican. the swing districts are getting smaller and smaller. what happens is therefore you take people that take more extreme positions and their views than we have seen in the past.
those in the middle are being squeezed. that is hard on the overall movement here in the united states every districting. host: elaine, san diego, democratic. caller: the previous guy was talking about 86 when reagan put in the immigration laws. the borders were shut down. totally shut down because they enforce the law. what has happened now is they are not enforcing the laws. it is just open gates. if i was from mexico, i will come here, too. at the same time, the borders are open. things like tijuana, it is like 90% hispanic. that is ok. we would not have any
immigration problems. if you enforce the law, you would not have this conversation. guest: there are a couple of observations there. mastec has been good for the united states and for the other two countries. in my hometown of laredo, 40% of all the trade between the u.s. and mexico happens in my hometown. everyday there is $1.2 million in trade between the u.s. and mexico. if you look at the jobs in the united states, there are 6 million jobs we have because of the trade and the business we have with the republic of
mexico. mastec has been good. it did not have to do it immigration reform. i'm talking about 1986. president reagan did amnesty. i do not believe in amnesty. we have to find a pathway to get those folks out of the shadow. amnesty i do not believe in amnesty. we have to look at numbers coming across. if you look at the numbers, there are less mexicans coming in. there are more returning back. these are the numbers that we have to look at. host: he was on the state of the union yesterday. he made the statement that the cincinnati irs employees say they got directions from washington. [video clip] >> their paid liar is still making up things about what happens and calling this a local
road. there is no indication. the reason lowest learner try to take the fifth is not because there is a road in cincinnati. this is a problem that was coordinated in all likelihood right out of washington headquarters. we are getting to proving it. host: what is your response? guest: let's see what further information we have. there are going to be a lot of hearings. judiciary, oversight. i used to be a member of the oversights. let's get the facts before we come to some conclusion. once we get all the facts, wherever they lead us to come we might have to take some tough steps. let's not jump to conclusions. let's finish the investigation. let the inspector general come up with all the reports and then we will decide. host: hollywood, florida, ron, republican. caller: the remark you made about ronald reagan doing free-
form, that is probably one of the worst things he ever did. he never sealed the border. he made the incentive for more illegals to cross. as far as crime rate, i want to know what it is on the other side of the border. these cartels are not stupid. they know crime overflows and we would not shut down the border. they cannot smuggle people. what is the crime rate on the other side of the border? host: first of all, it i represent the united states, not on the other side. you are correct. on the other side, and they do have problems and why we need to treat them as a friend and not an enemy. keep in mind, every year the united states sends back 25 or $35 billion of profit and therefore for the drug cartels in mexico, that is big business. that is why they are fighting over their turf.
the places where they send the drugs into the united states. mexico is a very important trading partner for the united states. 6 million american jobs are here because of the trade we have with mexico. host: stories looking at medicare and medicaid, this from usa today. medicare costs are still declining. medicare is on track for insolvency in 2026. for social security the key date is 2033. we found this out on friday. i must august ask, social security will not be able to pay full benefits to retirees.
given these latest numbers, what is your assessment on entitlement reform? guest: every year we do with a $3.7 trillion budget. it is growing by the year. as a democrat i know it is difficult to talk about entitlements. if we are going to be aggressive to this issue, we have to take some tough decisions. at one time or another, we have to deal with the entitlements. otherwise, whether it is president bush or president obama, at one time or another we have to make some reforms. unfortunately, what does congress say? we wait for the next classes. there we go ahead and react. social security and medicare are issues that are so far away. as he get closer we have to take certain bipartisan steps. host: the affordable care act is often called obamacare.
an aspect of this is implementation dates. clinical reports that they are reaching for an out reach push guest: i voted for healthcare. it is difficult but the right thing to do. in my district, 35% of people have no coverage. texas leads the whole country and having uninsured kids. we need to do better. that is why the healthcare law will provide is the care we need. the only problem i have is a
piece of legislation we should have had them work out the differences. we did not get to do that. the republicans want to repeal health care. the do not want to touch one single ink. -- they do not want to change one single thing. we are doing the out reach personally. i have my staff already getting trained to make sure we inform people so they can get the tax credit for individuals and they know what impacts them. the women so they know they will not be discriminated on premiums. there are a lot of good things out there. all we are trying to do is letting people know the benefit of healthcare. eventually, we will fine tune the legislation. host: has the president done enough? guest: they did not do enough
during the debate. i wish they did a much better job. they started to do some of that right now. i think they can do more. they ought to do more. there is a reason why we are there and doing the out reach. the leadership has been good. making sure that we inform people of the healthcare benefits. this is a very free market concept. imagine what happens if we provide more insurance. the more insurance companies you have, the prices will go down. these will be coming up october 1. host: democrat, virginia.
caller: hi. i have been listening and i have a couple of comments. in but if people need to know that darrell issa is the single richest congressman in all of congress. he's worth over 200 million dollars. there are a lot of shaky deals. it is him who should have someone look into him. they cleared him of any wrongdoing. there is a nasty undertone. as far as immigration reform, he may have about 70 votes in the senate. the land outside of congress they will do everything and everything to ensure failure or passage.
there's also a point about the deportation numbers. the obama administration has deported more illegal immigrants that have done crimes in that nature than bush did in all of his years. all this talk of wanting to kick illegals out in all of this nonsense, there would be an economic crash. i am in the construction industry. it is something i know well. these are some of the most hard- working people in the country. it would devastate the economy. my last point is one that came out this weekend. last weekend we have bob dole. this is something the democrats when they really looked inside and determined that. they used to do some sort of course correction.
the republicans have big issues with women, social issues. it is almost like the republicans want to manifest. they do not care. they want to be a party of the south. they tried chris christie for with president obama. it is just pathetic. guest: let me start backward. the republicans came out at the young people. they also have trouble with women. if they do not do immigration reform they will have a lot more problems with hispanics. president obama won 70% of the hispanic vote. there is a reason why republicans went from this making it so difficult. some of them understand that they have to do reform otherwise they will lose the hispanic vote.
if you lose the women and young folks, and if they ever lose the elderly, and they are going to be so compartmentalized that it'll be difficult event to win elections in the future except for those small congressional districts that they have right now. that is one thing that the democratic party is doing, making sure we reach out to the minorities and young will into the middle class. immigration reform, again, let me just say it is one of those things that will not go away. it is not going to go away. it has been here. we have to do something. or we do immigration, border security, let's take that in mind. some are speaking of putting
walls on the border. the canadians would hate that. they might have put them in which they are not to put any fence or wall on the northern border. some of us in the southern part feel a little bit not happy with that type of treatment to the southern border. people talk about terrorism and 9/11. then you come in through the southern border. they came in through other parts not through the southern border. let's get sensible. let's not get too emotional. let's he -- use common sense that will be good for the nation. host: how do you account for the large number people deported by the obama obama administration as opposed to george bush? guest: i think everybody is here with a criminal record, i do not want them here.
he is right. the first four years under the obama work, they deported more than george bush did in eight years. people are coming in. they have been here. they are good and lawful citizens. that is one thing. if they are here with criminal records and they do not go along here. host: let's go to jerry, republican. caller: good morning, c-span. i just want to ask you one question. most democrats go on with this immigration bill. they say it will be good for the country. it will make everything better. the last time they did this, this made everything very bad under ronald reagan. african americans still suffer from that. when you talk about bringing 11 million more people, the unemployment rate is just doubling.
i am telling you now. if you bring more people in that will make us suffer. we are the ones that used to do those jobs that used to do in construction in steel mills. we got pushed out when you all came in. when you all talk about this, think about that. how are we going to make this work? we are here. they are coming here. who's going to take those jobs? we are. guest: i do not want to pick hispanics versus blacks. we do not want to do that. we want to look at this as americans. we are not talking about bringing those folks in. they are here already. we are not talking about putting
them on boats or airplanes. they're here already. they have been here for many years. do we keep them in the shadows are duly take them out so they can be good protective -- productive citizens? the labor and the u.s. chamber worked out agreements to make sure we do this. i represent san antonio down to laredo. i have talked to a log of the when they were offering people 14 or $15 an hour to go work in the field in the hot sun. they could not find anyone to do that work. my father came over from mexico and became a legal resident and naturalized citizen. for many years, my father and mother used to work in the fields. they know what it is to work in the hot sun. there are no folks that want to do the job tom a then let's bring in the folks that actually want to get in the sun and work hard for those jobs.
we take care of americans first. if they do not want to do something, then this is why we have a guest worker plan. keep in mind what happened in world war ii. this created a couple of things. it created a lot of openings for women. it created work. as a neo-folks in the field, what do the united states do? they asked mexico, can you send us some of your folk? we are trying to fill in the positions of americans do not want to do. they are here already. 40% of them did not cross the river or border. they came here through a legal permit or visa. we have to be smart on how we do border security. you can put the biggest fence that you want to but it is ever going to work.
40% came in through a legal permanent visa. host: your collar set it up as a youth versus us dynamic purity was concerned about jobs. how do you both address that polarization that can happen among political parties and the fundamental question of fear of again, there will be safeguards. to agree on this, it takes a lot. two different positions. i have talked to a lot of oaks out there. there are jobs were there offered 14 or $15 an hour. my father did that type of hard work.
i've seen a lot of blacks pushed out because of the illegal immigrants. i have nothing again them. i was around at the last amnesty. if there's anything called amnesty i would be upset. to me it is not right. i do not trust it. host: you talk about amnesty. what would be ok for you? caller: well, border enforcement and law enforcement. to be able to put those that are here on the path to citizenship.
with the ones that have, and recently on the back line. host: ok. guest: why did you leave texas? i am just kidding. thank you for your question. there was a magnet to bring in people. we've put more border security than any time in history. we have drones and technology and cameras to make sure that we stop that. not everybody crosses the border. we have to understand how the
people got here. i still get concern. first the americans get the jobs. if there is an opening and an american wants to take that job, they take that job. if they do not take their job, we leave it open for somebody that wants to come in. immigration reform has been a difficult issue. i was reading a letter about an officer that was complaining about people coming across the river. "they are taking over our jobs." he said we need to deport them. it was a mexican officer talking about the americans crossing the
river. we know what happens after that. this immigration issue has been with us for many years. i feel we have to do it immigration in a sensible way. the last time we try to do with border security, we were talking about this six or seven years ago. what did the house pass? making it a felony if somebody digs a tunnel. we have been talking about border security for a long time. host: you can talk with congressman cuellar about a range of issues.
there is a headline about student loans. do you think congress will extend those student loan rates past the deadline that is looming? guest: i agree with the president. my father went to a third grade education. the more hands that you have, the more money that you may. those days are gone. the more education you have, the better it is. we are competing against other countries. we have to keep in mind that education should be seen as the greatest equalizer that we have. if we're trying to keep student loans lower, that helps the middle class. those in the middle, they get
penalized. let's help those parents and those students by keeping the interest rates as low as we can. it is for the working middle class. host: a democrat from california, jane. caller: i could not disagree with you more on immigration. they have come to the country originally, not speaking the language, not having a job and no place to stay. they have done this once before, going back to their original country.
i am an american citizen. the criminals who break all of these laws just to get here. then they break other laws just to get a job. guest: yeah. the majority of people are coming year because there are jobs. this is why on the immigration reform, we have to make sure we put in sensible provisions. keep in mind the majority of those people are looking for jobs. if they are here for criminal reasons, those are the people that we should support and we should let ice do their work.
we have to find a sensible way. it you think we will find enough buses to deport all of them, it is not going to happen. we have to make sure that once we address that issue that we do not have more people coming in. host: steve from wisconsin. caller: good morning. the house has done some good work on trying to repeal obamacare but the senate has not done anything. obamacare is going to bankrupt this country. president obama has done a good job of trying to bankrupt this country. i have not heard one democrat say how we will pay back the
we started two wars in 2001. we put the part d for medicare. we instituted the tax cuts. if we would have kept what newt gingrich and president clinton, we would be talking about surpluses. host: congressman rep. henry cuellar, democrat from texas. hi, fred. caller: hi. good morning. when it comes to immigration, if you're not supposed to be in this country, you would leave. these people have known every second and every minute and every month and every year that they were not supposed to be here. at first they were thumbing their noses at our laws. if we do this pathway to citizenship, who is going to manage it/
ice cannot manage the visa program. that is the question i have for you. who is going to manage this crap? guest: thank you very much. immigration reform has been emotional for years. they use to focus on the irish and the germans and now the hispanics. look at mankind throughout the world. people move around for many reasons. they move around because of war
and because they are starving. people are coming nearer to the united states because of economics. keep in mind that folks are here. we can keep them in the shadows. it will be difficult to deport them. or you can bring them out of the shadows. if it is a criminal, i will be the first to say kick them out. keep them in the shadows or start the process so we know who they are. pay more taxes. get them to pay more taxes. my father came from mexico and became a legal resident and a naturalized citizen.
i do not want anybody jumping ahead of him. we have done it before. host: some related questions on twitter. talking about immigration. guest: yeah, and he's right. 40% of the people we have here came through a legal visa. that individual is correct. right now the focus that used to be on the irish and the chinese, now the focus is on the hispanics. there is always somebody that there is a focus on. you have the officer and they were talking about americans crossing the river without documentation.
they took over texas. immigration reform can be an emotional issue. this is in the best interest of the united states. host: mary, a democrat. caller: hi. good morning. i feel sorry for obama. for the first four years that he walks into office, he believed that he could coordinate everyone to be a bipartisan. when it was said he would be a first term president, what does that tell you from the beginning? i feel very sorry for him.
he learned what the house did to him. he wanted jobs. he could have had a million jobs. the republicans blocked him. everything the republicans put up there. they did everything against that man to make this country great. he had infrastructure. he could have put people to work. guest: very good points that you made. a president comes in. republicans were determined to make sure he did not succeed. this is my overview of congress.
people talk about being a bipartisan. it happened to me and to republicans. that is one thing that is wrong with congress. republicans are focusing on investigations. they saw this in 1998 with president clinton. we have to address the issues that the american people want us to address. right now, jobs, jobs, jobs. science, research, and we can make our economy. the economy is a reflection of the strength of this country. host: congressman rep. henry cuellar, democrat of texas.
