tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN November 18, 2015 8:00pm-12:01am EST
infiltrating with women and children. but if you look at that mike gratian and i am looking at and i'm the first one to pointed out, three weeks ago i'm sitting and same isn't it a it a shame. then i said to myself, wow, they are all men. there were no men, there are so few children, there are so few women. they are all men, they're tough looking cookies. i say what is going on here? then you look at what five or six people did in paris, and we have to get smart. i just had a press press conference and i said we have to get smart, they said the masterminds, the mastermind he is scum, he he is at mastermind, he is calm. the press plays right into their hands. though press is calling the leader of the pack in paris
a mastermind. so all of these kids are sitting home, even in new york, in california, and massachusetts, all of the mastermind, he is not a mastermind. he he is a lowlife. he is just a lowlife guy. he is a bomb. he is a bomb. bomb i bet he doesn't have a 90 iq. they have to stop limeys people masterminds. we have to take back the internet, there are so many things we have to do. we have a president that doesn't have a clue, we have a president we have a president that says isis is contained. it's contained. the only thing contained is us. we are contained are contained because we have no leadership. we have to take back the internet is ours, but they have taking over the internet. they are using the internet better than we are. they're using the internet and they are recruiting people. then people go out to fight for
isis and then we let them back into the country. we let them back inches where have you been? i've been fighting for isis, o come back o come back in, go back home to texas. how stupid are we? when they leave the country, when they go to buy prices or al qaeda, or whoever the hell they fight, they never, ever, they never, ever come back into this country again. ever. ever. but we have to come back the internet. they are taking people, they are literally brainwashing people. they are brainwashing our youth. they're getting it to say all this is what they want to do. we cannot let that happen. we have innocent youth, and they are misguided. they are brought along but then they hear the press talking about these people like robin hood.
we cannot allow the press to do that. we cannot allow it to happen. we have to take back our country, we have to take back our intelligence, we have to take back the internet, we can't let this happen. [applause]. recently, jeb bush, recently, it's over, i don't want to waste a lot of time on him, comes it's over. it's over. you know what, i think it's use a nice person. who cares? who cares. recently he said donald trump's tone is very tough, that's what we need. we need tough tones. i say it, we have people in the
middle east and all over having their heads cut off, james foley who i think was an amazing guy, i got to know his parents. i got to know his parents, they are incredible people. their son's head was cut off. i was the beginning. they're chopping off heads. you are christian, they chopping off heads. you are christian, they chop off heads. they drowned them in cages, this has never happened -- may be the middle ages, may be mid-evil times. used to read about it. you used to read about medieval times, there is never been a thing like this. i said don't go into iraq, i was right. i said, now we have to go and knock the out of these people. we have to do it. we have to do it. [applause].
we can do it fast, we we can do it furious. we can do it. we can do it well, we can win there again. i watched on television -- i talk about it all of the time. i see are generals been interviewed on television, i don't want generals interviewed on television. i television. i want to be unpredictable. you know, we are predictable. we are predictable. i want to be unpredictable. all of the pulsate i would be the best at the military, i would be the best that form policy, which is interesting, because if you read the front page of the new york times today, they said about ben carson that he is unable to understand form policy. people actually said this. that he he is unable to comprehend or understand form policy.
it was a devastating, it was all over the place. if you watched over the weekend you would understand what they're talking about. it was devastating it was devastating when when you watch the interview. he is unable to comprehend form policy. we can't do this. i think he is a nice guy probably, who knows, who knows, i don't care. i don't care. we need someone that a sharp, tough, smart, and smart, and can figure it out, fast. fast. i mean, we we are playing games, we are playing games. the problem we have is that we are playing games. we do not have the luxury of going through what we have gone through for the last seven years with this guy. this guy was not suited to be president of the united states, he was not. i mean, i talked about ben the other day and i talked about his book. somebody said no you are too tough.
i went in iowa and i talk for 15 minutes, and i said zero that was to top it's not a question of being top. he wrote a book, he said book, he said he has a pathological disease, okay. that's a problem to me. problem. he said he'd hit or tried to hit is mother over the head with a hammer, i didn't. i didn't. me? mary macleod, no way. i didn't. he said he tried to tap someone and had the belt buckle. no belt buckle stops because it will twist, turn, slide, strong guy goes like this it's going in, it's not stopping. it might be detoured a little bit but it is going in. he said he's hit somebody really a very good friend of his really hard in the face with a padlock, boom in the face did a lot of damage. that. that is why they want to elect him. he is trying to prove that he did it. i am saying, i think it buys him i would try to prove that i
didn't do it. i don't get the whole deal. i i don't get it. i don't get it. what are we coming to? what is the country coming to? we need sharp, we need some, we need brilliant, we need tough, tough, we need to get the right guy, we need trump. so, then today they come out with the times and you should read it, by the way times and many other but it there's others that was just the times i was a don't believe it may be but it was many papers saying that he could not upper what is going on. that is bad. can you imagine that if somebody goes into office and then you can find out he really can't figure it out? we have a problem.
yeah, we have obama, that's right. that's right. he has never figured it out. then we have others, i mean mean they are running, they are running. but they are not the right people. you know, i have made a tremendous amount of money. i. i have built a great company. remember when they said he will never run, and iran. remember remember when they said he will never file for me basically it's one-page but you're your signing your life way, i cited. they would like all. then i said, zero well he will never file his financials because you could file forever and you get all these delays and everything, he will ask for the longest delay, will i have the longest biggest financial statement ever filed in the history of federal elections and i filed it a head of schedule.
you are given 30 days to file, then many extensions and every one said he will keep extending and then drop out because maybe he is not as rich as people thought. well, i filed it. it turned out i am much richer, you see. much richer. i don't do that you know much richer, all the press was devastating, they could not believe the numbers, they couldn't believe it. i think it was 98 pages, almost 100 pages where as pages whereas the politician is like one page. they did a book, they did something. so so i did this tremendous thing, what they do not know is that i didn't know by receiving a run. i came down, took a took a deep breath and i would like this to my wife, man look at that down there the press was like crazy. i said zero my, and i went like this you ever do this when you're just not 100% you said zero should i be doing this my whole life is going to change, my my family's life, and i went like
this, hall let's go baby. and we went down a famous escalator, we went on that escalator and here we are. here we are. but what they do not know is that if i didn't run i was going to find out file the financials anyway because they're so good and i was so proud of it. so shows it on believable company, buildings in manhattan, 40 wall street, fifth avenue, sixth avenue, all over the place. the bank of america building, a big chunk in san francisco, one of the great buildings in the world. land all over the place, from the potomac river to the pacific place, from the potomac river to the pacific ocean. very little debt, tremendous cash flow. they are devastated. they had one guy, you had boxes and you check it and they said 1 million, 2,000,000, 5,000,000, 5 million, it actually starts with $5000. various boxes.
10 million, 20 million, then they go 50 million or more. so i had met many buildings worth more of that. so you check the box. i didn't check, my accounts checked right. they checked the box, many of these i think like 23 think like 23 or 24 boxes 50 million or more. so we have a couple guys who added up the 50s and that is what they said my net worth was, so you have a building with 1,000,000,000 and a a half in new york city or someplace. there is no category, it is worth more than 50. so i checked, boom and i ended up with a net worth of all of those boxes times x, 50 million times 23 or 24. and i said this was dishonest because it didn't matter to me because the real people understood it. that it was also reported fairly by some.
but, i would have put in financials anyone because it turned out being great. the reason i talk about the financials as this, i'm a private company, no private company, no one knew what it was worth. they don't know anything. they don't know what it's worth, now they know what i'm worth because they see this financial disclosure which is certified and big deal. it's a big deal. filed with the federal government. but, the reason i talk about it is not bragging, it's simple. we need that thinking in that's country. that country. i don't care about me, we need the thinking in the country. we need somebody that is not going to allow and iran deal to be made. we need somebody that is a negotiated. we need somebody that is carl icahn the great businessman who endorsed me. we need coral, a lot of you know carl, great. many of the people endorse. they want me to win because they know i am like really good at this stuff. i talk to you this way, because
that is the mentality whether i am nice or not, i i think nice actually. but whether i am or not, we have to take our country back. we have to turn our country around. we need we need that kind of thinking, whatever that thinking is. whatever that thinking is. we need it. we can't give -- a deal i mean is not a financial deal although you could say it is even financial. but we cannot get sergeant, a dirty rotten trader, and give them five of the greatest killers on earth that they have been after for nine years. but that is the deal. so we get bergdahl the trader and we knew he was a traitor and six great people were killed going after this bum, six people. now in the old days, there's my man, stand up. what we do with it sergeant berg old 50 years ago? that's right.
a great veteran, he's gone. six people killed looking for bergdahl and we give five people to get them back. we knew he was a traitor because because of a general and a kernel going interview all of the soldiers that he dealt with and that he was with. they said, he deserted. so they knew. it is one thing if they made a mistake, but they knew. we can't do things like that anymore. by the way, bergdahl i see the other day no time, they do not want to give him any time. they are letting him out. they are not only gonna not shoot him, they let him out. they said well he has been through a lot. well yeah, six young, great people died looking for him. he is recommended to get nothing, zero. we cannot let that happen
anymore. so what i talk about myself, because i have had an amazing life, i have had a successful life, the apprentice became one of the great shows on television. i love the. i love the apprentice, i left so much. you know it is funny, the apprentice has been so great, everybody watch the apprentice. so nbc called, steve of comcast is a great dale came up to my office and said please donald do it again. i said steve, i want to run. not top people at nbc and comcast, great people, steve is a fantastic guy he came and said please do it again. they want me to do it again. they it again. they said please do it again, everybody, you'll be like the only one. i did take a renewal, are you crazy? i said mark, i really want to went run because i think i can do a great job. when i found my financial disclosure, you, you're not to believe this, certified numbers, i made
213,000,000 dollars doing $13 million doing apprentice. can you believe it? think of it. 213,000,000 because 13 million because we got the ads, i own the shows and the whole thing. 213,000,000 dollars is $13 million is what i put in my savings. now the schedule ago, they didn't believe it until they saw the numbers and it's a certified number. one on an nbc said he doesn't make any money on the apprentice. so anyway, think of it. i made all of that money, they want to extend for 28 shows. i said no. i'm not quite to do it. that is the least of it. so i gave up a lot. these guys, these politicians these politicians don't give up anything. they win, they lose, they were talk, that's that's all they do. they are nothing.
they can't do anything with it. they cannot bring us to the promised land. they cannot do it. it is not in their genes. i talk about corporate aversions. companies are leaving our country, they used to leave new york for florida, they leave new york for florida, they used to leave massachusetts actually, they stood leave for from mexico, that was pretty stupid i will say. but we would not let that stuff happen. so plenty left new hampshire, plenty left for mexico. plenty left massachusetts. but now, companies are going to leave our countries with thousands and thousands of jobs left behind an abandoned because of our tax code. because of the complexity. there is a two and a half million dollars offshore outside this country and they cannot get their money back. because of the complexity of the code and because of the amount they have to pay they are leaving it. they are going to go to the money. they are going to leave all of the jobs. they are going to get more taxes. we can't let this happen. i this happen. i talked to these guys in the sand, the people understand they
don't even understand what the hell i'm talking about. they are politicians. they're good at one thing, getting reelected. that's all they're good for. i see these people, i see them. i look at rubio, he's a lightweight, rubio said he's the next reagan, he is no reagan, that i can tell you. he's not a ragan. hey, hey, he's young guy maybe he will do well. i mean, my hair is better than his hair, that i can tell you. and i'm a little older. but these people are not going to bring you, they're not gonna take is where we want to go. they are politicians, all talk, no all talk, no action, nothing gets done, they controlled by special interests, it is not going to happen folks. it is not going to happen. it is time, it is time to really bite the bullet and do it right. we have have to do it right. we have to do it right. i want to be tough, i want to be strong, i want to do these things because if we don't do it, we will not have a country left. we will just not have a country left. not going to happen. obama care.
