Skip to main content

tv   Key Capitol Hill Hearings  CSPAN  February 27, 2015 3:00am-5:01am EST

3:00 am
kk.hejt off of two really interesting experiences. i spent the last five years as a college president and when you're 37, look 27 and according to my wife, act 17, it's a little complicated to be@ a college president for the first time. because you walk across campus and people are trying to get you to pledge fraternities,k$áu they're trying to set you up with undergrads and there are big problems that can develop. it's been five years getting to re-know the youth of america, and over the course of thes[ last 18 months my wife and irja and our)q+ three kids, spent 400 days living on a campaign bus. there are lots of stories about a 3-year-old living for 400 days on a campaign bus. but that's for another session. we did nearly 1,000 public events over the course of those 400 days, and there is a lot to be pessimistic about in american life and americanbñwu politics.
3:01 am
and you're going to hear a lot of that over the next 12 hours. i want to tenp you something c;s to bes$pz optimistic about as we kick off my partdh there are in americans a deep -- there are deep reserves of feelings that america is a lot more about countrytg than it's about the federal register. there is in america a deep skepticism of the idea that you can centrally plan all of life. we've got things that you're going to hear about. senator lee did a great job in the last sessionu@ptalking about the crisis of ther% three branches that check and balance one another. there's polling showing only about 38% of the voting public know that we have three branches of government. so when we have a crisis of a legislature that's for decades kicked legislative and law-making authority to the executives, and we have an executive that just claim the authorities that violate his
3:02 am
constitutional oath, theren crisis. but there is also great opportunity for us. and that is that the american people deeply believe that meaning can't beúb centrally planned, and isn't found in washington. i want to give you just one picture. and then we'll go to the next panelist. we traveled across the state with thefq? implementing regulations of obamacare. we put a metal rod through them. they're about 9 1/2 feet of ]á ] put it on a dolly and we took it into every town hall we did across our state. we just asked people the fundamental question, do you xñjx áju is a picture of what the american founders founders wanted? we contrasted that 9 1/2 feet stack of paper with the homestead of 1862. i live in a state until the civil war was nebraska ond"tt every map had written across it, the great american desert.l"&z
3:03 am
today america -- nebraska is the most fruitful bread basket not just of america, but of the entire world. it's not justç)6 and beans, it's the la?(u cattle state in take that, texas. but thexen homestead act of 1862 that created this framework of liberty, it's about a page and a half long. it's a completely different[lq picture of what government was so we played out a thought nebraskans, and i submit to youm ñ that this(f3= works for millennials as well despite the media obsession that the belief that8?c every young person believes in obama's view of government. we don't believe they do. could you have president obama come to nebraska and stand on a homestead farm and readñ teleprompter that you didn't build that speech? it wouldn't make any sense. and the people in my state, and frankly, i think young people mostly as well, would look at the president not primarily in anger, but in confusion, and they would say, sir, what are you talking about? our people built the farms, the
3:04 am
ranches, the schools, the"4@5ñ churches, the not for profit associations, the cpac, almost everything meaningful in american life happened just as senator lee said by voluntaryism. we have to tell the story of washington existing to.i framework for liberty so life can be6+-ñ community. at the end of the day, the meaning of america is about that voluntary civil;-;íñ society by which neighbors come to neighbor and solve their problems together, not by the coercive powers of5úbw the state but by persuasion and entrepreneurial activity and by med÷lrst institutions. and i think we need to talk about that some today. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you, senator. and next speaking we'll have charlie kirk from turning point usa. he saw that americans, especially millennials, didn't understand economic issues as well as they should, and decided to do something about it. so he found edóred turning point usa.