>> there is a gap in the front row. >> thanks for being here. thank you for being here. as part of the middle-class jobs and opportunity, the resident will travel to north carolina to deliver and experience first- hand the schools through digital learning. the president laid out his believe that the middle class is the engine of economic growth. there are three areas we need to invest in. jobs, skills, and opportunity. when he too builds on the progress we have made over the last four years.
that means investing in those areas that are ready creating good pay. with that i will take your question. i want to get the response of what is happening in turkey. the are questioning increase. >> thank you. we continue to follow the events closely and with concern. the united states supports full freedom of expression and assembly including the right to peaceful protest. it is fundamental to any democracy. we believe the vast majority have been peaceful, law-abiding, normal citizens exercising their rights. the united states has serious concerns of excessive use of reports by police. we call on these events to be investigated and encourage all
parties from revoking violence. he is not. i have no outreach that they might have had. there are no calls here to report. quit>> these are so many of the issues that the world deals with. there is the stability. turkey is a very important ally. all democracies have issues that they need to work through. we would expect the government to work through this in a way that respects the rights of their citizens. we continue to work with turkey on a range of issues. we look forward to doing that. >> german i set called you a
liar of the administration. rejig chairman i said called you a liar of the administration. issa can't do a liar of the administration. >> i will get into a back and forth. andink what our focus is has been is the need to find out all the inappropriate activities that have occurred and make sure those here are responsible for inappropriate activity be held accountable. that processes are put into place so that something like this cannot happen again. the president enacted in response to the general's report. he make clear that he was outraged by the behavior to at quickly by instructing that new leadership to conduct a thorough
review that would examine the behavior, hold those accountable. and to examine the overall culture to make sure these kinds of things cannot happen again. the i spoke about situation, i was returning to the findings of the independent inspector general. let's be clear. he both in testimony and in his report found no evidence that outsiders influenced the behavior that took place there. that is the conclusion of the independent inspector general. no othernly have seen evidence that contradicts that. the president is interested in getting all the facts. that is why he has instructed that they conduct this review.
this is an important component. there is a criminal investigation that is being undertaken by the department of justice. they're holding those responsible accountable. thanks. does the unrest in turkey make it harder to do with the serious situation? we will continue to do that. that the turkish government will appropriately work through the situation. on the events that occurred to be investigated and urge all parties to refrain from
provoking violence. freeink the right of expression of assembly are fundamental to democracy. we have concerns about some of the response. we certainly expect the turkish government to work for this. >> there is a story in the paper saying there's some displeasure inside the white house with eric holder. does it feel like eric holder is becoming a distraction? the chief of staff was quoted on the record. he spoke for the president. he spoke for all of us. he said the president and his team at the white house believed the attorney general has the intellect, integrity to efficiently run the apartment of justice and not get distracted by the partisans that seymour -- int seymoue more benefit
political attacks. i could not say it any better. >> just to button down the pointedthey specifically to two instances where you said on may 21 on cincinnati and on may 20 the iris -- irs companies scrutinized. >> those are the findings of the audit conducted by the independent expected general. correct? perhaps there are issues that the chairman has with this. ofas citing the findings this. we're are waiting for this to be released. withresident responded appropriate concern and took
immediate action. they are continuing to direct those are are responsible for those matters to take action. concludedtor general in his reports and testify to that heore congress found no evidence of outside influence. they're holding those accountable. it takes measures to ensure that it cannot happen again. separately, we are operating with criminal oversight.
i think it is important to stick facts and build on it. we certainly hope that is what the congressional oversight committee will do. >> robert gibbs called on darrell issa for you. >> i would say im not interested in having a back and forth. i am interested in what the president is interested in. we take action to ensure this activity does not happen again. we take action to hold those accountable. we cooperate with legitimate oversight. we obviously cooperate with any
investigation at the department of justice. those are the things that matter. ito not want to get into anymore. kind of back-and- forth that is productive? i was simply say that i am not interested in that back and forth. we spoke very carefully and specifically about the findings of the inspector general in his of congress.w of we have seen no evidence that contradicts the independent inspector general. i will point you to the irsimony of the former
commissioner. it takes those who are taking action to ensure that never happens again. it is important that the american people have faith that our tax lawses fairly across the country. that is why he is so outraged by the actions that were reported. acted inhy he has response in the way that he has. theas the president seen report that was opposed to come out tomorrow? it talks about waste at the iron is. employees using presidential suites.
does the president think that is appropriate? >> know he does not think that is appropriate. i would point you to statements released by the acting irs commissioner who says "this conference is an unfortunate vestige from a prior era. taxpayers should take him for that this would not take place today. ththis has been placed. they believe that everyone must take the role as stewards of the taxpayer dollar very seriously. 2012 thehy ma in administration outlined a series of of actions for reining in
spending and oversight of travel activity. the federal government spending on travel which includes activity was reduced by more than $1 billion in fiscal year 2012. travel spending, they have lower their spending on travel. they did this by roughly $2 billion. the department agricultural reduce costs by 125 million. they implemented mandatory guidance to use the lowest available fares. millionieved over 6.5 dollars in savings in fiscal year 2012. this is a commitment the president has to wringing out waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars. it is important to note that he is now the acting commissioner.
he oversaw this when he was there. >> how important is this to the white house? todoes not have enough investigate it at all. it is testifying public trust. are you concerned public trust is being hurt by both of these scandals? isn't the irs a broken agency that needs a federal review? >> the president is very concerned by the activity that has been reported by the independent expected or general with regards ivethe targeting of conservate groups applying for tax exempt status. he has been concerned of irsnsive spending by the and other agencies and has taken action accordingly.
it applies the american people irs isith that the applying our tax laws in a fair and responsible way. that is why he has ordered a review. after installing new leadership. he expects that review to be unsparing. it holds the council people for inappropriate conduct. cooperate with congressional oversight in the department of justice criminal investigation. it is precisely because of the president's concern that he articulated right away that these actions are being undertaken. issa is contributing to trust in the irs by insisting he believes the orders that target conservative groups come
out of washington? a do not want to get into a back-and-forth. we believe there is an important role important role to be played by congress. through legitimate oversight. veryke this matter seriously. that is why the president has ordered the actions he has ordered and why the new acting commissioner is proceeding with the review that the president and secretary of treasury committed him to perform. it is why we will cooperate with congressional oversight and the justice department of investigations. it is a serious matter that needs to be addressed. that is our focus. i think when it comes to getting the facts we need to get them and not make judgments before we have all of the facts.
is why we made the for the to wait evenctor general's report though it had become public. there was a great demand for comment on it. we believe it was the right thing to do. this would have been inappropriate to intervene in a process that was not complete. that is what we did. the president acted very quickly. he spoke very quickly on his outreach on this conduct. do you see legitimate oversight? >> i will not get into a lay by play-by-play. we believe congressional oversight is important when legitimate. we think this is a matter that
should he looked at by congress through the process of legitimate oversight. we think it is important to stay focused on what we know. the information we know from the report conducted by the independent general. and to build on that or the review, being overseen by the through theoner congressional oversight role in the investigation undertaken by the department of justice. thatere is one indicating the president has agreed to support this. i confess i was not aware of that report. i will run out and purchase the book online. i can assure you the president is not thinking about the next
presidential election having just recently won the last one. >> if i can ask you weekly about considering the efforts to try to stop leaks in terms of national security secrets. bradley manning's trial begins. his attorney describes them as a young and well intentioned man. what is the white house perspective on bradley manning inherent incks your question is the recognition that there is an ongoing trial. i cannot comment on an ongoing trial. i would refer you to the prosecutors on that matter. they're not referring to any specific case that leaks of national security. be very harmful to our national security interest. >> this is part of the mental
health, station taking place. va is partnering with 24 communities in nine states helping to reduce wait times to provide better access to provide mental health care. how is this going to be paid for? toi would have to refer you hhs. mental health is an issue that is often stigmatize. it is a component of our gun violence problem. is why this conference was a piece of the executive action theion of the report at vice president put together in the president has acted on when it comes to reducing gun violence. it touches on a range of issues
not just limited to gun violence. is a white house concerned that furloughs are taking place already? will they be furloughed to this place. >> i do not have it broken down to say with any specificity about what harm might be done. that certainly the case the furloughs caused by sequester are having effects across the country. real consequences for real people. we have seen it and reports about the elimination and some cases of meals on wheels. thehe reduction in
provision of meals on wheels program. we have seen this in the elimination on the head start. we are certainly seeing it in of the budget. we knew that this would be the case. that is why implementing that policy was always a bad idea and not something to be celebrated or to call it political victory for the tea party or anybody. there are real people who suffer the consequences of these arbitrary across the board cuts. that we can and should do better. he put this forward in his offers to capitol hill. this is not have to happen.
it did not need to happen. the president certainly hopes that we can reach the compromise on budget issues. chuck schumer said that he july 4 aspredicts on many as 70 senators would pass the bipartisan immigration bill through the senate. there will be some challenges when it reaches the house. marco rubio said the immigration bill "needs improvement to pass ." i am curious what improvement the president feels needs to be made. >> the president continues to be encouraged by the progress in the senate.
the president has made clear it you need to be part of commonsense immigration reform. we look forward to continuing with congress. we will continue to advance the president's priorities as part of that process. a lot of work remains to be done. the bill passes through the senate. it has bipartisan support. reflectd and needs to the president's principles. as it moves to the senate. that important to know there is a lot of work to be done here. we have seen with a variety of issues over time that victory can be declared early.
this is real work. this is something that requires broad support. that support exists but it requires some roll grit and determination to get from here to completion. minute ago you mentioned the productions in government travel costs. is there any effort on the part of the president to reduce travel costs? >> the white house has been affected by this sequester and measures have been taken both to weuce costs here as well as have had to have furloughs in the white house office. the president is president of the united states.
the nature he travels is very much the office he holds. it is a requirement of the office. he will be able to fulfill his obligation to the american people and the oath he took. we can gety of ways you more information on that if you would like. cooking action to reduce costs that deal with the sequester. i do not have anything more specific or you on that. >> thank you. later this week, it is supposed to be getting acquainted. the president also will be bringing the computer hacking and so forth. does the president want to come away from that meeting with some
deliverables? >> i would make the point that the resident is acquainted with concession to the presidency. it is important now that he holds that office that president obama very much looks forward to it. there is a broader what rain -- broad array of- topics they will discuss. cybersecurity will be one of them. this is a discussion. we are not trying to telegraph specific actions or so-called deliverables. relationship rehab would china is broad -- we have would china is rod and complex.
they will be developed for us to work on greater cooperation where we have been able to cooperate. confronte able to those areas where we're able to disagree. . that has been the approach of this administration in our relations with china from the time the president took office. we believe it is the right approach. >> did he come back saying it would be really tough? >> he had an excellent visit to china. he met with an array of top military officials. obviously, he reported back to the president on that meeting. the president meeting will build upon meeting that he had. i think that he felt that his visit was a successful one. >> is there a legislative tie in to this?
will be asking congress to do something specific. preview the advanced more than i just did. broadly, the president believes congress should be focused on what the american people are focused on. i'm not going to read you specifics. there are a variety of actions that we believe congress ought to join us in moving on. you're the president address some of those. there is ample room for on an agendation that would strengthen the middle class. provide a more security. cornerstonesolute of our economy. it has been the primary focus of the domestic policy since he took office. it is the primary focus of his agenda.
this is the eating, the set of issues that the american people care most about. toaffects their capacity have and keep a job that can sustain a middle-class life. the president is equally concerned about any opus -- and focused on making the milk labs more secure and creating more opportunity. it is a series he will be engaged in. he expects congress to engage him. theould you tell us if
shrinking of the deficit is making it harder for the president to get the bipartisan deal that he wants summary for bookends -- republicans. he has been searching for people. let me take issue with that. the deficit is coming down as sharply as it has been they did do something. 2009.ook direct action in they prevented a catastrophic recession from becoming a depression. passtook direct action to the affordable care act which bring down the growth in the cost of healthcare. health in the cost of
healthcare. atook direct action to pass wall street -- wall street reform law that will ensure the financial crisis that so battered our economy cannot happen again. to savek direct action the american automobile industry. ofis very much a part american history and a sense of who we are. it is also a great engine for economic growth and job creation. let me be clear about that. the president thinks we need to continue to take action to invest in our economy so it grows, to ensure the jobs we need for the 21st century are created here, to ensure we are taking action to enhance our energy independence and to reduce our deficit in a responsible way. he has had a number of conversations with republican lawmakers about the need to
find common ground on achieving just that. he has always looked at it as overall approach to economic policy that is focused first and foremost on economic growth and job creation. as part of that, responsible deficit reduction. that.ieves we can do he believes there are republicans that want to do that. we just have to see if there is a coalescing of will to make it happen. you have seen the president ers.c they are very explicit. on the table. it demonstrates the willingness to compromise, the seriousness of which he approaches these that he will hoped find partners in moving forward. -- spring this ring
the president took republican lawmakers out to dinner and had meetings with them. i am wondering if that outrage has an continued or is that a one-time, one moment deal. >> it cannot be one-time if there were a series of meetings and conversations. those conversations continue. it was fairly recently that senator mccain was obviously a leading republican in the was here visiting the president. we will continue to have those engagements. both at the presidential level and at the sub presidential level. the president is sincere in this effort. he believes we can find a common ground on these issues. some of these conversations have not just been on deficit reduction. they have been on immigration. they will continue to be on
ways we can reduce gun violence. they happen on ways we can invest in our economy and build out our infrastructure to create jobs now. this effort continues. >> are there more recent engagements? to take aat we need breath. i know the media cycle is what it is. the president is fully engaged with members of congress and both parties. they will continue to be. he has pressed and every one of these meetings for the willingness to find common ground. he has shown his willingness to compromise. sentimentsraged by expressed by some republican lawmakers to do the same. where there are opportunities to find that compromise and get something done on behalf of the american people, the president will see is an continue to have those conversations. >> i want to go back to china.
it was not clear to me whether there will be deliverables coming out of that. what would you expect to come out of that? would there be some sort of a joint statement, appearance? can he speak of the format? >> we will have more details about the specifics of the engagement and the conversations. two presidents plan to discuss the full range of economic and security issues on the u.s./china agenda. they are discussing how to manage differences in a manner that ensures a stable and viable relationship. let's speak of the domestic economic situations. these are the largest economies in the world. the steps that each will take andustain international
balanced global growth because of the impact that these economies have on global growth. i think it is important, while i wanted to assure roger it was not just a get to know you session, it is deeper than that. this is not a 1970 style summit where there are pre-negotiated outcomes. this is very much part of an withing engagement we have the chinese leadership at the presidential level and at all the levels and government. it is very important. of themportant because size of our economies, the entered dependence we have as engines of economic growth, the various issues where we cooperate and where we do not see i to i. -- seeing eye to eye.
sustaining that is critical. >> would there be any access for the press to the leaders? >> i do not think we have announced anything yet. we have been working through that and hopefully we will have more specifics for you. ow it has seen the united states reasserting itself and the pacific regions but it is the will work -- bulwark against china. how is this effort to reset relations with the two leaders a personal? how does that fit in to the more general asian policy? >> we have tried to make clear that our rebalancing to asia has not been against any nation, not against china. important role
that the united states has traditionally and needs to continue to play in that region. the president made clear >> weibel leave this briefing. we will go live now to capitol hill. members are coming back after a weeklong memorial recess. i hereby appoint the honorable steve womack to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner,
speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. we give you thanks, god of the universe, for giving us another day. as the various members of this people's house return, we ask your blessing upon each as they resume the difficult responsibilities that await them. give each the wisdom and good judgment needed to give credit to the office they have been honored by their constituencies to fill. bless the work of all who serve in their various capacities here in the united states capitol. bless all those who visit the capitol this day, be they american citizens or visitors or guests of our nation. may they be inspired by this
monument to the idea of human freedom and its guarantee by the democratic experiment that is the united states. god, bless america, and may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlelady from north carolina, ms. foxx. ms. foxx: please join in the pledge to our wonderful flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the
gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, during the memorial day work period, i was grateful to participate on a congressional delegation visiting with service members and our allies. we went to thank them but the reality of our new greatest generation, they have inspired us. we began in kosovo where they're nursing a 5-year-old nation with a muslim majority while respecting the rights of a cris ann minority. in germany we thank the hospital for lifesaving care of courageous warriors for freedom. in the american city of germany, we were assured of germany's appreciation of america's promoting peace through strength. across afghanistan, we witnessed a developing civil society from the rubble of a soviet occupation. we have trained 322,000 afghans
into an effective source to protect the civilian population from cowardly terrorists. to protect american families at home, we must deny safe havens for terrorists overseas. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. burgess: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. burgess: mr. speaker, there is both the president and the senate have immigration plans with a central component of amnesty of those who are in the country without the benefit of citizenship. past experiences have shown us that amnesty hinders us from creating the solution to our problems. remember congress in 1986 allowed amnesty during the reagan administration. we were then promised solutions, but knows have not been met. but let's focus fost just a minute about the reality and forget the rhetoric. which country has been the most welcoming to new citizens?