a disaster. it's a disaster. obama care premium is up 35, 45, 55%, deductibles or through the roof, you do not even get to use it the deductible is so high. people are getting killed and it was all alive. 28 times you can keep your doctor, keep your plan, dr., keep your plan, everything is wonderful. even the democrats were lied to. they would have never approved it. but the president kept saying, great, everything you can ask for. yet they yet they don't have to use it. the politicians and you washington don't have to use it because they don't want it it is no good. we are going to repeal it and replace it with something great. with something great. [applause]. so sad. when you look at it, remember
the website, the one problem in politics it has like a two-week lie. everybody forgets how bad. remember the website, 5,000,000,000 dollar website that it not work, it, it still doesn't work, a 5 billion website. those days are gone. i would have gotten microsoft, i would have gotten somebody, i would have gotten anybody, i could have gotten ten different companies that were the best in the world. they would have done it for nothing. they would have been so honored to do it. we spend hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of millions of dollars doing a website that does not work. everybody now forgets it. obama care has got to be repealed. in 17 it is going to cost it is
going to cost our country an absolute fortune, it is going to be useless as far as you are concerned. the deductibles will be so high you will not be able to use it. the cost is going to be prohibitive. they are already saying you have to go back to congress in 2017 to redo it, change it, we are going to get rid of, we are going to get rid of it. we'll get something good. you know who made the money with obama care? other than the fact that people design the website were very close to, you know who? right you know who made the money, insurance companies. they gave a tremendous amount of money to obama, the insurance companies have made a fortune with obama care. take a look at them. take a look at. take a look at the insurance companies. they are raking in billions of dollars with obama care. nobody even knows it. so we are going to get rid of it, come up, come up with a plan that is so good, so many ideas, soap many plans, it is going to be so good. you're going to you're going to have your dr., your plan, you'll have what you want. so, the other day i was watching the democrat debate. they called the democratic
debate it's the democrat debate really. i watched hillary who doesn't have the strength or the stamina to be president, i can tell you. no she doesn't have it. she doesn't have the strength or the stamina. we need very strong right now. she. she is exhausted folks. she is exhausted. in fact, i think if she pulled it off i think her greatest achievement ever will be getting out of the email scandal. i i think that will be her greatest achievement. i think she will do it because i think she is being totally protected by the democrats. they have destroyed general patrice, they put other people in jail for doing 5% of what she did, i think she is going to get a free pass. i think the democrats are protecting her because they think, you can't vote for
bernie. did you hear that the paris attacks are caused by -- did you hear this the paris attacks were caused according to bernie sanders, by global warming! the other guy, he should not be in the states. he was the mayor of baltimore, he did great job. so, we we have issues. we have 93 million people out of the labor force. think of it, when you have 5.2% forget it, when you add the real numbers you probably have a 25% unemployment and i will tell you this place is packed, people are still coming in all those people are going to be so angry when i finish and they are still coming inches can you believe people are still coming in? let's give them a hand. give those people a hand. [applause]. we love those people.
they are going to say, how did mr. trump do tonight? i was the speech? if they're going going to say i don't know, we never got in. so we have 93 million people out of the labor force, we have 50 million people in poverty, we have 43 million and now we have actually probably closer to 50 million people on food stamps. i will tell you what, if we had a real, if we had a real -- hello, hello. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]
[inaudible] >> you know, it is amazing i mention food stance and that guy who is seriously overweight went crazy. he went crazy. [applause]. amazing. that is an amazing site. you know, the the bad part, here's the bad thing, so we had three little protests, each person i think it was one over there, one over over here, one over there right? so we had three people tonight, three right? three three people so, we had three people and the press will say protests at
trump. we had three, we had 12000 people and they're going to so there with 12,000 people still coming and they're going to take three people, these three people and say all the protests were unbelievable. unbelievable. you know, it is like saturday night live. anybody. anybody see saturday night live? imac it was good. well, i heard about the protest and i said zero it is going to be tough, so i sent one of my guys out and i heard every newscast there will be major protests tonight in front of nbc at rockefeller center. the protests will be unbelievable. i said you know we better go in through a side door it's going to be rough tonight, it's going to be rough. so we looked and there were like 20 people outside.
so i said to my guy, i said go check it again, you must be wrong. he said 21 people total. he found one. the just before i went on i said go check it again, there is no one. you know why? they went home to watch saturday night live. is that crazy? crazy. but the press, the press was reporting massive protests against trump. it is really horrible, it is really, really horrible. honestly, you're talking about three people, one, two, three people right. they were not even in a group because who the hell wants to be in a guy like be in a guy like that with a group? seriously. sicily who wants be with them? nobody. nobody. nobody will have him. so tomorrow when you go home, or tonight when you watch your broadcast you're going to hear
about protests. you're going to hear there were protesters outside, i didn't see any, saw thousands, saw thousands of people trying to come in. that line, was four blocks long, five deep. but you are going to hear about protests and just remember what i said, it it is all a big lie. it is a big lie. it is a terrible, terrible lie. it is a terrible, terrible, lie. so i just want to close by saying, very shortly, you're fired. look, i have given up a lot to do this. i have given up a tremendous amount, i have given have given up a lot of deals, economics, shows, a lot of other
things. what i want to say is, we are going to win if i get elected, we are going to win on trade, we are going to win with isis, and boy are we going to win with them and we are win with them and we are going to do it fast. [applause]. we are going to win with our military. we are going to take care of our veterans. we are going to take care of our veterans. we are going to do great with our health care, it is going to be the finest in the land, the finest. and i can only say this, you have to remember this night, you are going to have something special. we are going to bring back our country. i use to say the silent regard lynn, it is not the silent majority, it is not the silent majority, this is a very, very vocal a very, very vocal majority. you have to keep it going. but we are going to have victory. we are going to have victory economically, we will have victories entrée, we'll entrée, we'll put our people back to work, we will not let other countries steal our jobs. it it is not going to happen anymore. we are going to have great
health care. the american dream is dead but we are going to make it bigger, better, better, stronger than ever, ever, ever before. and we are going to make america great again. i love you. i love you! i love you! thank you. thank you. thank you everybody, i love you very much. thank you. ♪ ♪ thank you very much ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
>> all campaign long, c-span will take you on the road to the white house. unfiltered access to the candidates, at town hall meetings, news conferences, rallies, and speeches. we are talking taking your comments on twitter, facebook and a phone, and always every campaign event we cover is available on our website at c-span.org. >> republican president can did it jeb bush was at the citadel military college in south carolina today. he discussed defense policy. he commented on the terrorist attacks in paris and outlined his plan for fighting isis. this is a half hour. >> [applause]. national security is a very to the state of the republican and especially to those of us who
plan on entering the military after graduation. i am uttered and excited to have the 43rd governor of florida here to speak with us today. it is a is a great concern to many cadets that the majority of the front runners in the race of the nomination do not have the experience to handle the threat we face with radical islam. today, we have the opportunity to hear from someone who is strong on national security, committed to protecting our country. governor jeb bush, is a man who travel and experience have evolved the kind of leader he is today. from this time is a 17 euro college euro college students studying abroad in guadalajara, mexico who he met his beautiful wife over 40 years. to his expenses a successful businessman businessman to his incredible feat of becoming the first republican to turn governor of the state of florida, governor bush is a man of strong leadership and sound judgment. as governor, is referred to as
veto because he vetoed over 500 items items in the budget concerning wasteful spending. his leadership oversaw the creation of over 1.3 million new jobs. unified state in shambles after experiencing four hurricanes and 44 days. a compassionate conservative, governor bush spent countless hours tending to the needs of the fourth largest state in the nation. governor bush is a champion of domestic issues, strong military and conservative principle. he will bring compassion, integrity, hard work to washington. here to speak on the vital issue of national security, ladies and and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming governor, jeb bush. [applause]. thank you thank you. [applause].
thank you so much. grant, thank you so much, who knows grant is going to be going to have a semester abroad to mexico, you may be as lucky as me. get mary, i have been married 42 years. when i went to lyon mexico, it was love at first sight, i know the kid at something that is possible, trust me, it is. it was a life changing event and i hope you all have life-changing events as you go for it in you go forward in your life but i've been blessed to have. thanks so much for allowing me to come. i really appreciate the hospitality of the citadel and the privilege of addressing members of the corps of cadets. it is great to be here and i am proud to report that in the citadel spirit i have got to the parade deck around 6:00 o'clock this morning and went on a run with the guards.
the next time a presidential candidates come by here, tell them that jeb set a new precedent. from now on, you, you cannot give a speech to cadets without first doing some pt. all of us, and for all of us what a privilege it is to be here this morning in the presence of war heroes throughout this room. for me, to be here in the presence of major general james livingston is an incredible honor. and the presidents of general livingston, you do not need reminders for me about military virtues. his character, and the character of our military is summed up in that one word on the metal he earned, valor. this marine did more than could ever be asked, gave it more than could ever be repaid, and i am incredibly honored to have his support. general livingston, it is always a blessing to be with
you. [applause]. as we gather today, we do so with memories fresh from the atrocities in paris. the indiscriminate murder of people sitting outside the café, the slaughter of innocents outside the national soccer stadium. or at a concert hall. the merciless killing of women, children, and on armed citizens who only had the crime of living in freedom. our hearts are broken for the people of france. they are our oldest and first allies and we are joined together by shared values. like france, we we know the deep sorrow of innocent life loss due to terrorist brutality. what happened on the streets of paris on friday should not come
or have come as a surprise. after all, all, we have seen isis expand its deadly reach in recent weeks to lebanon, egypt, and to turkey. to say nothing of the daily horrors faced by those who live under their control of syria, iraq, libya, and afghanistan. this brutal savagery as a reminder of what is next state in the selection. we are choosing the leader of the free world. if these attacks remind us of anything it is that we are living in serious times that require serious leadership. the free world needs to act. the last seven years under president obama has taught us that problems do not take care of themselves, in the absence of american leadership. during the state of the union address he declared we were stopping the advance of isis and soon they took from adi. last
friday, he, he repeated the delusion that isis is contained just hours before they murdered 129 innocent people in paris. hours afterward they killed dozens in beirut. america has had enough of empty words, of declarations detached from reality, of an administration with no strategy, or no intention to win. here is the truth, you will not hear from our president. we are at war with radical islamic terrorism. [applause]. it is the war of our time, a struggle that will determine our faith of the free world. three months ago at the reagan library i warned that we needed to defeat isis, i am i the clear and serious strategy to eradicate it. the action i call for remain
critical. we we must unleash the power of our air force by removing self-imposed restraints , enforce the no-fly zone, create safe zones in syria, allow, allow our special operation forces to target terrorist network and arm the kurdish forces. since the attacks in paris the demand for action to stamp out isis has right to lagrone. the united states should not delay in leading a global coalition to take out isis with overwhelming force as the words of french president has make clear, the united states will not be alone in galvanizing this global effort. militarily, we need intense fire efforts in the air and on the ground. while air power is essential, it cannot bring the results we seek. the united states in conjunction with our nato allies and more
arab partners will need to increase our presence on the ground. the scope of which should be aligned with what the military generals recommend, not politicians. to be necessary to achieve our objective. [applause]. the bulk of these ground troops will come from local forces that we have built workable relationships with. finally, to take out isis we messed and asides brutal attack on his own people. if you want to deal with the refugee problem properly we need to create a safe and secure syria. let there be no doubt this is not point to be easy. some of of you in this room will serve on the front line of that fight against isis. against radical islamic terrorists. you will sign up for an uncertain fate on foreign fields of battle, because your country
and the cause of freedom are calling you. for generations, american-led alliances, american diplomacy, american military power and american credibility defended the piece and deterred the violence. this is the way forward in our time as well. but for the united states, who is going to help our friends and allies in the middle east gain the upper hand against radical islamic terrorists like isis, al qaeda, and has block? but for the united states who will lead the effort for once and for all to stop iran's bid for nuclear weapons capability, his, his support for terrorism and its ballistic missile proliferation. but for the united states who will defend christians, religious minorities, and other persecuted people in the middle east and across the world? who will be the dependable friend of israel standing with them against the worst, if not
the united states of america? the fate of millions, the security of our own people and the cause of freedom itself all depend on the decision we make in these coming years. bad things, and sometimes it really very bad things happen when america steps away from hard challenges. it is time for america's leadership again and that leadership requires a change in course. defending our national interest always involves risks. the greatest risk of all is the risk of military inferiority. today, today, that is the direction we're headed. the next president will take office after an eight year drawdown of military power and careless chronic neglect by the president and congress. you would would be hard-pressed these days to find any soldier, sailor, airman, or marine feels
that washington is doing right by the military. and i agree. in a span of one decade our government will have had held 1,000,000,000,000 dollars from our national defense. there is no security rationale for these cuts or any kind of strategic vision. they are completely arbitrary. imposed by a process that everyone in washington claims to dislike but no one in washington has the courage to stop. in these years, we have seen cuts in defense that not only are automatic but also systematic, not only relentless but irrational. we are going from the cutting edge of military power to at the army secretary calls the ragged edge of readiness. the active army has 80000 fewer soldiers, half of our stateside marine units are not ready to fight.
twelve air force planes qualify for antique license plates in virginia. the b-52, the backbone of our bomber fleet took its first flight when harry truman was president of the united states. as for the entire naval fleet it has shrunk to half the size it was at the end of the cold war. sometimes the big problems are summed up in one anecdote, here's a story that caught my attention. to conduct training exercises under our nato applicant agents in europe, american forces have been borrowing helicopters and other vehicles from our allies. really? we do not have enough of our hardware equipment even for training purposes. so the the brits are spotting us choppers. that is not just unsafe, that is embarrassing for the greatest country in the face of the earth. whatever challenges we face in europe or else or where we are not going to meet them with borrowed equipment. others are not following our example of military downsizing,
china, to take the most obvious example has for years been spending heavily on warships, submarines, long range attack aircraft's, missile systems missile systems and other capabilities that threaten america's strategic position in the pacific. whatever china's designs are in all this we can safely assume it is not in our interest to draw down as they build up. president obama does not see a reason to change course. here in south carolina couple of weeks ago hillary clinton said that her foreign policy would be no more aggressive or forward leaning than his. let me tell you something, i reject that diminished view of america's role in the world, in my administration security for the united states will mean gaining and keeping the edge, in every category, old and new. [applause].