3:05 am
let's hear a little bit from him. >> thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you. this is a beautiful day here in d.c. it's unfortunate i don't think barack obama is very happy, it's awful golf weather. in9( come from the beautiful city of chicago, illinois. illinois's one of the few states in the countryb.ñ that hasdm term limits. however, it's a different type of term limits. they serve one term in office and oneées$u you know, when we asked for our governor's cell iv%yujt mean their phone we actually mean their cell. however, thanks to the hard workçrxz @r(t&háhp &hc% of many people in this room and the dedication and the lessons of the activism in the land of hillary ñ '=9e(p)ack obama, thereçndl governor in the state of illinois. [ cheers and applause ]
3:06 am
>> and it's a testament to what hard grass roots work, identification, and a belief in fighting the left at>gfñ their own game can do. this cycle was widely successful because the conservative movement came together and united aroundagd? key uniting principles. i felt in 2012 we were more divided than we were y50i9d united. what the left was able to do successfully is0n÷' work together and been able to believe in uniting principles and get behind candidates without infighting. i think today as we hear all these different speakers from different points of view, we can learn from the left in this regard. we can learn that the left was able to unite young people and old people around principles and be successful in that regard. i started turning point usa two and a half years ago around two key values, free markets and limited government. and young people across the count┐ljq looking for an they're sick and tijyjl+ of big government telling them how to live their lives. they're struggling under the burden of student loans. they can't find jobs. they're sick of the government
3:07 am
reading their text messages. our generation wholeheartedly bought the agenda of barack obama in 2008 and 2012 and now they're having to pay the price of big government. four things they thought they were going to get for/ x÷ free. the last- :jjt i'll leave with this, and i'll yield to congresswoman love. when barack obama lost the first debate to governor romney in colorado, which ks9tw thought was one of the greatest nights in modern politicalúj:ú history barack obama went to valerie jarrett and demanded that he would be on a college campus the next day. he said get me on !c a college campus. he went to the university of wisconsin madison, and 72,000 v6áu tq support. when barack obama needed energy and enthusiasm, he went to the young people. he built his legions on the back of millennials. now our generation has an opportunity not just to reject that agenda but to paint an optimistic future of limited
3:08 am
government, individual liberty, and increase the economy around entrepreneurship and the american dream. our generation and our belief system will be paving the way for millennials to pave c8a-> way. i look forward to hearing from this panel. thank you very much. [ cheers and applause ]:q >> thank you5ns+ñg(8ñcharlie. and finally we'll be hearing from representative mia love, who truly needs no introduction. [ cheers and applause ] >> thank you. oh, wow. crowd. here at cc pack.-xb well unlike the current occupants of the white house, i believe that given the opportunity, the american people will rise to the occasion. on theiréç own. no nanny state needed no big government mandate required. we're americans. and for over 200 years, we have lended azt hand and lifted the poor. we've lifted ourselves up. and made sure that weaj:yñ gave
3:09 am
opportunity to anyone that was in need. given the opportunity, we help a neighbor we helped the struggling, student, parent or friend. given the opportunity, we overcameó.k overwhelming odds and drive innovations. but most of all, given the opportunity, the american people rally around a good cause, whether it's down the street, across the -- across town or around the world. unfortunately, too many in washington don't trust the american people. they don't seem to want us to have the opportunities to rise to the occasion. they say just trust washington to do everything.w to control your land, educate our children, to dictate every aspect of our lives. i think it's time that we need to look within. but most of all i think it's time for washington to trust the american people.> given the opportunity, here
3:10 am
today, we must advance the conservative principles that haveñíph&ifted more people out of poverty, fueled more freedom, and driven more dreams than any set of principles in the history of the world.#&s conservative principles and conservative policies work. i've seen them work. as a mother as a mayor and i use them now as a member of congress.pñ flows from our conservative values the american people will once again rise to the occasion to create jobs, upward mobility and build an even greater nation. for example imagine a health care system that is centered on service, and measured by outcomes. not dictated by washington. now, i know that it is hard for some of my colleagues in washington to contemplate, but imagine, if health care dollars and ;decision-making is kept with
3:11 am
the5/&v expectations, to the families and their doctors, i can see american exceptionalism at work, creating a system for innovation compassion and people drive the highest quality of care.+.9z'eó now, imagine a single mother who is trapped in povertyuá+ú by big government programs that prevent her
3:12 am