which country has offered the oath of citizenship to more people who chose to legally enter that country? if you look at this chart you'll see on the far end it's the united states of america. in 2010, a million new residents were offered the oath of citizenship. that's better than turkey, better than belgium, better than germany. . will not solve gun violence fencing along the southwest border has been canceled. we already do a good job allowing new citizens into our country. perhaps if we focus on securing our borders instead of rewarding or offering amnesty, some of the problems would become more manageable. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. student loan interest rates are scheduled to double july 1
unless the president and senate act now to remove politics from the rate setting process. no amount of white house campaigning will stop the increase. we have to work together. and that shouldn't be hard since house republicans already share a great deal of common ground with president obama's own interest rate proposal. he asked for a permanent solution to washington's interest rate conundrum. he asked that the solution anchor rates in the markets and away from election cycles and that it include protections for the most vulnerable. the smarter solutions for students act passed by the house with bipartisan support meet those criteria. our solution to stop rates from doubling provides a good starting point for senate democrats and president obama to take action before july 1. cede esident must not this empty -- let's keep rates from doubling. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for
what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma seek recognition? >> request to address the house for one minute, without objection. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman seek unanimous consent? >> yes, sir. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, the president's justice department sold weapons to narcoterrorists south of our border who killed one of our finest. the president's state department lied about benghazi with false information provided by the white house. the president's attorney general authorized spying on a fox news journalist and his family for reporting on a north korean nuclear test. the president's justice department confiscated phone records of the associated press because they reported on a thwarted terrorist attack. the president's treasury department uses the i.r.s. to farget political opposition. the president's health and human services secretary pressures the insurance companies she is supposed to
regulate to promote obamacare, which is the same law she uses to force citizens to pay for abortion-inducing drugs against their religious liberties. mr. bridenstine: mr. speaker, the vengefulness and lack of moral compass lead many to suggest he's not fit to lead. the only problem is that his vice president is equally unfit and even more embarrassing. the speaker pro tempore: the chair advises its members to refrain from using improper references to the president. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman seek unanimous consent? mr. wolf: i do, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wolf: peaceful ro-democracy liberators were crushed by the chinese government. i submitted for the record an article from today's "washington post" which reported that in 2 1/2 decades since the protest's violent
end, china's government has largely scrubbed tiananmen from history. in 1991, congressman chris smith and i went to china where we visited beijing prison number one. while our requests to visit the demonstrators was denied, we left with a pair of socks made by prisoners for exports to the west. the events of the past and the continuing repression today are made worse by this administration's failure to prioritize human rights and our relationship with china. will president obama mention tiananmen in his summit with the chinese president this week or pretend it never happened? i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from indiana is recognized. >> thank you.
mr. speaker, it's 2013 and the world is full of successful women, women like my mother who raised her two sons on her own, working at the delta faucet factory in greensburg. mr. messer: some women like my wife, a successful full-time lawyer and successful full-time mother. she balances career with family and still finds time to celebrate good report cards, birthday parties and family vacation. last week, a national debate broke out over reports that four out of 10 households now have women as the lead breadwinner. live in and grew up in two such households. strong women are central to today's family and that is a good thing. i look forward to a time when statistics about the success of women are no longer news
worthy. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, this is to notify you formally pursuant to rule 8 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives that i have been served with a subpoena issued by the united states district court for the district of arizona for witness testimony. after consultation with the office of general counsel, i have determined that compliance with the subpoena is consistent with the privileges and rights of the house. except to the extent that questions put to me seek information that is privileged. signed sincerely, peter swagg, senior systems analyst. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 4 of rule 1, the following enrolled was signed by speaker pro tempore wolf on may 24, 2013. the clerk: h.r. 258, to amend title 18, united states code,
host: good morning. thanks for being with us. guest: good morning. host: what is this all about? guest: this makes the case that gal challenges to okay are not finished. there are some in the pipeline that are closer to getting to the higher courts than others. they focus on the i.r.s. setting up insurance programs which is a concern for supporters of ob care that if that ever got to the supreme court that could be struck down. the i.r.s. has been in the news recently. there is another lawsuit on the birth control provisions. and a couple of other issues in
the pipeline but those are court battles that will take more than a year to get to. but the legal challenges of obama care are still ongoing. host: congress is going to focus on one lawsuit accusing the i.r.s. of illegally implementing these subsidies to help people buy insurance. and as you and others are pointing out two days of hearings on the i.r.s. this week. guest: that's right. danny will be testifying before the house portfolio yations committee just tomorrow. that's just the beginning of the hearings. he weighs and means commit tee n the house and later in the week we have oversight committee will be highlighting a new audit, more trouble for the i.r.s. about spending by
the agency that danny, the i.r.s. acting commissioner has said was inappropriate. so we'll be getting more details on how much waistful spendings was spent later this week. but clearly the focus this week will be on the i.r.s. host: putting blame in part on the bush administration. guest: it goes back a long time. and that's the message that there is a lot to be done at the i.r.s. there are a lot of reforms that have to be implemented that are not tied to obama administration. host: tough on china with regard to hacking. this story available online. one key player in this is mike rogers who is calling on the president to warn the chinese president that cyber attacks waged by his country's government and military will
not be tolerated by the u.s. and comments by chuck hagel accusing china of cyber esponadge drawing sharp responses from the chinese government. guest: this could be an awkward meeting between the president and the chinese leader because the u.s. government believes it has enough proof over the years that chinese government has been involved in hacking incidents. so the fact they might be setting up some type of new memorandum or some type of new process where certain things are not allowed formally is an indication that there could be progress but this is going to be an awkward meeting because the chinese government has denied what the u.s. is alleging. host: july 1 is the deadline before student loan rates
increase. we heard from the president congress is under the gun to do something, correct? guest: absolutely. about a year ago democrats and president obama challecked republicans to keep the rates at 3.4% and the democrats didn't like the remedy. they want to tie the rates not to an artificial number like 3.4%. they have passed legislation that would tie it to markets rates. that has drawn a white house veto and smat democrats are working on their own bill they hope to get to this week that would freeze the rate at 3.4% for two years. they say the house version would raise rates and they say they don't want to do that. they say they are going to stand strong. between now and july 1 there will be a lot of jocking on
that. host: a couple of other agenda items before we let you go. the farm bill, where does that stand in the senate? guest: that is going to be the first thing that the senate addresses this week. they started before the last recess. they are going to be working through various amendments. that is a bipartisan bill. that is exeblingted to pass the senate. it passed the senate last year but didn't -- it got out of committee and the house but not on the floor. now if you talk to house members who are pushing the farm bill, they are optimistic they will get a floor vote and they have indicated there will be a floor vote. a lot of this goes to what is called snap and those are food stamp programs and the alotment for funding in those bills. very different and conservatives want to ratchet
that number down. there is more hope that a farm bill could be signed into law this year or perhaps into early next year but there is a long way to go. >> host: and a major centerpiece of the president's agenda remains immigration. we saw what happened and we talked to congressman bob good lak two different approaches on this legislation in each chamber. guest: yes, very much so. that bill is probable going to go on the senate floor next week. conservative critics of that are planning to ramp up their opposition to that. will it pass the senate? in all likelihood it will. then the focus is on the house. the house has strug told get a bill. they say they are getting close to releasing a bill that would move through the judiciary committee.
in talking to various house conservatives. they don't like that senate bill at all and they are saying no matter what the senate does, the house is not going to pass that bill. that's something that speaker john boehner has said. i think that's right unless there is e normous political pressure over two or three months the house is not going to take up the senate bill. so they are going to move this bipartisan house bill from this gang in the house if they ever come up with a bill or bob is going to move a series of individual bills through his committee and then on the floor. i think one area where you see the house move is they are not going to vote on one big bill like the snalt. they are going to vote on narrow bills and get into conference and that's where the real battle will begin. if it ever gets out of conference then it will be another vote in the house and snalt to see if it can get to
president obama's desk. host: you are calling alexander joffe about mitt romney trying to resurface in 2014 and remain among republican party circles. could we see him for the upcoming elections or could he be behind the scenes at raising money? guest: he's good at raising money. after the 2012 election which he lost he said i'm not going away. the candidates that want his help will ask for it especially in the money side. i don't think you will see him everywhere in every campaign across the country. certainly president obama and michelle obama is going to be on the campaign trail more than romney but i think if candidates want romney, he's indicating that he will show up. host: as we begin a new month, the end of the month a special election to replace now secretary of state john carrie
and from the hill newspaper senator mcconnell saying gomez is key for the republicans retaking the u.s. senate in a tough race against congressman ed markey. guest: this race is going to be get nastier as we get closer to the election. mark ki is basically the favorite. but he's not a huge favorite. gomez has not said he's another scott brown. he says imet my own person. ed mark ki in other interviews has compared himself to scott brown to get the independent vote. senate republicans need six seats to take back the majority. as mitch mcconnell is indicating this is a huming race. we give them huge momentum if hey pull it off.
host: thanks very much for being with us as congress returns this week. we appreciate your time. >> as you heard the house appropriations subcommittee will hold a hearing this afternoon on i.r.s. targeting groups applying for tax exempt stat us. you can watch live coverage of that hearing on our companion network on c-span 3 in just about a half an hour. also there will be more scrutiny of the i.r.s. on excessive spending on conferences. an audit is set for release tomorrow. we'll have live coverage of that hearing beginning thursday at 9030 a.m. eastern and that will be on c-span 3.
>> she make it is first speech by a sitting first lady. designs her own china and establishes the white house china collection and is the first to have a christmas tree in the white house. meet wife of benjamin harrison as we continue our series on first ladies tonight live at 9:00 eastern on c-span, c-span 3, c-span radio and cspan.org. >> last month the university of colorado hosted the 65th annual conference on world affairs. a debate on top picks ranging from arts media and science to politics and huming rights. coming up technology on human brain and child development. it's about an hour and 15 minutes.
>> hello everyone. welcome to panel 1716 this. is your brain on the internet. today is monday april 8 and it's just after 3:00 p.m. my name is allen carmichael. i work with the boulder weekly here in town. at this point i would ask you please to check your cell phone and make sure it's turned off. want to be sure that all cell phones are turned off at this time. thanks for coming. i'll briefly introduce our panelists and we'll get under way here. to my left is a writer and philosopher. he's written many books and published in lots of amazing magazines from wired to the washington post.
further down the row is thomas hardaway. he's a army veteran of 31 years. he works as a child and addless nt psych tryst and has a long tenure of working with children. charles love is right down there and he's a field proffsal in geology and an tropoling. he spent over 36 years practicing arkology. our fourlingt panelist isn't going to be able to make it today. for updates you can check the website. i think we'll have a great panel. to start things off i'll hand t over to michael. >> good afternoon. i'm going to stand up because i know for experience i'm too
short for people in the back to see me. let me ask, can the people in the back hear me okay? >> doth people in the back can you raise your hand if you are hearing me clearly? much better. i'm going to address that question of this is your brain on the internet by first asking what that word on means. what does it mean to say that your brain is on the internet? and there is at least two usages that i'll address. the first usage is basically looking at ou are your gadge jet and are trance fixed to your computer or phone or whatever you are using. there must be dozens of books
now that are arguing whether our use of smartphones and the nternet is making us dumber, more isolated, smarter, more connected, less connected. there is a book for every aspect of that debate. for most people i think that's what it means to say that your brain is on the internet. that the internet is doing something to you as you are using it. but there say second usage that is less common which i have spent the most time writing and thinking about and that is the physical integration of humans and machines. let me explain where i come from in that question. i'm a dual cook lar implant user. i've always had hearing loss from birth but i went totally deaf in 2001.
so deaf that i could no longer benefit from hearing aids. at the i got a coiklar implant in my left air. that consist of a string of electrodes that are surgically threaded into my inner area and lie on the nerves in my inner area. there are external devices like this device whose job is to pick up sound waves, digitize them and send them to a radio trance mitter that is in that little round thing. this here is the battery that controls this system. so what i have inside my head and outside my head connects and work together a built like this. so that just sticks there. stupid implant tricks.
what it's doing is sending a radio signal through my skin to my implants that is surgically implanted in my skull just underneath my skin. you can't see it but the 16 electrodes at the end of that string are curled up inside my inner area -- ear sending sounds to my brain. the basic outcome of a back is it is possible to put electronics into a human body and make that body believe that it is having a sensory experience. and that is what happened to me. cochlear implant does. it makes my brain believe it is hearing sounds. when i think of putting your
brain on the internet, i think is it possible to put devices inside the human body that will allow us to physically in terms of the brain connect to the internet? can we connect our brains physically to the global internet? is this possible? is this feasible? is this desireable? what would it do to us? let me outline some of the things it might do to us. i spent a lot of time investigating the physical possibility of doing this. with today's technology we can't do mind reading in any real sense. it's not difficult to look at the nerve firings, the firings of neurons in the brain and to y we see these 475 neurons firing. that means this brain is thinking about an apple. that kind of thing is possible
to a very limited extent with technology like magnetic resonance imagers where it is possible to tell if a person is thinking yes or no. if they are making a decision to add something or subtract something. it's possible to a limited extent to reconstruct what they are seeing by looking at the nurel activity in their visual cor text which is in the back of the brain. but that's not mind reading in any sense. that's just attempting to correlate activity with something that a user is doing. but in the second book i wrote worldwide mind i tried to push that further and to out line a scenario how we could put our brain on the internet. i said at the out set, it doesn't mean that you can read mind. the only way to know the inner experience of a brain is to be the owner of that brain.
nonetheless, i argue in my book that it is possible in theory to extract information about nurel firing, infer from that what experience the brain is having, send that signal to another brain and repeat the consequence in reverse, make that person's brain's neurons fire so that person has a similar of what the sender felt or saw. so it's just beginning to become possible to talk about doing such a thing. where if i have electronic implant in my brain and i see an apple for my implanted brain o send the word apple over the internet to your implanted device which would make your implanted brain think you are seeing an apple. whealts the point, right?