whether it is our command of the seas, the land, land, or the air, the space, or cyberspace, america's goal should be technical logical superiority beyond question. my plan is to maintain a force with -- such a forces needed but we must understand that sometimes deterrence fails. in such circumstances ideally after elements of american influence and power has been utilized, when the threat we face is an urgent one, and defeating it is in our national interest we must be prepared to use force. when we do use force it must be effective and our objective must be well defined. so that one deployment does not lead to endless others, or leave the job undone. any use of force will be purposeful.
aimed only towards a victory and always with a heavy thump of american power, resources, resources, and resolve on the skills of war. [applause]. i have a plan for 21st century military to project that force. to prevail in conflict or better still to deter enemies and do deter conflict we must have the instant, readiness, and equipment to meet any challenge from any adversary. we do not need to be the world's policeman but we must restore our place as the leader and indispensable power of the free world. [applause]. this is how we get there. no service branch has taken deeper personal cuts in recent
years than the army which will soon have an active duty force of just 450,000 soldiers. that is not nearly enough to protect america's interests. so, as president i would as congress for an increase of 40000 active-duty soldiers. [applause]. under my plan the marines will be restored to an in strength of 186,000 fighters. imac because in a crisis, everything can't turn on the speed, we'll act to ensure dominance in air and naval forces. we will not allow our pilots to fly 20th-century aircraft into the face of 21st-century air defenses. we must continue to invest in america special operations command.
in this complex fight against radical islamic terrorism they have demonstrated time, and time again their ability to capture and kill senior terrorists. to embed with, train, and enable local forces so a larger commitment of american forces is not required. like our military, america's intelligence agencies are overstretched and struggling to respond to technological advances by adversaries and harmful links of and leaks of sensitive information. i will give our corporation intelligence professionals, who too often go unrecognized, everything they need to support the war fighter and to get the job done. i believe in the principles that the greater our superiority in military power, the less likely it is that we will have to assert that power or be provoked into using it. our best president call that
peace through strength. this principle applies through capabilities of every kind to which all require fourth site and sustained commitment. beginning immediately as president, i will work with congress to rebuild our military forces starting with our most urgent needs. a new generation of aircraft so our planes are not older than our pilots. a naval fleet, a larger one so that our sailors patrol in the strongest and safest shift ships on the seas. an acceleration of of our submarine program so that america will always be a quiet whisper in our adversaries here. improve missile defenses to do that and the growing threats against iranian and north korean missiles. cyber community occasion against anything against them so that we find threats before the threats find us. i will fight to restore the patriot act metadata program to ensure we have the ability to connect the dots between known
foreign terrorists and the potential operatives here in the united states of america. [applause]. look, if there's ever time for such a product program it is now. yet too few in congress were courageous enough to defend this program when it mattered most. i have also laid out a plan here in south carolina just a few months ago to address the virginia scandal and it is a scandal. we need to modernize the department and empower vets with as many choices as they need to ensure those who serve our country are treated with the dignity they deserve when they return home. [applause]. these are among the goals of the 21st-century military plan that i will put before the next congress. not because i seek war, but
because we all seek peace. i believe the best policy for creating the conditions for pieces to develop the capability to wage a war with crushing force. however, we cannot and will not simply throw money at the problem. we need to reform the pentagon shedding over head from a different generation and adapted to our 21st century challenges. >> ..
that america's retaliation to a cyberattack would be certain and of state-owned -- davis one dash devastating. america has a policy some up in a single word. first, president kennedy explained i do not mean if or but or when but period. [applause] if they were to take command of our future we must ensure the military is first period once again. in the armed forces need to know support for the military is not another partisan issue and the commander in chief is not
just another politician. in every circumstance to shortchange our military and our troops need to be certain the commander in chief has there back. [applause] i am mindful to have great traditions in charleston has a great history of a city where the civil war for shots were fired and the president abraham lincoln did so with humility. even knowing the greater price of surrender and as we gather in the aftermath medicis said this generation knew the cost of four but the even greater cost of acquiescence that this is no
coexistence. to declare war on the western world you cannot negotiate with this threat we have one option to defeat [applause] >> we can take inspiration from the courage of france said those who liberated more than 70 years ago of the coast above the beach those of americans age one died to stop the evil of their time they traded their future for hours those grave markers would face west to
the america they would never return not only at the price of freedom during our time some of you will protect that freedom from the evil we face today it is my mission that shaggy be sent into harm's way that you would be given every two will to wage war with these -- the bill for city efficiency. to have the support from washington as the american people as resolute as i will be to defeat radical islamic terrorism wherever it appears. >> protect our vital interest to defend the
in the campaign against a candidate from the other party a solid generation older than he was. the next year we may get a chance to super history repeats itself in such close proximity. the senator from florida and presidential candidate marco rubio. [applause] >> good to see you again. thanks for being here. started with the news from paris in the atrocities that took place on friday on the attacks speaking at the meeting in turkey president
holland said it was enacted for changes of the french constitution to take aggressive actions to prosecute the war french warplanes are an action over the weekend calling for a complete the different approach how we deal with radical islam but above the by contrast sibley continue the same strategy we will intensify and his critics at home who have been criticizing him for not doing enough compared to what happened to france on friday is a fundamental change or a revision of what we're doing we're reducing and? ltd. doesn't require fundamental change the fact for the better part of a year-and-a-half but the of president problem is
domestic politics iran for the presidency as its mandate to extract the united states for further integument to the middle east he wanted his presidency to say i got us out without any more entanglements but history does not stop. so as the issue has gotten worse and worse it will take a more robust engagement to turn the corner. a president rhetorically will not make that commitment or literally as well. you have seen tactical changes from the strategic point to view it still does not have a well-defined strategy toward isis in general you cannot pull together a global coalition only american leadership can give the allied is such a strategy. only we can lead such a coalition.
facility is constrained by his ideology but also the domestic political consideration not wanting to read untangle in another conflict. and then to be confronted while largely based in iraq is in syria and libya. >> in years time what would you do? >> we can do this the right to go back to 2012 it is the argument we did not start the syrian civil war. it is a function the sudanese rebeling against the voskhod regime. and -- assad regime. this conflict will create a
vacuum that kid be filled by radicals jihadist in foreign fighters that is why we believe we needed to do that so strongly in we did not know we have seen that play out ultimately i systole be defeated by the sunni themselves. they have to be the predominant force on the ground to beat them militarily but that will only have a chance of success if united states pulls together the coalition in the effort to do so. with that high profile network to criticize this to conduct operations to the propaganda it is an unstoppable force still in
it but the president has a reauthorize special force. >> 50 special operators that i believe is insufficient number. ultimately the numbers the to be set by the tactician's that is their job to come up with a strategy entellus the numbers required to do so. i'll believe it is 50 it don't believe you -- the military commander said that is sufficient we need to agree airstrikes and maybe even moving into iraq. many death special operators on the ground it in the process and also the allies in jordan said arabia that
will comprise the bulk of the ground force th will comprise the bulk of the ground force that has to be is to meet -- sunni lead ever. we will have been issued with the shia militia you can anticipate a coalition presence on the ground will trigger attacks from the shia against us as well. anticipate that. and/or anyone from the assad will be in power they are one of the many irritants that have caused prices to gain ground that is whether presence of russians further complicates. >> host: he dussek with a strategy that assad has to go so when president hollande called with cooperation on russia and united states. >> if you defeat basis
antisexist still in power then you're dealing with another group to be any time in the future i am saying there is greater stability necessary to be no safe operating space you see what is happening largely under reported to bring foreign fighters it is perfectly positioned to go into syenite in egypt and into europe as well. libya has a growing problem as well with this. >> who is this? >> with his treatment of
the. >> host: in particular is one of the irritants. that is what they have taken care of. as long as there is the assad and power the irritant will still be there to take a bid to do what is happening is it's our job to put it back together but we can be assured there are elements of the grout that they can organize or call last and ultimately conduct. >> if they are the only plausible alternative venue will strengthen anger get more attacks. >> assad has not been successful model. in fact, look at the russian conduct they have been
against the non jihadist elements. that is what putin wants after e. white dash all the non isis spiders on the ground i'll think he is there personally and i am for the regime that is also see based they can be established in the middle east is a key component because or putin this is multifaceted to show the world to the power broker and allows the world to be distracted from the ukraine and also to appear as a strong global leader for the catastrophe. >> this is against the
radical islam. >> if it's the same then to wipe out the non fisa spiders led dash -- isis biters. >> that could potentially as the islamic state has no ability as assad is using limited air forces. >> for those thousands killed by a assad i am not sure they would agree because this is to allow refugees to find a place to go that does not involve an unstable journey into europe
where non assad syrians can organize themselves as an alternative to assad as the effective fighting force. they need a safe operating space the way people with the safe operating space is libya were the islamic state can establish. i want to be on the record about this part of their growing influence in afghanistan and competition for the taliban they're starting to percolate in pakistan that is a dangerous development since it is a nuclear arms state also to foster sectarian strife we were seeing greater increase read on their part to have the clear goal to be positioned this is a group
that is not conditioned - - condemned it is already shown in external operations as well. >> and leroy incapable to discourage the russians. >> but that is their choice to have a superior voluntary capability. >> those that are there for the purpose for the islamic state and then to have no reason to go over the no-fly zone. >> host: what about the united states?
to see how all palpable this is domestically they are french citizens. al vulnerable is the united states do this type of attack? >> we are vulnerable it could happen at any moment or any time we just know that this is true there is an element that has the capability to do so. the danger is multifaceted those that had been said here for a specific purpose is this the other facet to gain inspiration with publications put out to conduct an attack that is
why our intelligence programs are so important bellies to apply colleagues are aspiring to the presidency just to the last month and a half with a weakening of our capabilities leaves america of vulnerable and that is what has happened. through a combination of disclosures by edward snowden also to the weakening of our own programs that are phased out as a result of actionable intelligence. >> but the issue of surveillance have been very emphatic with privacy it is important that we will find
out there are haitians now that literally cannot be accessed because the changes that they were made when you force them to make that information available? >> the one is to provide for the national security is the united states they should be fired and prosecuted for having done so well will allow us to save american lives. to of the confidence or the money or the time that we need to have access to this information especially in the circumstances we need the cooperation of these companies because at the end of the day the number one obligation is the like a threat we have never faced. mentioned about the technology's you talk about
encryption at the communications security that have improved and they have learned from failures of the past. we need to stay ahead of that that will not prevent every attack sadly the matter how good we get the threat is so multifaceted we cannot prevent every single one but i do believe of the current program has left us unnecessarily vulnerable for the follow-up attacks. >> host: the president said after 11 state governors say they will not accept migrants and their own states. >> it is a tough issue going to the core but the flip
side will have to provide for our own national security my problem with the migrants i am convinced we can't begin to to adequately to a background check on to a thousand people it is maliki to pick up the phone to the syrian government is not the documents in terms of what they are saying. it is it easy to conduct a background check from that part of the world. if you let ted thousand in 9,999 innocent one is a well trained fighter you have a huge problem. that is the problem with this program is not that our hard as a break but what if one is wrong? the consequences are
extraordinary the better approach is to have ancient communities to be driven from their ancestral homeland bin to drive hundreds of thousands of people permanently away to go back millennia. >> the immigration to of partisanship with those illegal syrians here in united states is to get ben attacked by senator cruz in
particular it with amnesty in the past. where are you now and how you respond to that charge? >> running in nomination for the presidency for those who are here legally donald trump wants them to leave before that then to bring them back everybody supports legalizing through some criteria to change the position we have a right. >> host: extending that these the program? finicky wanted 9% increase to bring people out just not grant citizenship if he
changed his position he should be asked to clarify in 2013 this country needs to do with it to the hopes that the house would take it up further to offer a choice of reform because the trip this the democrats have the majority of the house and did absolutely nothing on immigration. what i learned in the american people had zero trust in the federal government to enforce the law. need to fix what we have been deal with the people that are here but not unless they are assured it will not happen again. just to say we will enforce it they wanted done. that was not much dash that
was an extraordinary revelation they will see it working before they give you the support. the only way to move forward is to approve the that illegal immigration is under control. it has been substantially lowered and we know what it takes to do that. to those that are here illegally because they overstayed also the second step needs to be modernizing the legal immigration system to be merit based so the primary criteria is what they can contribute economically not if they have a relative then i think the american people are
reasonable what you do with someone who was here 10 years but has not violated the law? come forward if you cannot pass the background check you have to leave otherwise when english pay taxes pay a fine and get a work permit that is all you get after 10 years than i inversely open to allow people to apply for a green card. others say leave them at a work permit i don't think that should stop them to move forward but it is better then we have now and i'm open to let them apply for the green card the you cannot do this all at once it has been tried here four times over the last decade met with failure there is no comprehensive approach that has a chance of passage in
any time in the near future. >> host: the term that was striking last week that when governor bush and governor john kasich said this is not the american way. they have been here for many years we will not send them away or pull parents away from their children. they were very passionate about the humanitarian consequences dealing with enforcement. >> you have no right to the degree to any country yes i understand the human aspect that is that makes it difficult some have very compelling stories others have taken a vintage of the system. i see it all. it isn't something i have read in the book i have
lived it. my family is immigrants my wife's family every neighbor is a degree or first generation american i know every aspect personally. if we deal with people in this country illegally because they appeal to our compassion and common sense but there is the right to legally emigrate we do this because it is in the best interest of america. i don't dig you can deport them for a variety of reasons and it undermines the ability and encourage people to come legally in the future if we can modernize the legal immigration most are willing to be realistic and responsible for those over a
significant period of time. >> they are offering tax reform as to compare with romney in 2012 with revenue neutral with a tax plan even with dynamic stowe -- scoring increase the deficit.n with dynamic stowe -- scoring increase the deficit. you don't cut the top rates of personal taxes much to have a massive expansion and i asked about this last week with the $170 billion for that tax credit but once you expend them they become very
hard so they are a permanent fixture hard to reduce it is another big in fatima program you are creating. >> tax policy isn't an entitlement because that to be reformed and change as we do now. i would argue first don't just look at the top rate because we take them of all companies that pay on personal rates that could be 39.5% see corporations and pastors at a flat rate of 25% in immediate control of expenses the does away with the need for all the loopholes move to a territorial system ready only major industrial country that taxes on a worldwide system.