it's a bit like talking about e-mail in 1993. when i first heard about e-mail i thought that's a faster way to send letters which is true but it profoundly transformed the way we communicate. so in this book i try to be a leading edge discussion and say here are ways to imagine using technology like this. it's hard to do because we're trying to imagine uses of a technology for which no social context exist at the present. imagine teams working together extremely closely where one person saw something important, everyone else on the team would immediately know that as if they were seeing it which would allow teams to coordinate their activity with provision we can't imagine today. so to me when i hear the phrase this is your brain on the internet, i try to imagine
these kind of leading edge technologies and where they could go and what they might allow us to do. thank you. [applause] this is an opportunity in coming this week has been for me a little bit unexpected because i come from more of a medical and developmentle perspective here, certainly not an electronic one as my wife will atest to in the back, there is a rule in the house i'm not allowed to be too close to anything that has buttons on it. from that perspective i probably would not have very much to contribute.
however, as i began to -- the meeting, kind of the cwa is it brings people from various backgrounds and you wouldn't think of the things you get dropped into asia part pant. but as i started thinking about this particular issue i started thinking about for children and addless nts this has a profound affect. that came to me when i was on tour with the children's quire work with and we stayed at a dorm tear that had odd things on the wall. one of the odd elk sen risstiss were 24i7ks like lied lls and all the kids through high school did not recognize a slide rule. that seems odd to perceive
that. they had a big cabinet on the catalog t was a card from a library. my seniors and juniors recognized that but i asked anybody under the age of 1 tell me what that is and all sorts of interesting answers, nobody began to get a clue for what that was. they said is it a letter sorter, is it this and that. and to listen to this conversation going on was very interesting. and when we told them what it was for that you had little cards in there that was each a link to a book or a journal of some sort, they were absolutely amazed. really, you mean you made a card up for each book in the library? there was this thinking that you could tell from people who
had been exposed to something that a lick is almost real time. and it's reflected in the way they perceive other things i hadn't thought about before. finally and i asked everybody under the age of ten what was this big book. and they stared at it and weren't sure. it was a telephone book. the older ones, some of them had seen one because they still get distributed from time to time. but they practically speaking where i am in texas and i presume everywhere else everybody is no practical purpose the way they used to. it was such a something that was so question mark for these kids. and i began to reflect on what it means when i read the topic your brain on the internet i was thinking about those old commercials where they had
scrambled eggs and it's your brain on cocaine. and i was thinking this is bout the evils and tax city of internet and it browlingt home to me as children think and organize information, how they access information, this really is a different way of accessing and organizing information in many ways and when we think of the developing brain and part of -- the critical element of development of course is accessing information, adapting to it, using it to adapt to something else and going in a circle. getting more and more information, organizing it in your brain and synthesizing it to go forward. so when you think in terms of now how one would access information, i was thinking more in terms of middle schoolers beginning to learn
how to do research in a different way from the way i learned. and the biggest trick there would be helping them to discriminate between noise and who defines noise? we would define noise as being information you don't need. and some people would say that's noise and some people say no that's very important. when we have a research project. we go out and garnered a list of references which our teacher had made for us or tried to get those references out of other articles and we'd go and look for information and we'd spend afternoons and morning discriminating and making note card what is noise, what is not elevant to what i'm studying and what is relevant. because i'm a middle schooler i don't know. and at any level we begin to
think in those terms. i'm not trying to present a discussion as a lecture as much as i have throwing things out there that would stimulate a question or two that would make interesting discussion. one of the things i see with children who are disorderers is the way that they again perceive the way people are interacting with them, how they perceive information that they read and the like, and how they learn in general. i think the idea of being able to discriminate what is important and relevant is important socially. so they have no editing when you think of what we're doing, we're editing. so remember those of us who had cameras, we always wished we had enough money to buy on thes of film because we never had enough film so we could take
pictures of the things we saw. we had to do editing up front because i only had three rolls of film and i had to be careful what i took a picture of. ow with infinite digital photography you take five pictures of everything that comes your way. it's easier now to store. but families go look on the internet and look up the photographs that are being shared, there are thousands of them and nobody has edited them. you have to take an extra step to edit resstrospectively if you want anybody to look at them. the idea of thinking ahead of the information you're not only going to procure but how are you going to archive that information. in your brain you're going to do it differently now. and then when you need to access it you'll run into the
problems that i have and that is i am of two minds when it comes to whether i have my old notebook. because i know i can get the information from there so i can write it down. it's easier to get it here so i write it there. i go back and forth and say it's going to take too long so i put it in my 2340e9 book. we're at a stage now of e-mail where we have so much available to us that if it's overwhelming for us in terms of accessing and using the internet, think of what it is for our children and addless nts. i have a hard time teaching them because i can't operate it well. they are teaching me. i had a four-year-old who came in with adhd but he was focused on his new little thing and he was playing things going back and forth from one to the next and i was amazed at this
four-year-old and i wouldn't have known where to start on his little game. from the drop mental per specive i thought if you have a question from that per specive it might make a good discussion. thank you. [applause] >> hi and welcome this afternoon. i want to start this out in any number of different ways. my father always required us our children to be observe nt, be observe nt and after that think for god's sake, think. the problem is you never knew what you were supposed to be observant about. let me give you an illustration of that. here is a man whose mother was a graduate from college, wrote
both latin and greek and she married a sheep herder in woimwoim. only in america and raised a n to get his p.h.d. from yale. the a professor who was grand old man of ace yation. and he took his graduate student slaves and said i want you to be observant dorks exactly as i do. and on the table in front of m was a beak cor full of a yellow foamy fluid. d he said this is a glass of human european -- european. do. t you to do what i he reached forward and stuck his finger in the urine and
licked it off. so the graduate students lined up and did as they were told. at the end he said you all flunked. you were not observant. i put my middle finger in the urine and licked off my forefinker. so not being observant has it payments. that's what i was taught to do. my father said the reason he chose to be a seeologist which because he didn't see much future in the back end of a cow. and the only other profession he had seen out there were geeologist looking for oil. i'm the best coat taylor you've ever saw. i've coat tailed on my father and half a dozen other men who were worthy of coat tailing on
because they were talents in their field. i want to mention this because although i do have kind of a variable background, i've taught for 40 years at the college level in woimwoim and one of the chances that i got was to realize by being bservant that a handful of wyoming chips. here were 286 registered arkologist in 19250eu7 do ordinary careology of wyoming. that was the first time i went out coat tailing on bill malloy. i got out there and there wernt 10 arkologists for a third of the planet. if you had a choice what would you do?
do arkology in woimwoim where it's cold or would you rather be in the south pacific which is warm and breezy and colorful and sensuous. i didn't see much future in a handful of flakes. so that's how i got involved with eastern i'll arkology and it is on the internet. so if you are sbrat for entertainment, you can alwaysta google easter island charlie love and you will have more than enough entertainment. one of the things we have done is i was involved in an excavation on the i'll thrand found the first trees. these are giant palm trees. and only a geeologist would find them. they had plenty of geeologist before but they didn't look. what i'm trying to say is when you get a trench deep enough
the entire island is covered with the roles from a giant palm. i've been on enough documentries they are all con traved. i haven't found one that wasn't con triveed. you have to have mystery until the title railroad it won't sell. i'm san win about documentries of sorts not to mention the ones being taken right now. at any rate what i want to get across that there is a propensity in american culture to seek after mistries it's a bottom line. if you want a mystery, it's not how the statutes mp moved. we've already done that. we did that 26 years ago. we made up a nineton replica and we moved it standing up right like this not lying down. that was the first time one had ever been moved in the united states.
and we moved it with 25 people, a one inch hemp rope and we put it on a bobsled thing and pulled it forward over fence posts. we moved it 150 feet in two minutes rolling time. i thought that was solved. but now they are starting to walk statutes and do things if you've seen national geographic recently, look out for the con triveed part of that. they haven't done the arkology of the roadways. 27 of my students and i went and excavated roadway looking for clues how they moved statutes along the roadways. they haven't done that yet. haven't done the background arkology on it which is interesting. the point i'm trying to say is when you see the new documentries on easter island they will cover the island with trees. the mystery is how and when did
the palm get there in the first place? it produces a coconut little bit smaller than a golf ball and the end result is they take two or three years to germinate and another 800 to 1200 years to grow into a mature palm. you can't recycle them. when you cut one down, it's down forever. easter island is as barren as the desert of wyoming and that's why it was a mystery as to how they moved these closs cal statutes across the island some of them 14 miles, some of the statutes weigh 86 tons. whenever i give a talk to engineers i challenge them. i want to you take a statute, you can make it five tons if you want and i want you to move it vertically. why? the bases are always perfect.
to be an arkologist you have to be observant and you have to ask questions. you have to think is the point. and don't we all have to do that had? everywhere in academics ushed be being observant and think. that's the sole contribution i've made of students let alone being a field man. get them out there. when you see it in the field hen you have a much better perspective overall what you're dealing with when it comes to research. i yield the rest of my time. [applause] >> thank you to our panelists for all of that. that's excellent. we're going to open it up to questions and answers part of the series in a moment. if you want to ask a question you can line up by the microphone in the middle of the room there. in the meantime i'm going to
ask a question to the panelist one or all of you can answer to kick off the questions and answers portion of our presentation to kind of borrow a phrase from the late great roger ebert a beloved member of the cwa family. we get in our own world as we move along in our careers. being that i've been in the media business, the internet and rise and popularity of the internet has been a huge factor. and one of the more interesting debates that we have are including long form journalistic stories in the boulder weekly. and our people with their august meanted thought patterns that are in general more less attention to detail just kind of more r more a.d.d. in general with the internet form,
is there room for long stories about important topics anymore and with the younger generation how do we get them to pay attention to if the keynote speech this morning was written down a 45 minute speech excellent, if that was in written form are we going to get people to pay attention to this? i want to get some panelist's take on long form journalism and it's importance and how you might see it being affected by he internet. >> how the internet is transforming not only journals but the world of books as well. this question is relevant to both of us professionally. you work in media, i write books and the question is what is the internet doing to this?
i don't know if i'm the best example because icons standly read long form journalism. i read more than i ever did because i have access to things on my kindle and my ipad so i read more than i did when there were only paper books around. i don't know if i'm typical or not in that. i think one of the biggest issues, first media landscape where there are so many things competing for attention that it's hard for one thing to command national attention. when i was growing up and this is going to age me and a lot of people in this room. when i was growing up there were 13 channels on t.v. the news arrived ob the doorstep in the morning. compared to today, media was so much thinner and so much more limited. so i'm not one of the people
who is scared the internet is damaging the long form. personally i think it's alive and well. i find more books online with my kindle than i did buying paper box because it's so easy and fast and i read them. i don't see it as hurting long form journalism. the question is that the medium is changing. again i see a bright future here because it is so easy to distribute books that i think that can only be possive in the long run for the book industry. but fwaws medium has changed that means the form of thought has changed. in writing my third back i know that first chapter really has to grab on audience because that is the sample chamenter that will be downloaded on a
kindle and will make people decide if they want to read the book. so i have to change the way i write the book and think about the writing process. >> i think the idea of children and addless nts again and when you think of it we are the children and addless nts ourselves have always had a problem with looking at a long full story in terms of media. but i recall as i was getting older taking a newspaper and wishing there was more information about something i was interested enough to read. remember how you would do it. you would start the first six paragraphs and it would say continued on 4 a and you'd go on and read more and then it would fizzle and you'd say gosh i wish it was longer and you
were happy when it continued some more on 5a or something like that. when it was in that format it was more enticing than going on to an internet format where you in the typical all of us are relatively adhd we dart around to something that is interesting and absorb it quickly and move on to the next thing. and i think many times i see this happening with children is that their perception of a given topic tend to be more superficial and i'm not sure i can explain that. and i think you bring up a really good point to encourage and push our children and addless nts to look at things critically and to look at it another another level i believe
the internet provides that opportunity. but we as adults in helping them to develop have to develop that critical thinking in them and not have them go from top toik topic as you see when you do a google search, you'll have 13 on a page and dip on one or the next or whatever. i think the internet afford us the requirement to push our developing young adults to do more critical thinking and look more in depth and to value the value of somebody else who has done that for them and written long article. >> i certainly agree with fwoth comments you folks have raised. and after teaching for 40 years i have developed some thoughts of my own about that. because over the last two decades i've watched the ability of my students lower down a little bit. things are not as intense.
they are shovelled too much stuff and don't know what you have gone from 40 years ago when you had one parent who was employed and the other really taking care of the youngsters and doing other things around house. we have now gone to to job workers, and the kids are left by themselves. the end result is they find other ways to entertain themselves. certainly by television, which is abysmal as far as i am concerned, in terms of content. you do have some programs that are okay, but they are scientifically abysmal, too. they don't give enough detail on these things in it cannot find them. you have to have patience.
your critical thinking skills have to be alive, and that is something we are not teaching children. look at congress. that is a grown-up version, and the end result is a rhetorical question, how many of you think the country is certainly on a downward spiral because we don't have a congress that does anything? they do have patience, right up until they get their pay check. so i am kind of discouraged. i think it comes from child raising. i think have the responsibility is on the parents to make sure their children do it. not only that, do what? one of the things i've found over and over again, number one, i find the form kids to be the most responsible.
that is because if you are on a farm or a ranch in your mom or dad says you have to go feed the cattle, you better go do that. if you don't, it is not going to get done, and you jeopardize the welfare of the family when you do that. ranch kids are the most responsible. you give them an assignment and it comes back the next day. but city kids find all kinds of ways of putting it off. that is because you have so many friends and peers. the ranch kids do not have as many. there are fewer distractions. another difference is in the actual ability. those parents who have taught the kids to read out loud in the evening a story, read back to them. not only are they more articulate, they are less has a 10th over many of the words, and i eat out. doesn't get done? that is the problem. and words,
i eat out. doesn't get done? that is the problem. . think we have a lot of ills it is a matr of being responsible and teaching responsibility. how do you do that? [applause] >> we will now open it up to questions from the audience. keep in mind this is just for questions, not statements, so go ahead. >> thank you, gentlemen. thank you for speaking to us. my question s, now that devices like smart phones have put the infinite storehouse of human knowledge in each of our pockets, the ability to immediately reference any skeptics that we don't know with,or are unfamiliar
has not undmined the necessity for learning in remembering information and underlining the value of critical thinking. >> is the undermining our ability to come up with things on our own? >> that is that a fascinating question that you ask. this kind of question has been asked for 2500 years. it is not a new question. 2400 years ago, plato wrote a dialogue where he complained -- theseexistence of new youngsters are going to
someone and gaining knowledge, they would rather read a scroll by themselves and learn that way and not talk to people. is as old as technology itself in many ways. is it changing our ability to remember things? i would say yes. but again, it has always been constant, media driven change. in pre literature society said did not have a ridg, -- that did not have writing, it was a tremendously valued skill. you have to minimize risk of all your ancestors going back that far.