to a trillion dollars of taxes are oversees the gdp of russia we will not get all the back but a significant portion if we move to a territorial system of taxation. talk about tax credits then i want to talk about the debt that tax credit i proposed is for work begins you can get the tax credit if you don't work you have to pay payroll tax to qualify. it is a pro work tax is also a unique 21st century reality it is expensive to raise a family. there are significant costs associated with raising children for working families so they can keep their own money to save for college or pay for child care at least 30 of the 50 states is no more expensive
in college. i am raising four kids now you give them shoes in january now you have to pay again in march they are real expenses. they tried to reflect the tax code of the reality of 21st century life. we need to understand the debts is not just sheer dollars if italy had a $5 trillion debt it is a catastrophe if we had a $5 trillion debt we would not even talk about it because we have an $18 trillion economy but to bring that down to a sustainable level there will always be some level but it has to be manageable. this is the business side along with regulatory reform.
there is a lot of people on medicare and social security my mother is one of them. she is 85. we still have time to save these programs with a long-term spending trend. >> we made those public officials. >> one way or another or it will be changed in one not grow as fast as i have been financially successful the benefits could take the medicare money they begin to
bring stability long-term fresno is to workers for every retiree u.s. to the entitlement reform or you'll never bring the debt under control. it is the unavoidable outcome. >> host: i a couple more questions spinner all candidates are critical of the federal reserve and janet yellen can i ask you don't write if your president we do have a chance to renominate? the neck i would not everything on the news is what will the fed do? hopefully you'll have a debate there is no
substitute for tax policy to create an environment conducive to economic growth. >> you have somebody in mind ? >> my problem is this notion of the fed is overactive i think we have done harm to america. >> access to easy money with zero interest with the stock market results in in many ways that is why i am a strong believer of fed
policy for this instinctive we will get into the room but it isn't based on any sort that is the constant speculation with that uncertainty that'd jack's into the economy it allows us to smooth out the ebbs and flows of the economic cycles and has the confidence to invest in the future. >> in one of the biggest trade deals in this region
and a very long time. to publish the details say couple of weeks ago he had not read it yet i'm sure you get a chance but this is a hugely important issue every republican president has opening measures. >> i support free trade but this specific one we literally just got it one week ago with a 90 day review period. it is this something i cannot be supportive of because this trade deal is important for a number of reasons because commerce is occurring in this part of the world the impact could be catastrophic and plays perfectly into the hands of
influence. >>. >> you said you are for trade. >> that is even before it was announced catering to labor constituents that are far to the left. i support that fast-track authority so we can conclude this negotiation and then before i can become a champion of this deal but we need a free trade deal from the geopolitical perspective >> i want to support it has to be a good deal. >> there is a microphone. you have a few minutes.
>> ended his right to make the proper interest in held accountable by the electorate in with those presidential candidates anymore than the u.k. to agree with nasa. and we have a right to make that end they will be the best friend in the world. ultimately that is to make bad decisions about what is right in the future. >> that will not change the nature of our relationship. >> companies represent millions of the employees
and their lives. >> another great friend in the world looking at the balkanization of syria what do you think about that? >> if think the of border but if you look at it you have an enclave in your damascus a massive population and kurds of north in syria and iraq with a shia majority around baghdad christian communities driven with full or prison tune substantial portion to return to their ancestral homeland and the
artificial ones that were drawn without any thought process to all of this. it -- ideally the with those nations date elements but it is increasingly difficult to envision how that happens in the future. it is touched upon the comments of today to work with those who need -- sunni but that drives a wedge with the shiite groups that came from tehran. site think it has been vulcanized for a period of time. that was before the invasion of iraq so that is why i alluded to that old think you'll see entered into canada. the national security is a to make sure that the nation states reform. we will love to see that the
our national security interest is to ensure in the process there is not vacuum is created for radical jihadist groups with the external ambitions to organize and that is what is happening hellhole instability -- though whole instability has been created to be a safe haven. they cannot conduct these external attacks they needed safe havens in afghanistan and then to conduct the attacks and a national security interest to prevent them of those that govern the territory and then to be extremely difficult.
>>. >> i am from wisconsin to read what portables joliet? [laughter] >> over the last stage of the union we have agendas from presidents that we have seen the limits of political capital to accomplish things in washington. what would be the two or three the news you can accomplish for sure? >> that is an excellent question for them to take off an office with limited capital we spend it or revisit so prioritize
quickly you should know that if you're running for president. the first spends political capital on dodd/frank and obamacare but in my mind their two major threats so giving the nation a clearer for policy to leave our adversaries respectful combined with the national security summit the secretary of defense will share with you how catastrophic the sequester is to the long-term viability of a national security in this country the other is everything possible to ensure america fills its potential we're now engaged not just in a rapidly evolving economy but a massive restructuring and changing faster than ever
and is global in requires us to compete better global level that is why we can tackle tax reform to make us more competitive the full utilization of the energy resources and the repeal of the free-market alternative. three build national security and our competitiveness the third with the to modernize higher education faster and easier and cheaper with the renewed focus on career training the best jobs require more than a high-school but less than four years alternatives to war competency based learning to allow people to get credit for life experience and work experience slight proposed
alternative accrediting models and the alternative to student loans for students investment plans allowing them to pay for their studies and right to know before you go before you take out the state won't schools are required to tell you if somebody graduates from that school with that degree. this is awfully well we will confront in the next presidencies to back the senate has a very busy schedule thank you. [applause] .
helped organize this even to. also our c-span and public radio audience. #npc newsmaker. now our speaker america called most popular populist you will not see her name on the presidential primary in to hold them for both parties that's accountable that wall street accountability college affordability id in cannes and equality and women's equality but if hillary clinton moves closer to solidify support can senator warren still serves as the power broker to help the
public policy debate? should begin serving her first term and i should begin serving her first term and is a democrat and is widely recognized as the architect of the consumer financial protection bureau i wish it had a simpler name. cfpd - - b but cheering the oversight panel for troubled assets of the beef program or that t.a.r.p. program after the financial crisis she was elected to the senate in 2012 with those passive tax to financial institutions and has written extensively on issues you 82 economic fairness it has published 10 books m3 best sellers.
she did raise eyebrows a few months ago when she had a private brunch with president biden when he was weighing his decision to get into the race. after much speculation the potential for a biden - warren ticket evaporated when the vice president said he would not be participating. so, it remains to be seen whom the senator will endorse, but for now we are just going to welcome her to the press club where she wants to talk about the international corporate tax and reform. she will take questions from the audience. welcome. >> thank you very much. clapmac it much. [applause]. it is good to be here. i appreciate your list because i wanted to come here to expand that list a little bit. changes in the air and washington. the lobbyists lobbyists are swarming on capitol hill, buzzes everywhere, congress is going to revive the
corporate tax code and the time is nearly here. so, the lobbyists have a pretty strong elevator pitch, it goes like this. u.s. corporations are paying too much in taxes, the tax corporate rate is 35% which is much higher than the rest of the developed world and it is forcing u.s. corporations to flee abroad. the solution the solution is to/corporate rates across the board. so, that is the elevator pitch. the story of over taxation is everywhere. it is told and retold for lobbyists for giant corporations, told and retold by their friends in congress and promoted by more than one republican candidate for president. i put together a sampling of what the republican candidates have said. ben carson - our government is driving businesses to other countries because our corporate tax rate
is the second highest in the world. donald trump-art multinational corporations can't compete because we have the worst corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. marco rubio --dash the u.s. imposes a double tax on the corporate earnings of u.s. multinationals, holding back our nations potential to compete around the globe. there is only one problem with the over taxation story, it is not true. there is a problem with corporate tax code but that is not it. so, let it go through the numbers. let's start let's start with the claim that u.s. corporations pay more than therefore counterparts. now, it is true the highest nominal tax rate on paper is 35%. but hardly anybody actually pays that rate. multiple studies have estimated the average effective tax rate
for corporations, the tax rate they actually take to the u.s. government after they take advantage of the deductions, exemptions, credits, is only 20%. 20% is right in the middle of corporate taxes paid in the rest of the world. right in the middle. so, the tax rate is about average. what about the trendline? are corporate taxes getting more burdensome as lobbyists claim? no. in fact there has been a ten-point decline in effective tax rates for u.s. corporations between 1998 and 2013. but there is a deeper line hidden right at the center of the elevator pitch. the tax code is so tangled up with exceptions, with credits that some of the biggest corporations the effective federal income tax rate is zero.
that's right, not 35 percent, not 20 percent, 020%, 0%. for example, over a five-year period boeing, general electric, and verizon paid nothing in net federal income tax. that is across a five-year five-year period. these fortune 500 companies reported nearly $80 billion in combined profits and actually got tax rebates from the federal government. now what is the problem with our corporate texaco? it is not it is far too high for giant corporations as lobbyists would say, no, whether we generate taxes is far too low, the trendline here is unmistakable. over over the past 60 years corporations have contributed a smaller and smaller, and smaller share to the cost. in the 1950s is about three
out of every $10 in federal revenue. today, corporations contribute just one out of every $10. well, of all countries, 75% of them collected higher corporate tax revenues as a shared gdp as we do here in the united states. that that means three quarters of all developed countries require corporations, just a few of the countries that collect a bigger share of corporate tax revenue than the united states. now think about this, fortune 500 companies probably proclaim they are making record-breaking profits and then they hire armies of lawyers to make sure they do not pay taxes on those
record breaking profits. i could give you a dozen examples of how different tax dodges work. there is check the box, reverse hybrid mismatches, inversions, earnings, stripping's, but before you head to the execs because that you're afraid that is what i will do, i will focus on one, i, i will just highlight one of these. that is attributing corporate income to the subsidiary set up of offshore tax savings. at the end of last year nearly 3/4 of all fortune 500 companies operated subsidiaries in tax havens. based on filings with the fcc, these 358 companies reported at least 7622 tax haven subsidiaries. that is more than 21 tax haven haven subsidiaries for each
fortune 500 company. the tax dodgers that shift money to these lows tax are an average the tax rates of just 3%. not the 35% of the elevator pitch, a tidy little 3%. the amount of money tucked away in tax havens is truly staggering. together, u.s. corporations have $2.1 trillion in untaxed profits sitting offshore. once again, look at the trend line. in just the past ten years the amount of untaxed, offshore profit has increased nearly fivefold.
in other words, one of the hottest investments in america in the past decade hasn't been biotech or big oil, it has been tax lawyers. the money sheltered overseas is now about the same as the combined total earnings of all u.s. corporations into a 2013. but here's the trick, that tax bonus is not shared evenly. now the game is rigged and it is rigged for the really big guys. out of the millions of businesses in the u.s., just 50 corporations hold 75% of the $2.1 trillion in untaxed offshore profits. even in that error there is a tax dodger hall of fame, just ten american companies hold more than one third of all of those
offshore profits. here's the real kick in the teeth, the average american household pays federal tax rate of 17.6%. the average tax rate for the corporation with fewer than 500%. but the biggest american companies are paying far, far less. in many cases nothing at all. they enjoy all of the benefits of being an american company but they leave it to leave it to families and small businesses to pick up the bill. for years now gridlock in washington has worked in favor of the tax dodgers. despite the expose in the media the corporations and their top executives continue to sweep sleep comfortably secure in the
knowledge they could block any real tax reforms. but now, there is it change in the wind. why? because the giant tax dodgers themselves are lobbying for change in the tax laws and they are lobbying hard. they are even signaling they just might be willing to bring some of that sheltered money back to the united states if we will give them a sweet enough deal to do that. so what is going on? why the sudden chain? a burst of conscious? patriotism? no. as always, it it is about money. while the united states congress may be asleep at the switch others countries are waking up to tax dodgers and they are starting to rewrite their tax law. many of of our global competitors have started cracking down on the infamous
levels of tax avoidance by u.s. companies. they know u.s. corporations are shuffling cash through their borders without paying taxes and they want their cut. the u.k. for example is developing a new tax to go after profits hidden away by u.s. companies. what is the name of the bill? they are calling it the google tax. the european court of justice is striking down sweetheart deals for u.s. companies and their subsidiaries around europe. your pain has been ramping up tax investigation and climb back tax benefits collected by u.s. corporations. the g20 just released a sweeping new plan for cracking down on cross-border tax gains. there is a move afoot internationally to shut down tax dodgers. even even here in the u.s. the treasury department is entering in tax information exchange agreement with other countries to uncover hidden
cash. the treasury is also developing new country by country reporting requirements that will shine a light on the scams used by the tax dodger. in fact it is so bad that tax advisers have been setting out to panicky alerts warning that other countries have crumbled to the tax dodger game and as always the days of single-digit corporate tax rates are coming to an end. so these giant corporations have suddenly found religion. they say it is time for tax reform. of course, they, they plan to write the tax reform. their strategy is simple, tell a story about about how u.s. taxes demand tax cuts for the you night states congress and threaten to leave the united states for good if they don't get what they want. i say it is time to call their bluff. why?
first, because i know tax rate for giant american corporations are far lower than the lobbyist claim. second. second, i know the tax deals available abroad are disappearing fast. third, and most of all i know america is a great place to do business and that is worth a lot to these multinational corporations. we have the world's best work force, smart, skilled, hard-working. we have the world's most attractive consumers, hundreds of millions most attractive consumers, hundreds of millions of people who are ready to buy. we have the world's most reliable and transparent legal system. we have the deepest and most liquid capital markets. we markets. we have copyright and patent laws that will ward innovation. one evidence for why this is a good and how much people believe this is a good place to do business? look where startups are going. more. more than 3% of newly started businesses with physical headquarters in the u.s. chose to incorporate, not in a tax
shelter. i set it backwards. fewer than 3% chose to incorporate in a tax shelter. tax shelters won't build the next new industry either. america is a great place to do business and our companies know it. so if we think about fixing our broking tax code we should bet on america and we should focus on actual problems not the fake ones pursued by the tax dodgers, by the lobbyist, and by the presidential candidates who are hoping to attract big corporate contributions. it is time to reform the tax code but let's do it right. how about three principles here. first, tax reform must substantially increase this share of long-term revenues paid by big corporations. not just over the next five or ten years but permanently. our tax system has already been so corrupted by tax dodgers that
a revenue neutral rewrite of our corporate tax laws leaves this country with too little money to operate basic services. if america is going to build the 21st century infrastructure, operate 21st-century schools and invest in 21st century research, then giant corporations must pay a fair share of the costs. second, tax reform must level the playing bill between small businesses and big businesses. in cambridge doesn't stash profits in luxembourg. in the bakery and all arlington doesn't put money in the cayman islands. auto electric cannot hire an army of lawyers to set up a reverse hybrid mismatch to lower their taxes. these loopholes and gimmicks are available only to giant corporations. when small businesses have to
pick up a disproportionate share of the taxes paid will be that much harder for them to compete. third, tax reform should promote investment and jobs here in the united states. the loopholes that litter our tax code and allow tax dodgers to hide cash overseas also actively encourage multi- national to outsource jobs and invest money abroad. right now, u.s. companies can take a lower rate by investing overseas instead of the u.s. for companies can strip out profits. these three principles, raise more long-term revenue, level the playing field for small
businesses and invest in jobs in america. most americans probably agree with me, it is common sense. but congress doesn't congress doesn't talk to most americans. congress talks to ceos and their armies of lawyers and lobbyists who are pushing. i want you to consider three tax proposals, first repatriation. this is a giant wet kiss for the tax dodgers who have already lost 2,100,000 dollars overseas. it says overseas. it says bring home the money but only pay half of what you all. or, with negotiations going on in capitol hill right now if that kiss is not wet enough, some are suggesting the repayment rate should be even less than half may be around%. think about what that means.
all of the businesses that have been paying their taxes in full keep on paying in full but the tax dodgers will get a special rate. but apple with a tax break of $27 billion. microsoft would save $18 billion. citigroup would save $7 billion. and what's the total price tag for this is juicy smooch? estimates are in the range of 300 to $400 billion paid by u.s. taxpayers. right at the moment when other countries are starting to get tough in the attached dodgers one of their money back to the united states, washington top reform idea is to give the tax dodgers a big tax break.
now the second ideas even worse. the ideas tax overseas income but to do it at a rate that is lower than u.s. income. so for example, money earned in the u.s. would have a top tax rate of 35% while the top rate for money held abroad would be 19% or maybe even less. it is like holding up a giant sign to all corporation that says, higher taxes if you invest in the u.s., lower taxes if you invest abroad. the result would be for every small business in every family in america would be subsidizing foreign investments of multinational corporations which would be a great deal for those multinational corporations and for our foreign competitors, but a terrible deal for us. the third idea is called an innovation box. i think about it as the kiss for
lazy tax dollars to her's. to get this loophole you don't have to move money around or corporate subsidiaries, no. instead a corporation can just text the innovation box on its tax return and magically pay lower taxes on the earnings it claims came from innovation. so big pharmaceutical companies and giant tech companies a provision like this just make pain a chunk of taxes optional. now look, i strongly support a robust innovation policy, like, like investing in nsf or nih. i believe in basic research and encouraging companies to invest in research. but the innovation box does not do a single thing to encourage new innovations. lobbyists and lawyers are really excited about the prospect of tax reform.
tax nerds are a buzz, but when i look at the details, i see the same rigged game. a game where congress hands out billions in benefits to well-connected corporations while people who could really use a break, the millions of middle-class families and small businesses that have been squeeze for decades are just left holding the bag. that is what this tax battle is really about. who does this country work for? is it just for the rich and powerful? those those who can hire armies of lobbyists and lawyers. can we make this country work for millions of hard-working people? this is not a fair fight. the corporate giants are lined up to make sure the tax changes
all tilt their way. america's working working families don't have a zillion dollar pr team to counter the false claim that corporate taxes too high. small businesses do not have a zillion dollar lobbying organization to fight back against tax giveaways for giant corporations. mostly, what they have is you. the people in this room. the people who report on what is going on in washington. the people who will hear the elevator pitch over, and over. and they will decide whether to repeat it or push back. as tax reform moves forward i hope each and everyone of you will be paying very close attention. thank you. [applause]. >> thank you, i have some questions that many people
participate in the audience here. you have been talking about corporate taxes but there is a question here about individual taxes as well. a lot of americans sympathize with the republican argument that the tax code is too complicated, is it too complicated and can it be simplified in a way that a way that is fair, would you simplify? >> yes it is to complicated. it is hard. i always made it a point of pride to fill out my own taxes. it has lots of moving parts to it. it is complicated. what worries me the most is what is hidden in the complication. it's that the system overall is tilted, it's not like there is a bunch of random stuff in here and sometimes it will help poor people and sometimes it will help middle-class wagers, sometimes it will help this group or that group, no. it is that the tax code has been reshaped over time and particularly over the last decade.
the reshaping has expanded the number of twists and turns that permit billion-dollar multinational corporation to say woo hoo, this is great. invest in tax lawyers because we will not have to pay money if we can exploit enough of these loopholes. this is available to anybody else. i don't think the answers to try to figure out how to get middle-class americans to shelter their money and it became an islands. i think the answer is we have to get a system that is level and that means giant corporations should not be getting a competitive advantage in this economy simply because they can exploit tax loopholes that are not available to anybody else. for me that is the hardest.
>> some candidates have also suggested a lemonade the irs altogether. just not having an irs. is that a practical idea? is there any formulas that that that make sense? >> no. [laughter] >> okay thank you. what about the republicans who want to impeach the irs commissioner, is there any validity to their charges against him or how do you feel about that issue question mark. >> you know, look they can make whatever claim they want to make and try to do whatever they want to do, it's politics. what i want to talk but is really what's in the tax code. i'm serious about this. this issue is upon us. the tax lobbyists are swarming capitol hill. everyone is starting to talk, tax rewrite, tax rewrites, tax rewrite. we need tax rewrite that has a voice at the table for middle-class family. a voice at the table for small
as this is, voice at the table for those who really are left to compete in a tough economy. right now the united states taxpayers are subsidizing some of the largest and most profitable corporations in the entire world. that is where the true scandalous. that is where we need to flipping on all of the lights and exposing it. >> obviously one of your main concern has been incoming equality. this morning you did another press conference about women and equality wages and all that, is the best way to get to income equality through this tax coders that really more of an issue through things like minimum wage, which way to get at income inequality more efficiently question mark. >> so if you let me, i will do a little bit longer answer to this. this is why the whole you list,
all of these pieces are woven together. let me start this way. america was a booming economy until we had the 1930s, in the 1930s the real genius of the moment that came out of the great depression was saying we can make this better going for. we can put regulations in place with banks, we can separate high risk gambling from boring banking that was glass beagle. we can do progressive taxation and invest in building a middle class. that is exactly what we did. we did. we invested in education, g.i. bills, we invested in infrastructure, interstate highway system, power grid that was upgraded, we invested in basic research, medical research, scientific research,
engineering research with the idea that if we made those investments we would create the right environment. we whip all the field so that businesses could grow here at home. they could could create great new jobs here in america. people who worked hard and play by the rules to get an education and have real opportunity and for half a century it worked. from the 1930s until the 1980 much happen across that. is gdp kept going up and so did the income in the united states. the 90% of america everybody at the top 10%, okay top 10% moved a little faster but the point is we built america's middle class.
then, just take in 1980 as a point of inflection obviously the years over lap a bit, but picking 19 it is a point of inflection a new idea take hold. the new idea that comes his trickle-down economics. trickle-down economics is two parts, one is directly, fire the cops, not the cops on main street cops street caps on wall street. second, cut taxes for those at the top. how can you do that? the only way you can afford to do that is that you cut all of those other investments that helped us build the middle class. that is exactly what happened. we could go through the numbers bulimic cut to the bottom line, 1980 until 2012 the latest year for which we have data, how is the 90% done? the group that is not in the top 10%? remember how they got 70% of all
income growth from 1935 to five to 1980, will from 1980 until 2012 they got 0% of income growth in america. none. nothing. 100% of income growth in this country went to the top 10% in america. is it related related to taxes? you bet it is related to taxes. it is related to what we didn't spent in investing in education what we did not invest in infrastructure, what we didn't invest in jobs here in america,, what we did not invest in research, it is related to firing the cops on wall street and sane have added, build an entire industry out of cheating people on mortgages, credit cards. that is the heart of what is going on. now those people have so many lobbyists in washington, so many
lawyers crawling across capitol hill that we are ready to rewrite the tax code in their various, you bet, they want to rewrite the tax code to pick up even more benefits for themselves. that is why say the fundamental question in america today is who does this government work for? doesn't just work for those who can hire an army of lobbyist or lawyers or are we going to make this country work for the rest of america? >> the plans that you talked about of changing the corporate tax code would moderate democrats in the congress support you? how much support is there for this idea of re-shaping the tax code? >> well, we'll find out. i mean, look part of his starts and have always pushed back on the elevator speech. the elevator speeches everywhere, you heard that elevator speeches everywhere, you heard that republican candidates, does anybody but impact check them? on these assertions about how much american corporations are paying in taxes?