it is a sign of spiritual dedication. we live in a time with instant access to facts. show "jeopardy" is a really good example of that. it is the ability to memorize useless facts and spit them out ofommand. ibm has developed a program ix.ch is as od as in what it does is free us to develonew kinds of skil. this is what technology has always done. it has always change the kind of landscape in which we live. ,ou always have old-timers while the youngsters develop new
skills that are as powerful and more profound than anything that has gone before. it has changed the way we think about information, retrieve and redistribute information. i think that is good in many ways. grow up notids remembering what the capital of florida is. i think more valuable skill is to teach kids how to look that up. we can now spend less time teaching kids how to minimize and more time to think about the available information, including its reliability. just the fact that is on the wikipedia does not mean it is right. to> i would really like weigh in for just a moment on
this really profound question. if i know where the information is, why do i need to remember it or memorize it? i remember coming through medical school and we had these big books. i remember looking kind of bewildered and people said you don't really have to remember all that stuff and memorize it, you st need to know where it is so you can look it up. thought, number one, i have a 15-minute appointment with a patient, so that is not going to work. something you really have in your brain for several reasons. one is that you are constantly synthesizing other information with what you have already got. if all the information is not here, so that when you add additional information -- my dad used to say i will give you the
skeleton upon which to add all the information you are going to get from now on. and that skeleton needs to be added to. one thing i've noticed in children of adolescence and other adults is that a lot of times we have a lot of disdain for things we don't need immediately. why shouli have to read heart of darkness or play-doh? i am going to go out and be an information management technician. ,hen i talk to kids about that what we really need this music? bodyworks of a to select text that we are seeing? select textneed to that we are seeing? and the children come and say am going to be this or that, i don't need all this other
inrmation, it means that they lose out on all that thinking that will have to be done for the world around them. ifhey don't know who plato was or all these other things, or have not memorize the basic that is how silly this sounds. you cannot reallget into algebra and do that unt all this operational infmation is at your fingertips. that is why it is so important that the pre operational information, which is facts, figures, are at your fingertips, so that when you do the more formal thinking, you now hav that information right in the unit in this casserole that keeps getting more complex and more contexture early integrated with what you are going to be doing all your life, which will be continuous learning and sharing the benefits of that
with those around you that we serve. [applause] >> i find my students like these martin bonds for really one reason of good use. that is, -- by students like these smart bonds. smartphones. where and when was magellan killed? they find outt was 1520. wasyou tell me why he hacked to pieces? nocannot find it, there is analysis. you can find a point of information, but you cannot find an analysis. isn't there. [applause] we have anymore questions?
go ahead. speak a little closer to the mike. your cochlear implant, that is a most recent step in advancement of more closely integrating technolog with our other capabilities. that is only going to become more extensive in the future, which will have implications for learning or w we access information for adoleent development. when new york neural system was more plastic, what kind of indications might that have for how you think and process infoation. >> the question was, in relation to michael's implant and his one example of how new, modern technology is evolving us
and the world, so just your thoughts on those implications. >> i have a lot of thoughts on that. i am just trying to figure out which stocks to pick up on first because it is a very general question. is one of the key points that i try to make when i talk with people about new neural technologies and what they make possible. i think that when a lot of people imagined a bionic future, that basically imagine what we do today, only bigger, bette and faster. dark, hearee in the the old resound, run in the dark. this is superhero fantasy thinking.
the thing that new technologies do is they don't just let us do what we do now, on better. there are entirely new things that could not have been imagined before. this is the kind of thinking that i try to write about in my books and articles. i try to rig -- imagine different kinds of futures. a very specific way, gathering information from one person is happy, anxious, fearful, sad. that is the kind of information this.e get for encrypting over the internet, that kind of information is fairly sparse.
e-mail is prone to contusion. they have access to each other's emotional status. be verythat could powerful collectively or in groups. we never know how group of people stealing at a given moment. a patient during the arab spring on twitter. tweets.s a flood of fear, shock, anger, hope. that was the kind of collective communation that i had never seen before. ae collected feelings of large group of ordinary people.
brain surgery is no trivial thing. it would allow a form of collective communication. >> we can take the next question. go ahead. >> my roommate works at a montessori preschool. they don't do any sort of video recordings or even listen to recorded music because they think children need space to come up with things on their own.
my little cousins are light 4, and they have their little ipad. i don't really have a good way of raising that question, but what do you think? >> it is about cognitive development of young people with access to the toys that we have now. question,ciate that because i think that the question was asked in such a way that a decision would be implied that either this is a good or bad thing. i suppose everybody has had problems with new things that have come along and said now what is going to happen to our children. that with just the art of writing. many times people have that
discussion on that level. that is we should not have any of these things, or we should. and what will that do? whats so much to do with we do with that and what the parents and the teachers do with that. it is possible, like with anytng else, if you don't have limits in your home. the toxicity that is potentially ising from the internet mindboggling. 83-0 orficial nature of 4-year-old learning, it depends on what they give that kid. what kind of material, just like it was with paper and pencil and everything else. for us to have that reading aloud and being read to and all those things.
can decided, if we at the adult level, how can i use this technology to push us forward. that would be great. like anything else, once we put our eggs into one basket and say it is electronics that will make it happen or the lack of electronics that will keep us in good shape, then we are getting away from the real question. we need to pay attention to these children and constantly synthesizing and how best to do that. that speaks to a lot of parents who are now very unwilling or even fearful of putting limits on any of these things. and i say, well, what does your child do if he's not doing his homework? he spends about phi hours on the internet or with his friends,
he's got 200 friends. i don't think he's ever met any of them or talked to them really but he's got 200 of them, whatever they are. you would think this that would be a no brainer in terms of your response to that part. and yet, many of u the children have decided the limits. i'm not finished yet. i've only been on for an hour. they get bent out of shape because they're literally addicted to that, or they're addicted to the television. and i think that we can teach our kids from the beginning, here are the elements. and it can start as a 3-year-old. montessori school, i'm surprised, hopefully that's not a montessori policy, all over mont sore re, i would think he mont sore rewould be the first ones to say, how do we teach the kids to utilize that and use that in an efficnt and effective way and then how do we teach them to use other things
as well? so i think one of the big things we're going to be ending up teaching this generation is how to balance our lives. and it's really a metaphor. balancing our lives with electronics, versus the weas of learning we had before, only a metaphor for balancing our lives in so many other things as we grow up. i'd like to offer some thoughts on that question. i was sanguine in my last two answs about technology, it's new things, that's great, but there are also reasons for concern, as have always been the case with new technology. when presenting came out, the catholic church was concerned, and they were right to be, because the protestant reformation detieror ated the power of the catholic church. there's always things to be worried out. but today the things to be
worried about, i think, is how people form intimate bonds. i think smart phones are incredibly addictive. we are addicted. my wife is always trying to pry me away from my iphone because it is so end lessless fascinating -- endlessly fascinating. there's always another story to read, another emale, at "new york times" thing. it's compelling. so you just stare at your iphone. there are a number of bobbings that have accumulated some ta that this is changing the way we form intimate relationships. nge of sherry turkle's book, "alone together," she talks about psychological profiles of children over the last 20 years, examining the way they form friendship, the number of friendships, the way they interact and she sees a declean in the quality of relationships, which is well worth worrying about. so this is something that ialk
about in my own writing. imagine this high tech future, all these really -- all this realy cool stuff, the problem was that that would be even more addictive than the iphones we have now. it raises the possibility of a future where people live in synthesized worlds and sit alone in their own rooms having virtual relionships and nothing else. i think we really do have to be concerned about a future like that. i was thinking about this when i was writing the book. one thing i stated was, i took meditation workshops. weekend workshops where you go away to a resort in northern california which is where this was happening, and do exercises with other participants like, sit down, face to face and lock someone in the eyes for 60 seconds. that's actually really hard to do.
it's valuable to me to have that coined of practice in encountering the other. i was trying to juxtapose a high tech, low touch future, with a high touch, low tech future and trying to say, it is possible to forge a world where wen have both technology and the intimatity -- intimacy of human communication together. it is not impossible to imagine a future in which these things an happen. [applause] >> i would add only a rhetorical question to that, and that is, can an iphone or -- excuse me. or a smart phone build word pictures in the mind of a listener? or are the pictures already shown you so you are forced to see the images that are built rather than to manufacture them
yourself. which would you prefer? one is fast, the other takes a little skill. >> thank you. next question, please. >> thank you. do you think -- because i've heard reports that a lot of young people, this is, there's more suicides. do you think too much technology might be -- hoith be one of the problems to that? >> the we was, you know, being -- there's a supposed rise in suicides in young people, you know, do you think technology lays a role in this trend? >> i was just saying that
there's a kind of clinical or practical aspect, answer to that question, or discussion of that question. but i'm very interested in knowing about mike's philosophical take on it in general as well. when you hear of a high profile suicide, they been in the context of someone being cyberbullied, i think is the term now, where the essential herbal -- social interactions within something like facebook and the like, are so out there and open that what used to occur , back biting in the halls of our schools among childreor among high schoolers or middle schoolers, that remane there is, so that it was more of a rumor thing, very painful and destructive even then, but now it takes on the role in terms of the facebook type of socialization where any time nyone feels something, it just
splatters, not to another person about the ore person but -- or not to that person directly. but it splatterso the hundred people that happen to be stopping in on somebody's facebook, plus, i dwess, the hundreds of friends of those friends. and the whole idea is, is that people -- one of my professors used to tell me when we were coming out with power point slides and i was able to make slides and put together a presentation very quickly and he said, you know, the bad thing about power point ithat you take your ideas and you can have a very interesting and very beautiful looking presentation, but it alls u to be very premature and perhaps not even have thought about what you're going to say because you can co-it so quickly and ease he. we used to have to craft the slides and have to do our notes and you know -- a lot of
research. he said, i'd rather you not add to the noise out there. do this again and think about it. and i was -- i was very insulted and hurt. but i think the lesson i learned was that he could tell that i had not really thought this through. even if it was an error or whatever, at least he wanted something that reflected some careful thinking about what i was going to say. on the internet, the problem with that is that there's so much -- i made a note here, of premature -- how many of us have sent an email in response to a message immediately and then we did it so quickly, that it literally did not necessarily reflect and perhaps done damage because we can't take it back. and the same thing even a hundred fold son social media in
terms of the things that people say. en you think of the number of -- or put on photos. think of the implications of putting a photo out in public, i mean, we have parents that cringe at somebody else having a photo of their kid if they don't know who it is, think of millions of people having access to that and not being able to take that back. if anything, i think that from a clinical perspective in terms of increase in suicides, i wondered, how can you be cyberbullied? it's one thing to be on a plground and haveomebody bigger than you are beat you up, i understand that, but can't quite understand how you'd be cyberbullied because you don't have to listen to that, you just turn it off. how can somebody cyberbully you to the poi of suicide. the way that happens, after i thought about it, is the humiliation and anything -- even if it's not true. there's no way to take that back.
and now enstead of being humiliated to yourself and to your fantasy about who else knows about this or who else has heard this, you don't have to fantsoys, you know thousands of people out there have seen this. and that is one of the tox exthings i see in the social media the way it's organized now and the tox exthing about being able to speak your piece on mail and on that media, immediately before you've even had a chance to think about it and the destruction possibilities are very real. >> thank you. >> i have a followup on that same point, google is coming out with -- fwoogle is coming out with their new google tpwhrass, life with subtitelts as they imagine it, with your camera and recorder on and we already have the memory capability now that not only a goog -- not only google takes a picture but
google records my every weaking moment and everything i see. i'm wondering if we as people are going to put up with any time we step out on the street, every acti, every word we say in peculiar, m be recorded for all time, may not ever get looked up but now every gaffe, every stupid thing you to, is now recorded and i'm wondering what your thoughs are, if we're going to be able to put up with that? >> thanks. the question related to the new fwoogle tpwhrasses product, and what your thoughts are on the ramifications of a product of that nature. >> well, i'm fascinated by google tpwhrasses. i can't wait to get a crack at it myself. i think it's a thought experiment, you can't imagine the uses to which it will be put. the practical experience i have for this is that, i interviewed a guy who has been using a
version of google glasses fo many, many years. he built himself a rig where he's got these glasses that he can see a projected computer screen hanging in front of him in space. he has a keyboard in his pocket he can take notes on any conversation and then look up those notes when he meets that person 10 or 15 yearsater and pick up the conversation where it left off. so i think that kind of technology which gives you that incredibly instant access, you remember, ave to it's going to have positive effects and negative ones. i think one of the potentially negative ones is tha kind of distraction. so this guy is kind of hyper. when i was talking to him, i just knew that he was reading stuff off the screen that only he could see while talking to me at the same time. so he had kind of a permanent
case of adhd hat's entirely technologically mediated. a deaf ther hand, person, that could be useful, i would love to see live, accurate captions of what people say in noisy rooms. i think the way things like tra gone naturally speaking, the way that works, it's not impossible. when somebody asks a question that i can't entirely peck up, i'd love to see something like that. i think it would be great in the way individuals and groups can collaborate to give're people access to your information, to create new kinds of teamwork that today would seem magical to us. it's really, as with any technology, there's dangers and benefits at the same time. google tpwhrasses, i'm pited about the benefits and really interested to see what the dangers are.