we have to start by having the conversation and then why does anybody who claims to want to rebuild america milk middle-class. anybody who claims to be there for small businesses even midsize businesses, anybody, anybody who claims to care about jobs in america should want to sign up hook, line, and, and sinker for these tax proposals. >> i just want to switch to other topics people of talked out. the minimum wage he touched on briefly. their different proposals out there for $15 or $12, do support either the 12 or 15 and what a steep hike have any impact on hurting job creation in low-income states? are there some problems with having some federal minimum wage
that's a hard question mark. >> look, i want to keep see the minimum wage go up and i will put anything that will raise minimum wage i think it's the right direction to go. i am a data nerd. the data just don't support the claim that when minimum wage goes up that employment goes down. look at study after study, the gold standard of studies, when the minimum wages put in place across the metropolitan area and because half of the city is in one state and happens in another or because half the cities in the county and half is outside the county you can actually do a comparison what happens before and after. you just do not see a strong measurable impact as a
consequence of raising minimum wage. there are a few reasons for this. one, it turns out higher minimum wage means lower turnover. people are more stable in their jobs, employers don't have to spend as much training people and so on. part of it is people who work at minimum wage than all that money. they spend it locally. so it is a real shot in the arm for a lot of local economies for people to have more money. i i hear from small business owners around massachusetts who say they are doing the right thing, they are going up there and tried to get their work as a living wage. they just like everyone they are competing against to have to do the same. that is what i think raising the minimum wage is all about. it's about trying to weather the plane feel. i know you want the lightning round but let me say something real quick about the minimum wage. this one is really personal to me. i'll do a very short version of this, my family had some really
tough times. when i was 12 my dad was out of work for long time and i had a stay-at-home mom. we lost our family car, we were right on the edge of losing our house. my mother put on her best stress and lipstick, put on her high heels and she walked to the seals sears roebuck and got a minimum wage job. that minimum ways job saved our house and it saved our family. but i grew up in america where minimum wage job would keep a family of three afloat. today, a minimum wage job in america will not even keep a mama and a baby out of poverty. this is about economics but this is also a fundamentally moral question. no one in america should work full-time and still live in
poverty. we can do better than that as a country. [applause]. >> there is another issue that you have been dealing with today that is the transpacific partnership. the information that has been made public all 6000 pages, can you tell us more about your thoughts on why you oppose it and give us an update on where you see this issue moving forward. congress would have to approve it, will it move in 2016 to the floor of the senate and the house? what is this likely to happen question mark. >> and lots of questions in there, if i don't do it all you can elbow me on it i will try to remember. let me start on the trade deal with the process of getting where we are today. >> as negotiations took place there were clear advisors,
people here in the united states met with them talked with them, help shade the trade deal and 85% of them were either corporate ceos or lobbyists. that builds a tilt into the entire process. now we've seen the product and the tilt is right in the product. let me give you one example, the administration talks a lot about the great promises in the trade deal unemployment and competition for workers around the world, on human rights. and there are some good promises. but promises without enforcement are not worth the paper they are printed on. so what is the enforcement? the answer answer is, it is the same enforcement of every trade deal
that precedes it that has not worked. so, i want to be clear on this, going back years and years now democratic administrations and republican administrations have not enforced the labor provisions, the environmental provisions, an earlier trade agreement so the promises can get fancier but if there's no enforcement there's nothing there. on the other side, what about the giant corporations? the ones who want to trade all around the world and what local countries to follow rules that make it profitable for the corporations. if they don't like how something has gone and what they believe are the promises they are entitled to, what they have to do? they just just have to go to a private arbitration board. private. that private arbitration board
will then issue a ruling and there is no appeal, there is no core process that comes out of that. the country that loses in that deal has to write a giant check and that's it. now, there are are a lot of countries that have already ended up on the short end of the stick in that process. for some of them writing a giant check is just not possible. so what is the alternative? they back down and simply change local law. that is the kind of power this trade agreed meant magnifies for the giant multinational corporations. that is the tilt and trade policy. it does not work for american workers, it doesn't work for the american people.
>> just to move onto another topic that has been huge this week is the republican suggestions we stop resettlement of any syrian refugees to the united states. can you comment on the situation was serious. >> i can't. actually on the refugee in particular i did a i did a speech on the floor in the senate yesterday that is available if anyone wants to look at it. there is the longer answer around this. let me just say on the shorter answer, it is our responsibility to protect our country. it it is our responsibility to protect our people. we do not do that by turning our backs on refugees who are fleeing the butchers of isis. right now to make it as a refugee in the united states from syria requires a screening process that lasts from 18-24 months.
we can always look at it and see if there's something else we should add to it but we are screaming syrian refugees. screening them very carefully. if we are concerned, concerned, and we should be concerned about terrorist threats, the much more worrisome problem is across europe. i recently traveled to greece and visited refugee centers. greece is so overwhelmed at this moment by refugees. last month, 100,000 people came through turkey into greece and all they can do is a fingerprint them, write down their names, and pass them into the rest of europe. think about that means, there is no effective process on the front-end. people are pressed
into europe and end up with european passports which permit them to travel throughout europe and to travel to the united states. we need to focus our security concerns more carefully on where threats actually exist. if if we want to make a real difference in threats to europe and the united states that we need to help the great government and europeans that need to be helping the great government. they need the resources to deal with the refugees who, sure and they need the expertise to do more screening of the refugees that arrive in greece. we have to get the focus in the right place here. and i should say one more thing, it really was a long speech yesterday but i do have to say one more thing. this is not who we are. we don't turn our backs on people fleeing from terrorists.
we aren't nation of immigrants and refugees, we were founded by people who are seeking to escape religious persecution, who are seeking religious freedom. the idea that we would turn back children and babies to the murders of isis because somebody doesn't like their religion, that is fundamentally un-american. that is not who we have ever been in the past and that is not who we will be in the future. [applause]. >> i want to remind the c-span audience and that if you hear applause, many of the people in the audience are not journalists so journalists do not applaud.
i want to quickly turn to the topic of politics. it seems when you listen to the democratic and republican it debate the topics are not the same. it is him is like their two parallel conversations going on but there are so little ground in the middle that we have a new house speaker who is still one year left in the obama presidency, is there time, is there space, is there any opportunity for finding some sort of middle ground for having a productive year in 2016? can 16? can anything get done in washington? >> look, i hope so. no, i do. there are places we are working. right now we are working on an education bill to replace no child behind. so going over the details it has some really good features in it that both republicans and democrats have agreed to and have hammered out. we talk about medical
innovation. this is an area where we should all be able to come together. who doesn't want more funding for the national institutes of health? i just want to add to the side a little commercial here, last year in america collectively we spent $225 billion taking care of people with alzheimer's. what could we offer them? we couldn't offer them any help. we cannot delay the onset by a single day, we couldn't reduce the impact of it by 1 inch. so what should we be doing as a country? we we should be investing in brain science. in alzheimer's research. you know how much we spent my string in the nih? less than two tenths of 1% of that $225 billion. the nih budget over the last
dozen years have effectively been cut. by 25%. we do not bill the future by turning away from medical problems that are bearing down on us. we build a future by investing in medical innovation and investing in that research. so there is a place that i am hopeful that we can get there with the democrats and republicans together. i have a bill out there, i will always put in a plug for my bill, right. that would add another 5,000,000,000 dollars to funding nih. there are some other ways we may do that. i will take anything as lane speaking get more money into nih. so, i am hopeful, i am hopeful there might be places we could do this. that should be why we are here. we should should be here to try to build a strongercountry and we should be able to agree on that. >> just to push a little deeper
into the political questions. hillary clinton wall street contributions have become an issue in her campaign, are you concerned with her ties to wall street question mark. >> i am concerned about everybody's ties to wall street. look around washington, i am worried about the influence that wall street has on washington. maybe that is partly because i watched in the aftermath the great crash in 2008 when congress was trying to put together a response, the response -- i assume that when they started this process just like they did back in the 1930s that these giant financial institutions that had been permitted to load up on risks and then had crash the economy and then bailed out by the u.s. taxpayer would at least be humbled enough to stay out of
the political process. by that shows you how naïve i was about it. wall street was spending more than $1 million per day for over one year. they're doing that to lobby against financial reform. they have not let up, and backed when dodd frank pass one of the lobbyist was caress having said, we do we do not lose it is just half-time. that is the case, they have come back. they are there day after day, after day, they want they want to punch this whole and dodd frank, punch that whole, they want to treat it like they do the tax code. they want to make it work for the biggest financial institutions in the country. so, this is the fight, this is
the 1i am deepened. >> looking at how surprisingly well bernie sanders has done, do you look back on and wish that you had gone ahead and run? >> know. >> before i ask you the last question i have a bit of housekeeping to take care. first i just want to remind everybody the senators going to have to depart immediately so please stay seated until she has left the room. thank you for that consideration. the press club is the world's leading organization for journalists and we piper free press worldwide. for more information about our club please visit the website, press.org. you can donate to our nonprofit the journalism institute and that is that press.org/institute. i would also like to remind you of a couple of programs we have coming up on the 23rd secretary of the air force, debra lee jane is going to come and join us to discuss budget
cuts, sexual assaults and other issues facing the air force. she will be at a press club luncheon on wednesday, december 2. on tuesday, december 8 the club will have david squirting, the new secretary of the smithsonian institution. at that luncheon he will discuss his plans for the 169-year-old institution. now, i would like to present our guest with the famous traditional club mug. >> thank you. >> i will now ask you our last question. this is just kind of a yes or no. >> one more question after the mug? >> i could run now. >> if hillary clinton asked her to be your vice president could we have an all woman ticket would you do it? >> let me put it this way, if
hillary clinton were running for president and i were running for her vice president, i am pretty sure it would be in all woman ticket. >> okay, for those who are free to applied can we have a round of applause. [applause]. i would also like to thank the national press club staff in the broadcast center for organizing today's event. if you'd like like to know more about the club, again press.org, we are adjourned. weight, i get to hit this. >> thank you very much. >> all persons have in business before the honorable supreme court of the united states may we have your attention. >> coming up on c-span mr cases we'll discuss brown versus board of education for a topeka kansas third graders separate but equal meant a six block walk to the
bus even though the all-white school was only a few blocks away. her father sued the school board and their case along with four other similar cases needed all the way to the supreme court. we will examine this case and explore racial tensions of the time, the personal stories of the individuals involved in the immediate and long-term impact of the decision. that is coming up on the next landmark cases. by monday night on nine eastern on c-span, c-span three, and c-span radio. for background on each case while you watch, order your copy of the landmark cases companion book. it is available for $8.95 plus shipping and c-span.org/limit cases. >> first of all i wasn't elected so it didn't make that much difference. i did notice the difference between being the vice presidents wife and the presidents wife.
it was huge because the vice presidents wife can say anything, nobody cares. the minute you say one thing as presidents wife it made the dues. >> during george hw bush's presidency barbara barbara bush is the office of first lady to promote undersea, raise awareness about aids and homelessness. she also earned her way to the history book back becoming only the second for slater to find abigail adams both the wife and mother of her president. examining the public and private lives of women who filled the position of first lady and their influence on the presidency. from martha washington to michelle obama. sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span three.
>> at a house and senate conference on surface transportation spending they began work on reconciling two bills before november 30 deadline. the house bill spence $261 billion on highways and 55 billion on mass transit over six years. the senate version is a 325 billion-dollar package. house transportation bill schuster begins the two-hour meeting. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> will come to order. i see we are joined by mr. defazio, electronically. peter, how are you doing?
>> doing well bill, thank you, thank you. >> peter had surgery and is unable to be here and unable to fly. we want to make sure he was here. first i would like to make sure i would like to welcome members of the house and the senate. everyone else here today at the meeting, according to long-standing agreement the house and senate alternate cherry the conference and i will begin by recognizing the chairman will be a key partner to nominate the chairman for congress. >> thank you mr. chairman i nominate congressman schuster is the chairman of the conference and without objection that will be the order. >> i second the nomination. >> i thank you i would also like to nominate senator as a vice chair of the conference.
we'll start with opening statement and i would like to take care of procedural matters. first i asking animus consent that the committee on the ranking member peter defazio be able to participate by electronic means. next i want to give you all sense of the conference schedule going forward. as. as we all know we are operating under extension of the highway trust fund that goes through december 4, this is the last extension and i put in! i'm at. getting. getting everything done by december 4 is going to be a challenge. i want to outline the schedule and we are following this public conference meeting we need to negotiate all areas in the house and senate bills this week, the step will be busy putting together the conference report next week. staff on both sides of the aisle, happy thanksgiving.
we plan to file the conference report on november thirtieth, it is the first day back after thanksgiving. procedurally this procedurally this barely gives us in the house enough time to pass and get to the present by december fourth. obviously it is going to be a challenge. we will we will need to buckle down and get to work. this is a very ambitious schedule ahead of us. again, i am confident we can get it done. we have a large conference committee, i know everyone wants to have an opportunity to speak. therefore, let me explain the order for recognition today. within agreement of senator and hope he can enforce this on his side of the conference committee, we recognize members for two minutes alternating between the house and the senate and the order you are seated. if a number is not here are present in the name is called they will be recognized when they come in. i know the senate folks are due for a vote here this morning so we'll be going back and forth. >> let me start by such same
when i became chairman one of the high priorities was passing a multiyear bill to it improve the transportation system. i'm happy to be here today and getting closer to that goal, i believe everyone in this room understands how critical the transportation system is to the economy into the decision. it has a direct impact on lives every single day. >> imac. >> ..
in many are here now i look over in one of the nice things i remember is i don't recall one time we had any partisan squabbles we got along and made an agreement. to look at that document that nobody pays attention we're supposed to be defending america and that is what we are here for no doubt we can get through with this and where we disagree on a lot of stuff but nothing to do with the infrastructure people are in sharp. -- shock. on june 24 the committee
unanimously voted in our committee that is very unusual that we share with the democrats and republicans were in the majority but we do on this. but the majority that you had chairman. so looking at the things that we want to do with the need for the streamlining to focus on innovation in most importantly to provide necessary long-term certainty. sought -- cannot do a short-term extension. so let's get something
important done. thank you, mr. chairman. >> with that a riot recognize the our ranking member electronically. [laughter] >> is that a portrait? >> it's working. thanks for your partnership as the senator noted they pass the bill unanimously as we did also it has been ted years since we did a long term bill to provide much more authority to ruth the state to efficiently with dash sufficiently plan for long-term projects. i am concerned and continue to be and i have expressed to us with 325 of the house
and the senate at 342 with the scenario could to go on to the next generation and though worse condition in the and it is with 400 million per year there is one way to get their to reduce the terms of the of bill five for four years to get more robust to force people to work and put the policies for word i hope the conference committee will consider that for our also hope they will include building bridges and the house bill to allow for any future revenues dedicated tutus rotation flow through the policies of this bill with no further action required by congress so should a future congress find additional revenue revenue, said that they can be put to work nearly immediately. with the policy issues that are outstanding the staff is
doing a tremendous job to narrow those differences and i expect with the ambitious schedule that you put forward by intend to be back when removed -- ruth four reducting skipping a i appreciate the opportunity to participate. >>. >> you're doing your second to bill so this is important we get this done on your watch between the two committees. >> mr. chairman of was going to say we have a great record to work across party lines. also working on a last
highway bill and this is a moment we cannot let it go. we look forward to getting a bad care where it belongs. but we are making great progress in the flesh stopping me to say does this mean it is over? no. we're making great progress. my friends and i are heading this effort which is important because we are together on this issue. but to every member of the conference committee, we are so fortunate to be here right now regardless of party because this is amazing opportunity to help our country which you can take transit to work and
hurts the economy and families and we are poised to do something great something that hasn't been done in a long time. able to your bill i'd think we can get there. we have to get there. the three reasons why we cannot fail. 51,000 bridges are structurally deficient. i saw one go down in california near the border it completely wrecked the economy there. we have to pick up -- to pass this to fix the road bridges 50 percent of the roads are not in good condition. that is from the people who follow the conditions of roads it is a put out by a government entity. 1.3 million construction
workers that is a lot of families that are mentioned -- counting lotus. the staff has been working night in and day. normally we wait but just from our side our staff has become all lost relatives as they work together night and day. we have our problems think we worry about the safety title to make sure when we do this bill that only sells something terrific but to reassure a the highways and automobiles are safer. i am excited. i will put the rest of my statement in the record but i will work night and day. i am ready. moment in history that doesn't come along very often that we can actually work together. and makes us so happy.
rita have to work against each other on this bill and for us we can set had an example. on our side we have senators nelson in senator spittoon and hatch and senator wyden senator brown senator shelby this isn't a one-person show for cry love working with my friend the q so much. >> mr. graves. >> all of us know the importance of the multi-year surface transportation bill. a modern design is critical to what we do with the country and my home state we
have 35,000 miles of roads with said thousand bridges most of those are in need of repair will need to be rebuilt or completely rewrote replaced we have seen states and local governments forced to operate after one decision that the states cannot make proper investments of infrastructure without the multi-year transportation bill. the reauthorization reform act is bipartisan piece of legislation focusing on those investments. the house bill reauthorize as federal programs over six years to target regulation to expedite its environmental reviews to get 15 percent to maine's state -- to maintain or restore rule bridges. to bring our country back on the path to reshape the
national transportation infrastructure to apply innovations from the private sector during the future reauthorization bill it ensures that the states have the certainty that they need to plan for long-term transportation projects. this is one of the things the federal government should do and should do well in the final agreement will make that possible a look forward to wrapping up this process as the liggett the multi-year reauthorization bill. thank you mr. chairman. >> i recognize the former member of this committee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i appreciate all the great work working with our
counterparts percolated important point in the process to get a multi your highway bill something we have desired to get done for a long time and what our states needs for the benefits it provides to the economy. i appreciate the good work of the staff if you're like family than maybe we're like the inlaws. [laughter] but we have a lot of good work into this already but what senator nelson and i have jurisdiction with safety provisions a number of things to be included as part of the bill allowed to mention briefly a few of those there are important passenger rail reforms that were passed separately by the house of representatives
as part of their investment act and decide from the numerous safety improvements the record recall we have had a real opportunity with safety technologies with the blind spot detection the departure warning in injuries. i am pleased with where we are. but a great credit to you mr. chairman and the various committees in the house and the senate to get where they are today in the process to provide the uncertainty for the transportation improvements and all the benefits that come with that. thank you. >> you're recognized for
your statement. >> it is a pleasure to work with you and the ranking members on what truly has been a bipartisan effort where we have stuck together taking pains we would prefer not to have been moving forward with a bipartisan bill that may be a model before the house and senate and i would like my colleagues thank you for moving so prickly in july with a long-term authorization bill. this is the first long-term authorization bill in 10 years. despite the funding i think we will find every commuter stuck in traffic and every
business that has to use these roads and bridges to get goods and services to our country there is a bill and we're determined to make sure there will be a bill. mr. chairman. this is a six year bill without secure funding and would take $400 billion over six years just to maintain the status quo to do nothing new. one thing we should consider is making it five years with the funding truly able to maintain at least the status quo. there are so many good things in this bill but i don't want to detail the ones from my own district except for two of them. one is the $20 million for
the state's to do what we have not done to find a substitute to replace the obsolete highway trust fund. we did nothing we have allowed the states to show us the way. and finally i would like to say, this ought to be the last time particularly if we have a joint hearing of the house and senate, having the private sector come with new ideas it may well be the last time we will do what we have done the first time we have never funded highway trust bill using gimmicks as to dates change the filing to dates of information returns with a corporation date for the enterprise.
i hope the house and senate will lead together so we can develop a new fund for the highway transportation to ensure every six years we renewed infrastructure. >> senator nelson. >> other they of the funding differences, some were significant differences between the house and thus a deposition there some of the safety concerns and we have some hard compromises but together on safety that is in the senate bill. for example, with numerous
exemptions from trucks' safety laws from liability protections as well as the speed of safety rule making. that is the difference. another difference is of liability cap in the senate to increase from the current $200 million per incident up through $295 million. if you think of the incident a few months ago, the amount of damage that has been caused will far exceed 200 million. we started out to get that at 500 billion. we compromise down to vendor 95 million.
we need strong vehicle safety measures. here is one that defies is - - defines under standing you would want to know if you have a recall vehicle we have millions just with the airbags is over 20 million that you would allow a rental car to read to a recall the vehicle and in the house bill that is applied to dealers said you could rent a recall vehicle. we don't have that in the senate bill. then on any of the defects that nhtsa presently at 35 million we wanted to take it up significantly and
compromised at three times instead of 500 so it is compromised at $105 million. bin and penalties for the safety defect with the general motors ignition system that company, a $35 million. that doesn't seem to be reasonable. there is one other provision that provides in-house will sweep the liability protections for all suppliers are with regard to the engaged dc-8 guidelines. we think there should be determined by lot not congress through nhtsa. i certainly support the
efforts of the top 4s you try to bring us together on the highway bill. >> you are now recognized as >> to make this an open bipartisan process we're making sure those pierides we thought were important to stay in the bill. the house bill as far as safety improved by rail we go beyond the final rule of the dot flammable liquids the thermal begin and require all legacy lockhart cars to be phased out directory -- retrofitted with the provision those that are remaining on rails and require the top of
hitting protections to minimize adverse impact if they derail. also the oil spill response plan and finally to provide states and responders with information to approve within their states. and also want to commend the senate with reforms to amtrak fellow strengthen the investments in the bill includes the reciprocity act that eliminates environmental reviews with years of project planning that will help to improve many bridges that are in need of repair like the
modesto's seventh straight - - street bridge. if we have bridge's two years later cannot even allow school buses to bear the load that is rated number two out of 100. finally a bipartisan amendment i offered on the floor federal motor carriers must be included in the final package with one federal standard. you have met our friend that is around the capital frequently i have never received so many letters from constituents and republicans and family members from around the country that would like a simple ability to bring their pet on the train is
seems ridiculous economic small dog on the airplane but on trade she is forbidden for garneau pet owners are looking for to having their pets on the train. >> is that the movie? [laughter] senator wide and -- widened. >> to say hello to my friend end colleague. my bottom-line you cannot have a big lead economic growth with little league infrastructure. nearly three dozen short-term funding extensions have created a one year long cloud of uncertainty high end confusion. and has been traumatic for states and communities that want to plan ahead.
this bill stops the roller-coaster a short-term extension saddam least. i will pictor some important points. all of my state to understand how much we appreciate his good work with the provision to bring new projects tuesday neck areas with transportation funding. another in portland oregon they are to well-traveled routes they will be an important investment for the future. i will tell you what should be the priorities for all of us. number one is robust funding for as many years as possible. my preference is five years
to give governors and community leaders the certainty and predictability to plan. and hope this committee will agree to strike the provision to use private debt collectors it is a proven track record of failure indicating and with the irs uses private deck collectors in the past the program wound up losing more money than abroad and. what we saw was a huge increase of consumer complaints to the ftc. and warm as point i think it will be a serious mistake for this conference not to make a strong effort to get some of the billions of private sector dollars off the sidelines into the ever
structure there is a bipartisan proposal to do this called the move america act it can spur hundreds of dollars in investments of roads and highways and bridges according to the joint committee on taxation's in-house, a billion dollar taxpayer investment generates $226 billion worth of transportation investment. here is where we are. the cost materials is lower than we have seen. we have so many workers out of work. this is the opportunity i really am looking forward to move the legislation portrait -- for word.
that is not the way you do things because if you do that, what you do is simply get in a feeding frenzy. we are all doing the same thing, we're trying to find more money for community, i get that. we are not doing that because we are not putting the spell properly. we turn on each other. that is all well and good but what happens is you get turned on. if you take one formula and deal with that that may sound good until you realize in the fda law there are 12 different formulas. that doesn't include the fhw a or the the fra, all of whom have dozens of formulas, each one of which can be called into question. the way to change formulas is to have a discussion about it before we get to the floor, run numbers, see how it works, combine them, and get combine them, and get rid of some, whatever we want to do. it is not to do it ten minute limit on the floor otherwise i guarantee you there, and other day when the people try to attack different formularies that they benefit from.
i just don't think that is the way to do business. i don't think we'll end up doing that. nonetheless, it needed to be said and i think you for the time. i yelled back. >> thank you. i recognize senator brown. >> thank you mr. chairman. transportation bill is pretty much forever been bipartisan affairs. i'm sure this conference led by the senators and congressmen will continue that fine tradition. the dismal state of our nation's outdated roads, bridges, and railways costs my state and other state the valuable time and money and energy. from the 1940s into the 1980s into the 1980s we lead the world in infrastructure building things the world had never seen before. as we all know the quality of u.s. infrastructure ranks 16th in the world. it it is critical this conference committee focuses on producing a bill that increases funding above current
levels and help states and cities invest in their infrastructure in a meaningful way. the banking committee develops the transportation portion of this bill in the senate through bipartisan negotiation we have worked to improve the title. since the manse transit account was created in 1983 under president reagan president tran but it has received 20% of new revenue provided. the senate bill continues this tradition and ensures the mass transit account receives a fair share of revenues. the senate and house bill increase the amount of american made steel and other components that will go to buses and subway cars, subway taxpayer dollars should be spent supporting american workers and american businesses. i'm pleased both houses included identical language about that banks. it supported 350 businesses in my home state, and about two
thirds of which are small businesses. it is five months overdue and will help insurance ohio exporters manufacturers, workers are not facing a plainfield tilted in favor of foreign competitors. finally, i offer my support to the creation of a competitive grant program for regional and nationally significant projects. with my friend and senior senator from oklahoma pointed out several times on the senate debate, on the floor projects like the bridge connecting cincinnati and northern kentucky, they carrying equivalent of 4% of our gdp across that bridge every day, every week, every year. the federal government must play a role in its improvement is so much more. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you senator brown. with that, recognize mr. thompson for opening statements. >> chairman schuster, thank you so much. i appreciate your leadership in this. i i want to thank all the members of the staff that have move this critical bill to this
point. i look for to working with you as we complete this process in a timely manner. haven't having spent decades as a firefighter and emergency medical technician i have a witness first hands how lives have been at risk or protected by the conditions of highways. our highway investment sure it not only the safe and efficient transportation of america's families, but also america's economy. that is why i am so honored to be a part of this process. i also appreciate the inclusion of the reauthorization of the export, import bank within this. it is an important tool in terms of making manufacturing here and selling to other countries our products, the fruits fruits of the labor of american workers.