>> i wanted to touch on one point that isn't specifically along the google tpwhrasses but along the idea of children, adolescents, who are not aware of the implications of what they put on, in terms of photos or maybe keeping track of min-to-minute what they're toning with their -- minute-to-minute what they're doing with their lives and now i suppose everybody has had this experience, when you go in for an interview for a job, you've been googled. i had an attorney we were going to do business with at home and i set it up and so i was talking to the lady at the desk, she was an assistant, and she said, oh, hello, i said i'm going to send the information you need. she said, i've already got it. i said, what have you got? well, i've got your address and everything and where you're working, that kind of stuff. i looked at some of the things
you've written, very interesting. i began getting kind of chilled. i was just trying to think, what else have i put on the internet? and when i think of some of the kids who very playfully because they could do this playfully before, put up crazy pictures of themselveses or share that with a friend, what happens when the 12-year-old texts something or puts an increept -- but puts a picture they western they had never done and the person applies for a certain school or pplies for any kind of job and revels in the indiscretions they've had at a certain point. that's the toxic, scary things i think of in terms of recording every ent and having it for he peculiar. >> on the subject of scary and hopeful, is there any use of the
technology being used to partially rewire, partially help the children you find that have problems? it seems like some of the things that -- some of the problems children have are airing thin in their brain almost. is there anything being done that's hopeful? >> the extent to which neurorow transmitters and pathways are getting -- become more crystallized in ters of the assessment tools that are used, in terms of the use of glucose in the brain, lights up certain pathways which is just incredible. it hopes -- opens up whole new ways of thinking about brain disoers. and certainly the idea, i don't know if it was you that mentioned brain mapping earlier, but somebody did, but that whole idea lends itself very much to the use of technology in ter of the way we're changing the effect on the receptors in certain pathways, wdo that
with medications right now and a lot of times it's extremely helpful, almost scy how helpful it is to take someone in the midst of a bipolar man exrage, an episode, and it's not a matter of calming them down, putting them to sleep or drugging them out, it's a matter of the mother the next day says i've got my child back. t just totally, it's gone. and so the extent to which the represent re-septemberors are affected by neurotransmitter replacements is a very re phenomenon. the idea that technologically we may be do a parallel to what's been described by mike, in materials of ideal odgic and other devices, the vista is wide open but wru to the talking to an expert, i'm talking philosophically, as i say, anything that has buttons on it, i'm not supposed to be close to. >> context, microphones, is my
mike snon let's talk about context. there was a study that asked how many neurons is it possible to track, between 1960 and now. he went through literature and found out the number of neurons that can be individually watched in the brain is doubling about every seven years. that's an obvious analogy to moore's law. in stevenson's law, the number of trackable neurons doubles about every seven year. it's hard to track now -- it's possible to track between 60 and 200 neurons simultaneously in the brean.
but even -- but every seven years if that number doubles, by 2040, 2050, it may be eable to track thousands or tens of thousands of neurons in the brain and have a much richer understanding of what gos on in the brain in devastating disorders like parenson's epilepsy and others and be able to tre them. >> we've reached the time limit. give a warm welcome to our >> the house begins legislative work coming up in about 20 minutes. on the agenda including one establishing a national system for tracking prescription drugs. live coverage when members gavel in. spoke earlyenator this morning. he served in the senate from 1991.
he was a remaining world war roman to -- world war ii veteran. he was 89. >> a report is scheduled to be released tomorrow by the inspector or journal. it shows that the irs spent nearly $50 million on conferences over a three-year time frame. jay carney responded to the news today at the white house briefing. has the president seen the report that was supposed to come out? he talked about irs employees using the presidential suite. does the president think that is appropriate? he does not think that conduct is appropriate. i will point you to statements
by the acting commissioner who says "this conference is an unfortunate vestige from a prior era. taxpayers should take comfort that a conference like this would not take place today. oh new spending restrictions have been put in place and travel and training expenses have dropped more than 80% since 2010. similar large-scale meetings and thousand 11, into 2 thousand 12, or 2013. the president made creating an efficient government a priority. he believes that everyone in this administration must take their role as stewards of the taxpayer dollar very seriously. may 2012 then outlined a series of actions for reining in spending and ofreasing that oversight travel activity. the spending on travel which includes conference activity was reduced by more than $1 billion in fiscal year 2012.
agencies have lower the spending compared to fy 2010 levels. ehe department of agricultural reduce costs. this is required to use the these areilable ones. examples that demonstrate with the president has to wringing out waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars. it is important to note that danny is not a acting irsissioner over at the and oversaw the process at the omb when he was at the omb. >> we will hear more about the treasury department specter general reports on funding coming up on thursday.
they hold a hearing looking into the findings. that will be live in the morning at 930 eastern over on c-span3. president obama hosted a conference focusing on mental health issues. he called on those suffering with mental health issues to come out of the shadows. this is 15 minutes. >> i feel deeply honored to be with you here today to openly discuss the very important topic of mental health in america today. mental health disorders affect tens of millions of people each year.
due to unnecessary stigma, only a small handful will receive treatment and suffer in silence. those who do receive treatment will leave them feeling ashamed, uilt and secrecy. and is in the challenges all too well connect with this topic deeply because i have been there. august5 on august 15 of 1999 when suicide hit my brother's life at the young age of 20. in the acre of grass next to our childhood home where we used to laugh and play together. ofht years later at the age 23 i was diagnosed with major depressive disorder. i suffered for years of silence. add anegan to heal, overwhelming urge to share my story with others.
this organization empower students to openly discuss mental health issues on campuses nationwide. the tent and millions of people who are suffering, there are friends, they are our friends and colleagues. it is time we put an end to the suffering and the silence. now it is my pleasure and honor to introduce to you the president of the united states, president barack obama. thank you so much. welcome to the white house. and thank you, janelle, for that introduction and sharing your
story, and making such a difference through your organization. we're really proud to have you here. i want to thank secretary sebelius, secretary arne duncan, secretary ric shinseki for their leadership and helping to organize this event. and i also want to acknowledge some outstanding members of congress who are here and who care deeply about this issue. and finally, i want to thank all of you for participating in this national conference on mental health. we wanted to bring together folks who've suffered from mental illness and families who've supported them. we wanted to bring together advocates and educators, faith leaders, veterans, local officials. all of you have shown an extraordinary commitment to what is a critical goal, and that is to make sure that people aren't suffering in silence and that we have the capacity to pull together all the resources and
support and love that's out there to go after an extraordinary challenge in our society. the main goal of this conference is not to start a conversation so many of you have spent decades waging long and lonely battles to be heard. instead, it's about elevating that conversation to a national level and bringing mental illness out of the shadows. we want to let people living with mental health challenges know that they are not alone, and we've got to be making sure that we're committed to support those fellow americans, because struggling with a mental illness or caring for someone who does can be isolating. and i think everybody here who's experienced the issue in one way or another understands that. it begins to feel as if not only are you alone, but that you
shouldn't burden others with the challenge and the darkness, day in, day out -- what some call a cloud that you just can't seem to escape -- begins to close in. the truth is, in any given year, one in five adults experience a mental illness -- one in five. forty-five million americans suffer from things like depression or anxiety, schizophrenia or ptsd. young people are affected at a
similar rate. so we all know somebody -- a family member, a friend, a neighbor -- who has struggled or will struggle with mental health issues at some point in their lives. michelle and i have both known people who have battled severe depression over the years, people we love. and oftentimes, those who seek treatment go on to lead happy, healthy, productive lives. so we know that recovery is possible, we know help is available, and yet, as a society, we often think about mental health differently than other forms of health. you see commercials on tv about a whole array of physical health issues, some of them very personal. and yet, we whisper about mental health issues and avoid asking too many questions. the brain is a body part too; we just know less about it. and there should be no shame in discussing or seeking help for treatable illnesses that affect too many people that we love. we've got to get rid of that embarrassment; we've got to get rid of that stigma.
too many americans who struggle with mental health illnesses are still suffering in silence rather than seeking help, and we need to see it that men and women who would never hesitate to go see a doctor if they had a broken arm or came down with the flu, that they have that same attitude when it comes to their mental health. we see it in veterans who come home from the battlefield with the invisible wounds of war, but who feel somehow that seeking treatment is a sign of weakness when in fact it's a sign of strength. we see it in parents who would do anything for their kids, but who often fight their mental health battle alone - afraid that reaching out would somehow reflect badly on them. we see it in the tragedies that we have the power to prevent. and i want to be absolutely
clear: the overwhelming majority of people who suffer from mental illnesses are not violent. they will never pose a threat to themselves or others. and there are a whole lot of violent people with no diagnosable mental health issues. but we also know that most suicides each year involve someone with a mental health or substance abuse disorder. and in some cases, when a condition goes untreated, it can lead to tragedy on a larger scale. we can do something about stories like these. in many cases, treatment is available and effective. we can help people who suffer from a mental illness continue to be great colleagues, great friends, the people we love. we can take out some pain and give them a new sense of hope. but it requires all of us to
act. and there are a few ways we can do our part. first, we've got to do a better job recognizing mental health issues in our children, and making it easier for americans of all ages to seek help. today, less than 40 percent of people with mental illness receive treatment -- less than 40 percent. even though three-quarters of mental illnesses emerge by the end of -- by the age of 24, only about half of children with mental health problems receive treatment. now think about it: we wouldn't accept it if only 40 percent of americans with cancers got treatment. we wouldn't accept it if only half of young people with diabetes got help. why should we accept it when it comes to mental health? it doesn't make any sense. the good news is, there are plenty of groups that are stepping up to change that. so a former colleague of mine, gordon smith, a former republican senator, lost his son to suicide 10 years ago. and i remember him speaking so eloquently about it. gordon is now the head of the national association of broadcasters, and today, the national association of broadcasters is announcing a new
campaign designed to change attitudes about mental illness through tv ads and social media, because gordon doesn't want other parents to go through the agonizing loss that he's endured. so we thank you, gordon, for that great work.[applause] you've got secondary school principals who are holding assemblies on mental health. you've got organizations like the ymca who are volunteering to train staff to recognize the signs of depression and other mental illnesses in our young people. you got leaders from different faith communities who are getting their congregations involved. and dozens of other organizations have today made similar commitments, so we've very thankful to all of you. there are other people who are leading by example.
my great friend, patrick kennedy, when he was running for reelection back in 2006, he could have avoided talking about his struggles with bipolar disorder and addiction. let's face it, he's a kennedy. he was -- his seat was pretty safe. everybody loved him. and yet, patrick used his experience as a way to connect and to lift up these issues, not hide from them. and one day, a woman came up to patrick at a senior center and told him she was afraid to tell her friends she was taking medication for a mental illness because she was worried they might treat her differently. she told patrick, you're the only one who knows aside from my son.
and so patrick started realizing how much power there could be for people to speak out on these issues. and patrick carried these stories back with him to washington, where he worked with a bipartisan group of lawmakers, including his dad, to make sure the mental health services you get through your insurance plan at work are covered the same way that physical health services are -- a huge victory. so because of patrick's efforts and the colleagues who worked with him, it's easier for millions of people to join him on the road to recovery, which brings me to a second point. it's not enough to help more americans seek treatment - we also have to make sure that the treatment is there when they're ready to seek it. for years now, our mental health system has struggled to serve
people who depend on it. that's why, under the affordable care act, we're expanding mental health and substance abuse benefits for more than 60 million americans. new health insurance plans are required to cover things like depression screenings for adults and behavioral assessments for children. and beginning next year, insurance companies will no longer be able to deny anybody coverage because of a pre- existing mental health condition. we're also investing in science and basic research to make it easier to diagnose and treat disease early. and earlier this year, i announced an ambitious initiative to develop tools for mapping the human brain, which
could help scientists and researchers unlock the answers to conditions that affect mental health. we're also doing more to support our troops and our veterans who are suffering from things like traumatic brain disorder -- or traumatic brain injury or ptsd, post-traumatic stress disorder. today, we lose 22 veterans a day to suicide -- 22. we've got to do a better job than that of preventing these all too often silent tragedies. that's why we've poured an enormous amount of resources into high-quality care and better treatment for our troops. and today, under ric shinseki's leadership, the va is going even further. they're partnering with 24 communities in nine states to help reduce wait times for veterans seeking mental health care. and they're -- they've met their goal of hiring 1,600 new mental health providers, which means
this summer they're going to hold more than 150 summits like this one in communities all across the country so that every one of our service members and veterans understand -- just like you take care of yourself and each other on the battlefield, you've got to do the same thing off the battlefield. that's part of being strong. for many people who suffer from a mental illness, recovery can be challenging. but what helps more than anything, what gives so many of our friends and loved ones strength, is the knowledge that you are not alone. you're not alone. you're surrounded by people who care about you and who will support you on the journey to get well. we're here for you. and that's what this conference is about. that's why these issues are so important. so if there's anybody out there who's listening, if you're struggling, seek help.
>> thank you, mr. president. >> you're welcome. if you know somebody who is struggling, help them reach out. remember the family members who shoulder their own burdens and need our support as well. and more than anything, let people who are suffering in silence know that recovery is possible. they're not alone. there's hope. there's possibility. and that's what all of you represent with the extraordinary advocacy and work that you've already done. so thank you all for being here. let's do everything we can to help our fellow americans heal and thrive. and now i'd like to turn it over to secretary sebelius who will be leading our opening panel. thank you very much, everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute]
[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] remarkshe president's on c-span.org. in a moment, we will go live to the floor of the house, where members are taking up five bills, including one establishing a national system for tracking pharmaceuticals. they will vote at 6:30. house members are also working on bills to fund the government. two of those have been approved by the house appropriations committee, and they are scheduled to be taken up by the full chamber, and later this
week. senators are expected to resume work on the farm bill. policies over five years for farm subsidies and crop insurance. also, harry reid has said he has towed to begin a bipartisan immigration bill next week, and on the floor of the senate, senator patrick leahy is discussing traditional nominations. there have also contributes to a late senator who passed away earlier today at the age of 89. he received a flag at the capitol at half staff in tribute to the senator, again, passing away at the age of 89. you can see live coverage of the senate on our companion network, c-span2.