so, with that i just want to say thank you again, i am honored to be on this conference committee. i'll back. i'll back. >> thank you mr. thompson. we recognize senator. >> thank you mr. chairman. i think both of you and i think those of you have been working long and hard to get where we are today, which is consideration of a long-term transportation bill. i think something that many of us have been looking for, for a long time. i would like to highlight very quickly a couple of the programs that are significant to my state of alaska, very remote, very rural. chairman and hoff had mentioned that our obligation here is to focus on roads and bridges and i certainly don't dispute that. i also remind colleagues that in certain parts of the country our roads are on the water. marine highway system through fairies that is a priority. we ought not forget them as
well. making sure we have a program of very center facilities must adequately account first states like alaska, or coastal states that do rely on our fairies as marine highways. they carry people and marine necessities from a place to another. they they are there lifelines. where they have no roads or airports. when 80% of your community are not attached by your road, we have to figure out how to our transportation corridors work for us. so note that that is a priority. second, the tribal transportation program must provide base funding to our tribes particularly are smaller, more rural tribes. we have a minimal spending stream, tribes in many states cannot provide access to services that it intends. i want to acknowledge my colic here in the house,
congress men young who secured a formal change for railroads to correct a mistake that we saw and map 21 that disproportionally and negatively impacted the alaska railroad. i am looking to see that fixed in the conference report. i've expressed my concerns, most specifically on the petroleum reserve that would be proposing to this would be the largest drawdown in history and at a time in the middle east where we have to preserve, my view as many of the barrels as possible because even minor changes in the market can have tremendous impact on her need for the reserve. because of the upton amendment, there is also an energy component to the highway bill, i think the good news for us is the energy committee and the senate voted 18 - 44 to report a bipartisan bill by several courts responding provision. we look to work together on
that. i appreciate again the opportunity to be working together on this very important initiative. i think think the members. >> thank you senator. we recognize for an opening statements. >> thank you very much. i must say and to senator boxer, we work so hard and came to this institution together, you have been on reluctantly. going forward on your highway bill is long overdue. short-term patches have caused uncertainty and long-term transportation projects that have hindered projects that create jobs and help move our economy. in order to really make the meeting upgrades to the roads and bridges, level funding in this bill falls short. in addition, several of the offsets offered are problematic. they illustrate an effort to avoid the tough work of a grain
to financing mechanisms within the transportation system and searching instead for unrelated and on wise revenue. for example, the example, the legislation includes $2.4 billion in revenue from private debt collection which subjects taxpayers for two harassment and other inappropriate debt collection techniques. when the irs most recently used private text collection in 2006 the program the program lost money. i urge the provision be removed. additionally, the funds generated by indexing custom user fees are desperately needed to ensure our nation's borders are secure. mitigate long times at a border for trade and travel. we need to ensure the u.s. is in compliance with its international obligations. funds generated by the payment of custom user fees have been
long used to pay for customer related expenses and that is where they should remain. if i might add, on a somewhat personal note unrelated to her jurisdiction, i would also like to take this opportunity to associate myself with the senate provision that would raise the cap on passenger liability claims and railroad accidents to $295 million. i look forward to helping resolve these issues and others with my colleagues over the duration of this conference. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you. without objection we're going to senator schumer because the senate has a vote. i know in our side of the aisle as soon as the gavel goes down because first but because this is a conference we try to do with seniority. so i recognize. >> chairman your father :-) and
it is great to be back here in the house. but i poked my head in the banking community where he spent 18 happy years. i want us thank first senators boxer and in half for all the hard work they have done into this bill so far and for their continued efforts to improve the aging infrastructure. i want to thank generals schuster for their effort and we look forward to working with you. i want to thank speaker ryan has been very positive about moving the bill forward and not being stuck in any one way to do it but get it done, which we very much appreciate as well. the fact we can do this in a bipartisan ways is great news. that that is what the american people want us to do. we all know we are facing a huge infrastructure crisis in america. roads and bridges are crumbly, transit system falling into disrepair, lack of continued long-term investment is having a
real impact on our economy. according to fha, 63,500 bridges thousand 500 bridges are structurally deficient. thousands of my state of new york. our nations roads are less than good condition. the situation with our transit situation is dire. the fda has said placement needs have created a backlog of 90,000,000,000 dollars of transit projects. with the significant needs in mind i welcome the chance to be part of this conference committee and work with all of you, both houses, both, both sides of the aisle towards a long-term solution to our nation's infrastructure challenges. the discussions have been productive. sometimes when we have these conference committees things move backward. but they keep moving forward on both the house side and set aside which gives me great cause of optimism that will get this done before our december 11 deadline. at the end of the process it is
my hope that we not only have a bill that makes adequate investments but one that sets us on the path to clearing out the growing backlog of projects across the country. doing that will not only improve our nations infrastructure but put thousands of people back to work and improve our growth competitiveness and most important labor of the safety for the traveling public. i appreciate my colic from nebraska waiting to go, so i will ask unanimous consent that it thrust my statement be submitted to record. >> thank you we recognize senator from nebraska. >> thank you chairman schuster, it is an honor to be here at the house transportation of a structure committee. and to participate in this bipartisan conference committee to negotiate a multiyear highway bill. since my time in the brassica ensuring the safety, reliability and efficiency of our nation's transportation system has been deeply important to my work in
public office. two of my signature accomplishments and that the unicameral have led to increased investment for nebraska's infrastructure and help local communities move forward with starting a completing those vital transportation projects. passing a long-term transportation bill has been one of my goals as a member of the united states senate. as chairman of the comets subcommittee an active member on the public worse committee i work closely with chairman as well as other senators to develop a comprehensive and reform oriented highway bill known as the drive act. the senate pass the bill in july and we did so without raising taxes on our hard-working american families. this august, i welcome transfer station secretary anthony foxx to lincoln nebraska where we convened a roundtable at the university of nebraska, lincoln's transportation research center. we were joined by local transportation stakeholders
represented the railroad, highway highway construction, trucking, passenger, automobile, and aviation industry. at this important meeting, as well as that my listening session throughout the state, the message from nebraskans with loud and clear. our businesses, consumers, workers, and families once a multiyear highway bill. local communities and states need certainty to ensure critical and crucial infrastructure projects can get up and running. so, i look forward forward to working in collaboration with members of our conference committee to give nebraskans and all americans a multiyear highway bill that strengthens stacy, provide certainty, and increases united states global competitiveness. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you senator fisher. with that, we recognize for an opening statement.
>> thank you mr. chairman. i appreciate that. and congressman defazio and our senators on both sides of the aisle for providing me an opportunity to speak against section 1111. in hr 22. mr. chairman, the services committee has serious concerns with section 11, 11. the section is aimed at redoing a restrictive easement that the navy entered into in the waters around bangor submarine base so that a gravel company can build a peer for offloading gravel near the base. there is an effort to include this provision in the fiscal year 16 and the aa but both congressman thornberry and congressman smith objected to it. the department of navy has clearly indicated they do not support this provision area that according to the navy and i quote, the provision will harm
current readiness at the navy base and other installations that are similarly situated near domestic aggregate reserve. the mission that naval base requires acoustic and characteristics that are not consistent, nor compatible with certain types of lands, or maritime development. the navy's concerned with encroachment on the base but there is also major concern is the easement the navy enter into it is still actually in litigation which is being pursued by the gravel company that wants this easement. i don't believe congress should be legislating on this issue when this is in the court system and undergoing legal proceedings. for these reasons, they repose the position and i believe the house committee should also do the same, mr. chairman and i yelled back. >> thank you. with that, i recognize
mr. conley for an opening statement. >> thank you mr. chairman and mr. fazio, and senators for your leadership. all of the members especially on the committee for producing a bipartisan long-term funding plan. i was was in local government for 14 years. i did bridges, i did interchanges, i did sidewalks, did transit systems, did airports and all of those things have one thing in common. they are long-term planning projects. you cannot do infrastructure on six month increments are three-month increments. that is why is why this bill is so important. mr. chairman, i have a longer statement i would like to add in the record but i want my contribution to get this down and get it done now by yielding back the balance of my time. >> mr. conley gets a gold star. if we still had earmarks we
probed boldly be considering that too. with that i recognize mr. duncan. >> thank you at the last i had the privilege of chairing the subcommittee so i know how difficult this type of legislation can be can i want to first of all commend you because i don't know, i don't believe anybody could have done a better job in handling this bill then you have done. and working with my friend peter defazio in a very bipartisan way. i had the privilege of years ago sitting back with senator in half on this very committee and i have always admired the senator and have great respect for the way that he and senator boxer has worked together on the senate side on these matters. let me say that i am really pleased that after spending hundreds of billions of dollars in a futile effort to attempt to
rebuild the middle east over the past 15 years that we're finally passing a bill to rebuild this country and create hundreds of thousands of jobs that cannot be sent other countries. i want to thank mr. chairman for placing just about all of the cross that i made into this legislation, especially my prohibition on using federal funds for red light cameras which are merely revenue raisers and not really safety-related. also, i appreciate you putting in many of the provisions of the special panels that i asked to chair on for private partnerships. with that, mr. chairman i will just simply asked that my longer statement be placed in the record and thank you very much for giving me this time. >> i also want to thank you for your work on the two committees. thank you for all the hard work on that. next next we'll go to
former chair of the committee and lost author of the mat 21,. >> thank you and leadership on both sides of the author moving forward with this bill and by getting it done. it's a tough job. but it is in good hands. just two things that i would like to mention. my priorities is i brought up on the house side, this is our last chance in six years to bring some reforms to amtrak. i consider myself one of the strongest advocates of moving people by passenger rail. i strongly believe amtrak is the last message of a soviet style monopoly, particularly in the northeast quarter for service. they have an have an opportunity to open the competition, that service and catch up with the rest of the world, congress will
never give 150,000,000,000 dollars to amtrak in that quarter. the private sector can help, they have the expertise, knowledge to move the expertise, knowledge to move forward. you all just need to open the door, allow them to continue, the rest of the western world, even european union is now requiring competition and state-supported rail service. it is pitiful the train runs from new york to boston at 60 miles per hour, that's a joke. it is pitiful that from washington to new york it is 83 miles per hour. the second item is, and i requested this having seen there is never enough money and we always need to expand our roads and it is six benson, one of the alternatives is using alternate transportations. the latest system of deploying technology, we can do play that technology in the bill you have 137 i believe it is for research
which is nice it goes to universities, it is academic tour, i have to be frank. but you have $67 million per year for actual the plowman of technology that will move traffic in our communities faster and smarter and cost-effectively. if we could even that out or reverse it you all could be the beneficiaries by getting that technology in your communities now, i will show you stacks of those studies from universities that are great. they're collecting are collecting dust on lots of shelves so if you want to continue that we can do it, if you want to move forward, we can move forward. those are couple of my priorities and i think we can also had some to the record. thank you. >> thank you i appreciate that. >> thank you.
[inaudible] thank you mr. chairman. i yearn for the day that we have one of the most bipartisan committee in congress and we had a six-year deal and my only discussion of thoughts in this town was numbers, priorities. however, things have changed and i need to discuss what i support and what i do not support. first of all, i oppose the inclusion of the port metrics mandate that includes in the senate drive acts that create additional burdens on american port. this information mandate in the senate bill is all ready available and could encourage dangerous working conditions. moreover, the department of transportation statistic does not have the funding otherwise to collect these metrics. my home state of florida has 14, all of whom oppose this new
reporting requirement. our report should be focused on preparing the facilities for large ships and increase cargo it should not be used as a wedge between port workers and the businesses they serve. i ask unanimous consent to include a letter from the florida florida port council concerning this issue. >> without objection, so ordered. >> it should be included in the final conference. language address the federal preemption was included in the house bill due to a bipartisan amendment that should be included without changing the final conference report. chalking companies are a critical link in our nation's supply chains and should not face difficult rules and regulation in each state they operate in. this amendment does not alter or roll back service regulations that currently governor drivers
and it doesn't prevent drivers from taking meals or rest breaks. it simply allows professional truck drivers to determine the safest and best time to take a break without worrying about breaking federal laws. the last one, the national national advisory committee on travel and tourism infrastructure which seek to strengthen the economy contribution of travel and tourism in the united states, reduce congestion and improve leisure travel. improved travel safety safety and security and develop and maintain a transportation network that keeps america connected. lastly, a florida ranks the top with pedestrian driver index and our limit is one, jackson and tampa is closely connected, i encourage congress to include the safety street in the final bill. with that, i i want to thank you for your leadership in the
ranking member and promoting a comprehensive company transportation deal so local communities can plan. with that you'll back the balance of my time. >> thank you. it is now my pleasure to recognize a new ways and means committee chairman first aim is. >> a morning everyone, i want to thank chairman schuster today, we are in the process of finalizing the key pleas of legislation. i'm glad i'm glad to be joined by my fellow committee members will be bringing their expertise to the discussion. we must provide funding for if a structure program. we have to make sure our nations road, skies and ports keep america petted it. keep her good safely moving across the country in and around the world. funding laid out before us is noah's first choice we want to see a permanent solution so we can stop kicking the can down the road on an issue that impacts so many people across the country. i'm concerned about some of the
revenue provisions in the ways and means jurist's shin, however it is important for us to work together and find a way to address the shortfall for years not just months. this positive step gives the committee the jurisdiction sometime to work on a more permanent solution are construed to's, and global allies are looking for. it is also encouraging to have a genuine debate about transportation policy. to work out the differences so we can all come together to help advance progrowth agenda and get america back on track. again chairman thank you for your leadership, i look for to getting to work. >> thank chairman brady. i chairman brady. i look for to working with you as we go forward. with that i recognize senator korman for statement. >> thank you mr. chairman. i'm glad to be able to serve on this conference committee focusing on a matter of critical
importance to this committee and my state as well. it represents a milestone as members work to create a multiyear highway bill for the first time in a decade, and long overdue. with service transportation program set to expire on friday it is imperative to work quickly to reach a bipartisan and bicameral agreement. i work for two working with my colleagues to address a number of issues which happen to be particularly important to my state. for example, upgrading the freight corridors and interstate system that move goods through my state to global markets every day. providing additional resources for public-private partnerships and border infrastructure. >> ..
we are growing. some estimates showing her state population doubling by the year 2050. on average more than 600 people move to texas every day. a testament to the opportunities that exist in our thriving economy but a trend that requires improving roadway maintenance and capacity to meet the rising demand. doing nothing represents an unacceptable