any record vote on the postponed question will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? mr. latta: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1919, the safeguarding america's pharmaceutical act of 2013, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 65, h.r. 1919, a bill to amend the federal food, drug, and cosmetic act with respect to the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain, and or other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from ohio, mr. latta, and the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that
all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous matters on the record in the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. latta: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. latta:, thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of h.r. 1919, the safeguarding america's pharmaceuticals act of 2013. this legislation is the culmination of many years of hard work by legislators and stakeholders alike, and i'm honored to have introduced this legislation along with congressman matheson. this is an issue that was printed in part to my attention when i was first elected to congress 5 1/2 years ago by concerned stakeholders in ohio and pleased that the legislation is being considered on the house floor today. securing our nation's pharmaceuticals supply chain is an extremely important issue, and passage of this bill will be an important step forward to protecting america's families. the pharmaceuticals supply chain touches every part of the health care system and is
imperative we get the structure and segments of it connected in a safe, secure and effective manner that provides the best protection for patients. h.r. 1919 will make improvements to the current supply chain while providing a clear path for industry stakeholders towards enhanced supply chain protections. pharmaceutical distribution occurs nationwide, and it is estimated within the united states there are more than four billion prescriptions filled each year. by replacing the current patchwork of multiple state laws by the uniformed national standard we create certainty for all members of the pharmaceutical supply chain. when one takes a prescribed medication, he or she should have full confidence that the medication is as prescribed and will do no harm. it is of utmost importance that we implement commonsense solutions to safeguard our distribution supply chains against counterfeit and
adulterated drugs as well as improved security and integrity throughout the supply chain. this legislation is an important step forward to ensure greater patient safety for all americans. i was pleased to receive a support letter for h.r. 1919 from the united states deputy sheriff's association, which also recognizes the national system will help curb criminal activity and criminal counterfeiting. in the letter it discusses how a national system could deter opportunityists ability to focus their efforts on state laws or those states that have no laws or regulations, therefore, allowing for criminal infiltration. specifically, the letter states that tracking packages destined for patients is a good defense against criminals who would profit from contaminating or stealing those medicines and put patients at risk. to protect patient safety, this bill would replace multiple state laws and create a uniformed national standard for
securing the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain, therefore, preventing duplicative state and federal requirements. it would increase security at the supply chain by establishing tracing requirements for manufacturers, wholesale distributers, pharmacies based on changes and ownership. the bill also establishes a collaborative, transparent process between the food and drug administration and stakeholders to study ways to even further secure the pharmaceutical supply chain. finally, the bill puts in place a requirement for the f.d.a. to issue proposed regulations on unit level traceability. the timeline put forth in this bill for all those steps is reasonable and will allow enough time for stakeholders to comply with these new national standards and ensure through feedback from these stakeholders that phase two is done efficiently and correctly. as i stated earlier, this issue has been worked for many years and setting up a track and
trace process is complicated. chairman upton, i appreciate your leadership in moving the safeguarding america's pharmaceuticals act to the floor today. we've made a number of changes in the energy and commerce committee to improve the language of the bill as we work to create a safer pharmaceutical distribution system to protect against the threat of counterfeit drugs. this is a highly complex area, and i understand additional changes were made in the version we are considering today. further changes are necessary to ensure that the wholesale distribution system meets the highest standards of consumer protection. in order to achieve these high standards i'm committed to ensuring that language is included in a congress report brought back to the house to tablish the -- those who purchase those from the manufacturers. i know you want a stronger supply system and i look forward to working with you as we go forward. there has been much work to be
done over the many years and i appreciate the input from stakeholders, interested parties. i again want to specifically thank chairman upton and subcommittee chairman pitts for all of their assistance in advancing this legislation. i urge full support of my colleagues for h.r. 1919 -- from my colleagues for h.r. 1919 and i thank you and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio reserves. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the president of the united states. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: mr. secretary. the secretary: i am directed by the president of the united states to deliver to the house of representatives a message in writing. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. in discussing this legislation. i rise -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. waxman: i have a number of concerns about h.r. 1919, the safeguarding america's pharmaceuticals act of 2013. it's a bill designed to improve
the integrity of our drug supply chain. unfortunately, this bill falls far short of achieving that goal. throughout last year, members on a bipartisan, bicameral basis, engaged in extensive discussions on legislation to protect our drug supply. during those months of discussion last year and at the health subcommittee hearing this past april, we repeatedly heard loud and clear from f.d.a., the national boards of pharmacy and many others that if we want a secure drug supply chain, we will ultimately need an electronic interoperable system that tracks each package of drugs at the unit level, and it involves the entire supply chain. this kind of a system would enable us to identify ill legitimate product in real time
and prevent it from ending up in patients' hands. we also heard repeatedly that creating this kind of a system is dobble -- doable. unfortunately, the bill we have today will not create that kind of system. the bill does not require the establishment of an electronic interoperable unit level system. by 2027, 14 years from now, f.d.a. will be required to issue proposed regulations for such a system. but there's no requirement that these regulations ever be finalized, and if they are ever finalized, they cannot go into effect for at least two more years. and certainly we are looking at 2030 or beyond under this proposed legislation. and in fact it may never be done. the bill also has a number of additional defisheses. it fails to adequately a--
deficiencies. it fails to adequately address ill ctors to introduce legitimate product -- ill-legitimate product into the supply chain. in the meantime, it will prevent states from responding to particular needs they may have in regulating their wholesale distributors, and it preempts important existing state safeguards against the entry into the supply chain of unsafe and counterfeit drugs before any adequate substitute will be in place. two weeks ago, mr. speaker, the senate health committee unanimously approved a bill, sponsored by senators burr, bennett, harkin and alexander, that requires the establishment of a unit level, electronic, interoperable system within 10
years and is not dependent upon f.d.a. issuing regulations. but the senate bill still provides plenty of notice, input and guidance for industry stakeholders. f.d.a. is required to hold public meetings, one or more ilot proprojects and issue guidances -- pilot proscombrects and issue guidances -- pilot projects and issue guidances. stakeholders will have the incentive to work with f.d.a. to see that the guidances and any needed regulations are developed and released. our fundamental goal in establishing a federal system should be to provent americans from being harmed by counterfeit and substandard medicines. if we cannot assure the public that legislation will establish that a system will protect them
and that will do so by a date certain, then it might not be worth doing. the house bill needs significant improvement as it moves forward if our goal is to enact legislation that will truly protect the american public. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i would yield two minutes and recognize the chairman of the full committee, mr. upton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for two minutes. mr. upton: thank you, mr. speaker. certainly this afternoon i rise today in strong support of h.r. 1919, the safeguarding america's pharmaceutical act of 2013. i want to thank the bill's authors, including mr. latta, for their bipartisan leadership on this very important issue. this bill strengthens the prescription drug supply chain
in order to protect american families against counterfeit drugs. the bill also would help prevent increases in drug prices, avoid additional drug shortages and literally eliminate hundreds of millions of dollars worth of duplicative government red tape on american businesses that is harming job growth. as mr. latta said, supporters of the legislation include the u.s. deputy sheriff's association and also those in the supply chain, including the national community pharmacists association. according to the c.b.o., the bill's going to reduce the deficit by some $24 million. . we move the food and drug administration's safety and innovation act through the legislative process and our continued efforts beyond enactment into this congress now. and during that entire process, we also sought input from the stake hold urs, like pfizer in my district in michigan, as
well as our smaller pharmacies, too. this hard work allowed us to better understand the issue and this bill reflects that understanding. the energy and commerce committee, we healed legislative hearing on the bill last april, we aproved the bill in both subcommittee and full committee by voice. we had a spirited debate at the committee but we stand here united in our belief that the prescription drug supply chain has to be strengthened. we look toward to -- forward to working with our senate colleagues on h.r. 1919, on a bipartisan basis, to improve the bill, including how it addresses issues related to wholesteal distributors during phase one. and because of the hard work that has already been put in on this issue and the importance of protecting our nation's families from counterfeit drugs, i am hopeful that we can get a product to the president's desk by the august recess. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. latta: mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california.
mr. waxman: i wish to yield three minutes at this time to the gentleman from utah, mr. matheson, one of the original sponsors of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for three minutes. mr. matheson: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. and i thank mr. latta for his work on this issue as well. this is a bill before the us today, it's a product of several years of collaboration. it's a really complicated issue. and it's important that you have a lot of collaboration to address something of this complexity. this legislation that mr. latta and i have introduced together was -- it will provide what i think are important steps for the security of our prescription drug supply chain from counterfeiters and other bad actors. we've seen in recent press reports about fake drugs slipping into the supply chain. so the threat of counterfeit drugs is a growing problem in this country. in fact, when you think about it, the counterfeit drug trade may be a more lucrative opportunity than the illegal drug trade, since the united
states over all spends roughly $325 billion a year on prescription drugs. this bill is an effort to try to keep those bad actors fromenting the drug supply. now, since we've had some of these problems, some states have rightly tried to take action to deal with this. what this legislation is going to do, however, is establish more of a national standard to create some certainty for everybody in the supply chain so there's an opportunity to work effectively in a national way. without such action, everyone in the supply chain could be forced to comply with an ever-ending patchwork of different and complex state laws and that patchwork will force stakeholders to step up multiple state systems and it could still open the door for bad actors to exploit security gaps through some states that may have weaker laws. this bill also establishes a collaborative process between the f.d.a. and the industry on establishing protocols for unit-level traceability. the bill stipulates the f.d.a. will hold regular meetings and conduct part-time programs with
stake holders to -- conduct pilot programs with stakeholders. this is a critical to ensure that the unit-level traceability regulations achievable does not increase prescription drug costs for consumers and ultimately protects parents from counterfeit and adult rated prescription drug products. what we do not want to see are regulations that are not technologically achievable, ensuring a delay in implementation. as we've seen in some state circumstances. now, there's no question that the this legislation has been an effort of several years and there's still perhaps some work to be done. and i'm hopeful that as this legislation moves through the process of the house and the senate goes to conference, that there's some other outstanding issue that can be addressed -- issues that can be addressed and question build even greater consensus as we go to a final product that goes to the president's desk. i urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio is
recognized. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, the chairman of the subcommittee, mr. pitts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes. mr. pitts: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the bill before us today is important and necessary legislation to strengthen the prescription drug supply chain and to provide greater safety for our nation's patients. safeguarding our prescription drug supply chain is important to protect against counterfeit drugs. it is necessary to help prevent increases in drug prices while also ensuring adequate supplies of much-needed prescription drugs. equally important, h.r. 1919 includes reforms that will eliminate hundreds of millions of dollars worth of duplicative government red tape on american
drug manufacturer, wholesale distributors, and pharmacies. sadly, counterfeit prescription drugs have proven to be a lucrative business. with many of these illegal counterfeit drugs finding their way to some of our sickest patients, including those with cancer. additionally, some states have taken draconian actions to safeguard their prescription drug supply chain, but many of these steps will force small and large businesses to implement costly and indefensible electronic systems for tracking such drugs at the unit level. after hearings in the health subcommittee, on the energy and commerce committee, which i chair, we heard that a more feasible and practical solution to this serious problem is attainable. and those provisions are included in h.r. 1919. mr. speaker, by approving this legislation, we will be saving
our nation's businesses millions of dollars, protecting our patients from counterfeit drugs and securing our drug supply chain in a reasonable, commonsense way. i urge all my colleagues to support this bill and vote for h. rrment 1919 -- h.r. 1919 and i yield back the balance of my time. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield three minutes at this time to the gentleman from north carolina, to speak on this legislation, mr. butterfield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for three minutes. mr. butterfield: thank you. first, let me thank you, mr. waxman, for yielding time and thank you for your extraordinary leadership on our committee. let me also thank mr. latta and mr. matheson for working together to try to get this legislation onto the floor today. but, mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 1919 and urge its passage. since the prescription drug marketing act was signed into
law some 25 years ago, a patchwork of vareying state pedigree laws has evolved, leaving our drug supply chain very vulnerable. resources should focus on up to date d and adaptable -- up to date and adaptable technology using global sterilization standards. in the past 25 years, industry stake holders have been unable to agree on a uniform federal solution, but today i'm happy to report that it does exist. the fact that so many members of the industry have finally come together to embrace new, commonsense regulations speaks to the importance of getting this done soon. if we fail to enact drug distribution safety legislation soon, my fear, is mr. speaker, that we will miss the opportunity to significantly enhance patient safety for all americans. the house bill has improved since its introduction and while i strongly support some of the provisions in the senate companion bill, including a date certificate to reach unit-level tracking, the house
bill represents a good stepped forward in drans -- step forward and advances the ball toward one ultimate goal. and hopefully some of these concerns can be addressed in conference. my constituents, like all of yours, deserve to know that the prescription drugs that they use to treat diabetes and high blood pressure and heart disease are not stolen, misbranded or counterfeited. this bill and the senate counterpart addresses the very real concerns that spurred the introduction of this legislation. while the house bill isn't everything many of us want it to be, and mr. waxman spoke to that earlier, i am hopeful that once the house and senate bills move to conference we will see a final version that will protect consumers and better protect the prescription drug supply chain. therefore, mr. speaker, i urge my colleague today and in the senate to proceed with deliberate but swift action so that we can pass a workable solution as soon as possible, so as to better protect the american people. i ask my colleagues to support
h.r. 1919. thank you, mr. waxman, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina yields back. the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. bureau jells. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas for two minutes. mr. burgess: i thank the gentleman for yielding. you know, the united states has the best drug supply chain in the world, but it faces attack each and every day by counterfeiters, thieves and rogue distributors. you know, most americans would just assume that their prescription drugs that they buy in their drug store have been tracked rigorously from manufacturer to retail. but that assumption could not be more wrong. in fact, current law leaves a great deal of leeway for counterfeit medications to enter the market and the punishment for those counterfeiting prescription medications is oftentimes far from adequate. for from fake flu sack seens to fake cancer drugs, counterfeit
medications have been manufactured and allowed to enter the supply chain and in some cases unfortunately even administered to unsuspecting patients. the united states may be the most secure, but we are still at risk. i believe we have a bill before us today that is guided by the strong principles of patient safety and supply chain integrity. the bill is flexible and does not seek to overly burden state suppliers or small businesses. maintaining the integrity of the united states' prescription drug supply is a compelling national priority. i want to congratulate mr. latta and mr. matheson, as well as chairman upton and ranking member dingell for their leadership on the issue. i appreciate you allowing me to be involved in the development of this bill and i think it's a testament to all the hard work done, including that by our committee staff, clay and paul, and my personal staff, j.p. and paul. i urge my colleagues to support this and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. waxman: at this time i wish to yield three minutes to the
gentleman from maine, mr. michaud. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from maine for three minutes. mr. michaud: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to express opposition to h.r. 1919, specifically i rise to express concerns with section 8 of this bill, which allows prescription drug labeling for physicians, pharmacists and other health care professionals be provided solely by electronic means. this provision is flawed on multiple levels. first, some states can be intermittent at best. in an area with low internet connectivity or reliability, health care providers would not automatically have the necessary information about the drugs to make sure that they're being administered and priebed appropriately. -- pried appropriately. this is even -- prescribed appropriately. this is true in an area that might be hit by a natural disaster, like hurricane sandy. second, eliminating the paper labeling requirements would
have repercussions for the industries that it supports. there are more than 10,000 jobs nationwide associated with the printing of this sensitive information. in maine, the paper industry supports 7,000 workers, including hundreds in the pharmaceutical paper industry. these workers are part of an important industry that keeps health care professionals, dispensers and consumers informed about their drugs. section 8 would jeopardize the jobs of more than 1,000 mainers. finally, legislation passed during the 112th congress required g.a.o. to conduct a study of the advantages and risks of electronic-only labeling of pharmaceuticals. this study is due to be released next month. passing this legislation that preempts the finding of this study is bad policy. i'd urge my colleagues to support, -- support informed health care professionalance and consumers and to fight for
more than 10,000 manufacturing jobs across the country. so i'd urge a no vote on h.r. 919. i'd yield to the representative. mr. waxman: i thank you for yielding to me. you're raising issues that i don't think were really brought to our attention when we were considering the legislation. and i would want to look it over carefully. but i think you raise an interesting point and as we go into the conference after this bill is passed, i'm going to pledge to you that i will continue to review this issue with you and others, to see what the merits would be. whether this provision should continue in the bill. and i talked to chairman upton who told me that he would continue to review the issue as well. and would the gentleman from ohio, would you like me to -- him to yield to you? are you rising to that point as well?
mr. latta: would you yield to me? mr. waxman: i'd be happy to. mr. latta: thank you, sir. as we discussed earlier, we'd be happy to continue discussing this with you. mr. michaud: i thank both gentlemen for your willingness to look at section 8 more closely. thank you very much. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from west virginia, mr. mckinley. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. mckinley: i rise in support of h.r. 1919. let me bring attention the provision in the bill that we were just discussing about electronic distribution of prescription information for health care professionals and pharmacists. the industry and the f.d.a. have been in discussions for years about eliminating the paper attach the bottles of prescription drugs. let me show you this.
this is what we're talking about. this wad of paper on the top of a prescription bottle. t's a folded up piece of paper . it can be in three and four parts. this is not an efficient way to distribute critical information about prescription drugs. eliminating this wad of paper would save consumers millions of dollars in printing and shipping costs. the house committee recognized the need to allow pharmacists the option of electronic or paper copies, because some rural pharmacies may not have internet capabilities. unfortunately, this labeling provision is not in the senate bill. so as the process moves forward into conference, this labeling provision needs to be retained
so that we have a final product that assures patient safety and provides uniformed national standards to strengthen the national drug supply chain. i urge my colleagues to support this bill and the labeling provision. i yield back my time. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from west virginia yields. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i'd like to submit for the record three letters from the california state board of pharmacy and four letters from dozens of organizations representing consumers, patients, physicians, researchers and public health advocates. these letters praise serious concerns with h.r. 1919, the track and trace legislation, before us today and i'd like to read a few sentences from just one of the letters. we're concerned -- quote, we're concerned that legislation as currently written does not contain the minimum safeguards to keep unsafe medicines from reaching patients.
the subcommittee's proposal does not create a clear path forward to a meaningful unit level traceability system. furthermore, the proposed legislation would eliminate all existing state drug pedigree laws which provide essential patient safety protections as well as major tools for law enforcement. the bill would leave the u.s. pharmaceutical supply unprotected for a full two years before introducing even limited fraceability requirements, end -- traceability requirements, end quote. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to read these letters carefully. they provide a detailed critique of the legislation and offer suggestions on how to figures it and i hope we can improve this bill as it moves forward through the legislative process. i'd like to submit for the record several letters. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. waxman: and i'll -- i'd like to ask the gentleman from ohio how many speakers he has. mr. latta: we have none. mr. waxman: well, then, mr.
chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: ok. the gentleman from california yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. latta: mr. speaker, we have no further speakers, and i yield back the balance of my time and ask for support for the bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1919, as amended. hose in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? mr. latta: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill, senate 622, the
animal drug and animal generic drug user fee re-authorization act of 2013. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 622, an act to amend the federal food, drug, and cosmetic act to re-authorize user fee programs relating to new animal drugs nd generic new animal drugs. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from ohio, mr. latta, and the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and xtend their remarks and insert bill ous matters on the in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. latta: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. latta: i rise in support of s. 622, the animal drug and animal generic drug user fee
re-authorization of 2013. the energy and commerce committee passed h.r. 1407, a nearly identical bill, through the committee last month with broad bipartisan support. the agriculture industry, animal drug manufacturers, veterinarians, pet owners and the food and drug administration have all found both the animal drug user fee and animal generic drug user fee to be effective and asked congress to re-authorize the programs as soon as possible. in addition, there is strong bipartisan support for the programs which i think is a reflection of their success and effectiveness. passing s. 622 is extremely important for our nation. first, having quality and safe medications is essential to ensuring the safety of our nation's food supply chain. second, these help livestock producers, veterinarians to keep their animals healthy. third, these programs enable families to have safe and affordable drugs for their pets so they can live longer and
healthier lives. it is essential that the house passes this bill swiftly so we can guarantee that these programs continue without interruption. i'd like to thank my colleagues, mr. shimkus, and mr. gardner, for their hard work on this piece of legislation. it's no small feat to move legislation to the president's desk in such an efficient manner. i'd like to thank senators harkin and senator alexander for their leadership. mr. speaker, i support this bill and encourage my colleagues to do the same and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. waxman: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 1407, the animal drug user fee amendments of 2013. f.d.a.'s animal drug user fee programs have been successful at speeding both brand and generic drugs to the market. however, i regret we have not taken this opportunity to provide f.d.a. with new tools
to address a glaring public health crisis, the problem of antibiotic resistance. antibiotics are truly a lifesaving gift. unfortunately the more they are used the less they work. untold numbers of americans die are infected each year by antibiotic resistance. we know most antibiotic use occurs on the farm, and much of this issue is not to treat sick animals but most of the use is for disease prevention or growth promotion. if it's for treating sick animals, no one could quarrel with that. unfortunately, if it's used for growth promotion or disease prevention, that is a misuse of it and could lead to antibiotic resistant bugs. we don't know exactly how much
is for which of these two uses of the drug. that's why we need to ask industry to give us more data on how these drugs are being used and use steps to curtail the inappropriate use in animals of important human antibiotics. my bill, the delivery antibiotic transparency in animals, or data act, would enhance the information f.d.a. gets about how these drugs are used. representative slaughter has a bill, which i have co-sponsored, the preservation of antibiotics for medical treatment act, and that would curtail the inappropriate use in animals of important human antibiotics. we need to ensure that f.d.a. not only has the resources and procedures for speeding safe and effective animal drugs to market, but also the information and tools to ensure that they are being used judiciously. i regret that we're not taking
this opportunity to give f.d.a. these tools, but i hope we will soon have an opportunity to move these bills forward. mr. speaker, i would like to reserve the balance of my time and ask unanimous consent that the control of the time on our side of the aisle be given to mr. butterfield from the state of north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina will control the time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from ton, the chairman up chairman of the full committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. the gentleman from michigan. mr. upton: beat the buckeye
state. i rise in strong support of s. 622, the animal drug and animal generic drug user fee re-authorization act of 2013. this bipartisan bill is nearly identical to h.r. 1407, which we favorably reported out of the energy and commerce committee last month. this bill as well as the animal generic drug user fee act have proven to be very successful, and they are so important for the nation's public health. congress first created this back in 2003 and ag dufa back in 2008. they yielded many benefits for the american public. these bills have ensured that veterinarians, livestock and poultry producers, pet owners have access to new and affordable drugs to keep their animals healthy. they assisted animal drug producers by having an f.d.a. process, a rigorous process that fosters new drug development.
the programs have helped american consumers by keeping the food supply safe. having medications that keep our animals healthy is essential to keeping our nation's food supply safe. for companies like one which employs some 00 people in southwest michigan, -- 700 people in southwest michigan, these keep innovative drugs for pets and livestock. i was the original sponsor of the bill back in 2003 and it's terrific to see how successful it's been and how many americans it's helped over the last decade. so i want to thank my colleagues, particularly mr. shimkus and mr. gardner, for their real leadership on this important issue. they deserve tremendous credit as we work to get the bill to the president's desk. i urge my colleagues to support it and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan yields back. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. butterfield: mr. speaker, this time i'd yield to the gentlelady from new york, ms. slaughter, such time as she may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr.
speaker. i thank my friend for yielding. mr. speaker, just today "the new york times" reported that we are simultaneously facing a shortage of effective antibiotics and the growing threat of antibiotic resistant bacteria. already antibiotic resistant disease claims 70,000 american lives each year. according to today's story, the director of the center of drug evaluation and research at the food and drug administration has warned that, quote, it's bad now and the infectious disease docs are frantic. but what is worse is the thought of where we will be in five to 10 years from now. there are even desperate -- they are even desperate enough to ask glasgow kline smith to work on new antibiotics to allow the use of them untested, the f.d.a. is considering this, to try -- perhaps will turn out
to be to save people who are dying from infections we can no longer cure. asgow kline smith has said they will not license it for livefeed. 80% of it is fed in their food each day. 80%. it is the routine use -- overuse of antibiotics in the nation's livestock. these are not sick livestock, mr. speaker. this is simply in their feed because they grow faster and they're fatter. they can get to market a little quicker. this irresponsible practice has already been scientifically linked to the growth of superbugs. it's clear and it's been clear for quite a while that the federal government must act to end this dangerous practice. yet, incomprehensively for more than 35 years the united states
food and drug administration has refused to follow its own bass to bass the use of antibiotics in agriculture, not just using it for sick animals. instead, they have provided voluntarily guidance that naively asked the public to put the public welfare before public-private, something they have not shown in 35 years that they will not do. if such duties from not enough, the f.d.a. has panicked about the superbug threat that they have helicopter to create. instead of finally removing antibiotic use from feed, they will waive the procedures as i said to rush new drugs to market. attaching procedures that are currently in place are in place for a reason. waiving these requirements is a dangerous precedent. as the only legislator in congress with background in microbiology, i can assure you
we will never win the arms race against nature. as long as we allow the irresponsible use of antibiotics in our society, nature will always evolve to create stronger bacteria. with 80% as i said of all the antibiotics going to agriculture use, our answer has to start on the farm. we have to end the unnecessary use of antibiotics on healthy animals before it's too late and indeed it may almost be too late. at the very least, today's legislation should include language to protect data on antibiotics. that provision would least allow us to finally learn the full scope of the problem that we confront. even more importantly, i urge my colleagues to support my legislation, h.r. 1150, the preservations of antibiotics for medical treatment act, which would ban the routine use of eight important classes of antibiotics in livestock but still allow a sick animal to be treated and to help to curve the growing threat of superbugs. we are literally standing today
on the brink of a public health crisis, as the food industrial complex fritters away one of the most important advances in medical history. the golf swinging of the use of antibiotics -- the beginning of the use of antibiotics to cure human ills. already, some strains tuberculosis have evolved that are incurable. and others are coming. and some experts have said that if we don't do something soon, and as i said it may already be too late, that strep throat, strep throat could become a fatal illness. that's what they're worried about, what happened here in five years. i urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation today and pleased to join me in the fight to protect the antibiotics for human health, it is so important. i cannot vote for this bill. although i can recognize that some work has gone into. it but i've spent years on this. and the years are running out. and the time is short. i yield back the balance of my
time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york yields back. the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, the chairman of the subcommittee, mr. pitts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. for two minutes. mr. pitts: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of the re-authorization of two successful programs. the animal drug user fee act, adufa, and the animal generic drug user fee act, agdufa. the bill we have before us today originated in the senate. and was approved by unanimous consent on may 8, 2013, and i urge my colleagues in the house to support this legislation as well. in 2003, the first adufa was authorized to help the food and drug administration's review of animal drugs. similar to the prescription
drug user fee for human drugs, under adufa, f.d.a. collected funds to help expedite the new animal drug approval process and to reduce application backlog and improve communications with drug sponsors. the program was authorized for five years and congress renewed the program for an additional five years in adufa-2 in 2008. in 2012 f.d.a. completed 747 adufa reviewed and according to f.d.a., the agency has exceeded all performance goals outlined in adufa-1 and adufa-2. however, be a september congressional action, -- absent congressional action, the f.d.a.'s ability to collect hese fees will expire in 2013. agdufa-1 was first authorized
in 2008 for five years in order to improve the reviewle abbreviated new animal drug applications, eliminate application backlogs, and reduce review times. to date, according to f.d.a., the agency has exceeded all performance goals but one. from agdufa-1. this program also expires september 30, 2013, unless it is rere-authorized and f.d.a. and industry have negotiated an agreement for agdufa-2. these programs are extremely important, not only for our animals and livestock on our farms and ranches, but for our pets, health and well-being as well. i want to thank my colleagues, representative john shimkus and representative cory gardner, for their outstanding work on this legislation and i urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania yields back. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. >> do you have any additional
witnesss? mr. latta: we have one. >> all right, i'll reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. gardner. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado for two minutes. mr. gardner: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding time. i rise today in support of senate bill 622, the animal drug and animal generic drug user fee re-authorization act of 2013. this legislation will re-authorize two very important programs that the food and drug administration that will provide farmers, ranchers, pet owners and veterinarians with speedy access to medications that they need for the treatment of herds and pets. i would like to thank senator harkin for leading its passage in the u.s. senate and also i would like to thank congressman shimkus for his leadership with the house version of h.r. 1407. these programs have been a success story at the f.d.a. and this legislation will ensure that drug approvals are done efficiently and to the highest quality standards.
ad fumbings a and agdufa expire at the start of september and we need to pass this re-authorization today to assure there is no delay for animal care takers and livestock producers. this bill will also help companies that develop and manufacture an mull drugs by -- animal drugs by providing predictable time lines. it will also help them to benefit from a more stable review process so they can make decisions about where to invest research dollars. colorado has a thriving livestock industry which supports rural communities and economic strength for the entire state. i said this during the committee markup of h.r. 1407, there are -- there is more livestock in my district than people. or at least that's what i'm told. colorado is also home to one of the nation's premier schools of veterinary medicine at colorado state university. keeping livestock animals healthy in particular is crucial to ensuring our own health and not to mention the health of our family pets. the adufa and agdufa program keeps our food health andy and safe while the application of animal drugs pose no risk to human health. i had the honor of introducing
with bipartisan support h.r. 1408, the animal generic drug user fee act or agdufa. the bill was later incorporated into h.r. 1407. this program at f.d.a. has achieved noteworthy success since first being authorized in 2008. f.d.a. has decreased a backlog of applications and reduced the review time for new jernerk drug applications -- generic drug applications. the re-authorization of this program will continue this success and allow our animal care takers and livestock producers to utilize cost savings associated with generic medications. i thank the chairman and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. mr. butterfield: thank you. any sfurt speakers on my friend's side? mr. latta: none. mr. butterfield: we have no either. i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. latta: mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and ask for passage. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass senate 622. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.
in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. butterfield: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. butterfield: i call for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this otion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition?
>> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 126. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar mber 53, h.r. 126, a bill to direct the secretary of the interior to enter into an agreement to provide for management of the free roaming wild horses in and around the national wildlife refuge. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from virginia, mr. wittman, and the gentlewoman from california, mrs. napolitano, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. wittman: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. wittman: mr. speaker, in 2007, the state of north carolina, the county, the corolla wild horse fund, and the u.s. finish and wildlife service signed a comprehensive
wild horse management plan for the colonial spanish mustangs that live on the 7,500 acres of private and public lands in north carolina. this plan expired last year and u.s. fish and wildlife services indicated that it will not sign a new agreement. h.r. 126, authored by congressman walter b. jones, requires the secretary of the interior to enter into a new agreement within 180 days of enactment. it will also cap the number of horses to no more than 130, allow the introduction of a small number of shackleford bank horses to improve genetic diversity, and will ensure that the corolla wild horse fund, which is a volunteer organization, will continue to pay for the cost of caring for and managing these horses in the future. these horses are living symbols of our colonial history. h.r. 126, which is a similar
bill to one that passed the house by a voice vote last year, will ensure their survival at no cost to the taxpayers. i urge adoption of the measure and compliment the author for his tireless leadership and his passion for this issue and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california. mrs. napolitano: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. napolitano: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. napolitano: mr. speaker, h.r. 126 directs the secretary of the interior to enter into an agreement with the corolla wild horse fund, as well as local and state authorities to provide for the management of a wild horses in and around national wildlife refuge. the agreement will increase the cap on the herd size and specify that the privately
funded corolla wild horse fund will cover the cost of managing the herd. this refuge was established in 1984 to preserve and protect the native coastal barrier ecosystem. the refuge provides habitat for migrating water fowl and for the endangered species, such as piping plover and sea turtles. it is unusual to protect a nonnative species such as these horses in a wildlife refuge, extra effort and resources are needed to ensure that the herd does not impair the ecosystem for the native animals and plants. h.r. 126 is an imperfect solution, though a solution, to a very difficult problem. we must continue working with fish and wildlife service and with the local community to achieve balance between the needs of the refuge and these wild horses. i thank the gentleman and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. wittman: mr. speaker, i yield as much time as he may
consume to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. jones. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. mr. jones: mr. speaker, thank you very much. and i want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their words today and i'll take just a very few minutes. mr. speaker, as has been said both, this is a plan to maintain and protect a part of north carolina's history, as mr. wittman said, these horses have been traced back by general he ethic experts to -- genetic experts to the spanish mustangs that swam ashore in the 1600's. they are really part of our heritage. these beautiful little horses roam, as has been said by both sides today, over 7,500 acres of public and private land. this is now the corolla.
these little horses are so special that the citizens of the area decided that they should try to create a foundation, where they could work together with the federal government, the state government and the county government and it's known as the corolla wild horse fund. t.s.a. nonprofit. these people are -- it is a nonprofit. these people are just absolutely convinced and committing to making sure that for years to come down the road, that these little horses will still have ability to reproduce. and that's been part of the problem, mr. speaker, is that if you allow this herd to get down to about 60 horses, you will not be able to maintain the diversity of this herd and that's why the expert named dr. gus cortham from texas a&m has said you've got to have a minimum that's been said in the comments by both sides, that