the american people deserve the opportunity to rise to the occasion. but to be honest, this is not just about washington. it's about us. it's about you and me and what we are willing to do. last year my family and i were able to go to a hot air balloon festival and i was able to ride &1 in a hot air balloon for the n/[h÷ first time. on my own. and i've never done that before.u%dñ a.4sn[ the last minute they told me i could take one of my children with me. so i called my son payton, who's 7 years old, i said come jump on the balloon with me. he hesitated and resisted.s and gosh, we had to launch and h]e÷ finally we just had to make -- áat we had to go without him.t'lp so i called my other daughter, abby and she jumped in the balloon immediately and we took ví3v$(t&háhp &hc% off. and we enjoyed the beauty of utah's landscapes. it was beautiful. until the weather started to change. i don't know if any of you have been on a hot air balloon when it's windy and you're trying to land, but needless to say, we ended up in the backyard of a neighbor. somebody's backyard.'ehyi&1
3:13 am
and my son payton had to watch all of the excit3i ground because they were qlu )háhe car. so anyway, we get out of the basket and my son payton runs over and he says, i'm ready, mom, i'm ready. it's my turn. and unfortunately with the now-windy conditions, all of the balloons had to stay on ground m;mñ and the opportunity for him to soar and rise in the sky had come and gone.;÷àjd9 i took that time to take payton aside and say remember this experience. remember today.");÷ because if you do not take opportunities that come to you, you never know if they'll come back. [ applause ]vvpq to paraphrase winston churchill, he said to every person there nug,ñ comes a moment when they're figuratively tapped on the sññfìáhp &hc% shoulder and given the opportunity to do something special.xógw what a tragedy it would be if that time finds them unwilling ééa;tu4c
3:14 am
and unprepared for what would be his greatest moment. so my challenge to my colleagues:,@hm in congress is to not yield the moral high grounds to the left, xépx[p to get out of the way and allow the american people to rise. my challenge to the conservative0+s movement is for us to be the group that promotes the ideas and the opportunities where people can come to this countri"b [ legally like my parents did with $10 in their pocket and live their version of the american dream. [ applause ] that given the opportunity our eqd children can get a good education without mortgaging their future. and hard working families can jg save and leave a better, brighter future for their children.]qy conservative movement. so my challenge to you, my friends, is to be woó prepared for every opportunity.e?v2÷ for every tap on the shoulder to
3:15 am
show up, speak out, pcy stand strong for the policies and principles that have made america such a great, extraordinary and exceptional place. may god bless you and may god continue to bless our still independent united states of america. thank you. [ cheers and applause ]1,ymúúú- >> thank you, representative. so for the first question, i wanted to ask you, senator.ó, you were the president of midland college.d-x you implemented a graduate in four years program that saw attendance soar afterwards. what were some of the hurdles implementing that and where did you come up with the idea and how did you do it?+,@ji >> so i took over t61!6 a 130-year-old liberal arts college it my hometown that was looking at how to declare bankruptcy. i'm a turnaround guy by wñz background. we went in and had an honest conversatioñçg)háhe faculty about the fact that the budget of this institution was dedicated to all of the tenured
3:16 am
faculty in the departments that didn't have students.ix(hñ we had -- i kid you not -- 45 majors and minors, 84% of our student body majored in only 2mx seven departments. that's not going to work.lz#@ and it turns out if you tell the truth about the fact that people were not going to get paid at this place in the future, and you could not waste the crisis and you could use it to build something that focused on the students of tomorrow, instead of financial commitments that were )d made yesterday, reasonable people were willing to have that conversation but you couldn't meet something with nothing. you had to have a story of how we were going to serve the students of tomorrow. we said let's rebuild the institution for those students yet to come. it shouldn't take six years for a four-year degree. we'll give you better advising but you'll have to do the actual work of getting through the institution$jz i'm happy to report that our faculty, our staff, or board, our donors pulled together and midland is now the fastest growing school in the midwest now. >> well, congratulations.
3:17 am
>> thanks. just following up on that, you were a very young college president. was there some skepticism when you took over? how did you handle some of the prejudice that goes against being a younger person? >> i think fundamentally if you're talking about cause, all of a sudden the nouns are less important than the verbs. how many years you have in your hmtq"%_tááhrs(ortant than the mission and the direction you are outlining for the institution and we were able to pull together a lot of people to pull on oars in the same direction. we just never really paid attention to the fact that i 0 looked like i may be an undergrad. >> to you, charlie, you started this great organization as a national wide program. what was the catalyst for that? what came up with the idea, how did you implement it and it's hard as a young person to say =(ty this world's big and i'm only one person. but you took it by the reins and really ran with it. >> well, thank you. it was interesting as our organization continues to grow, the left wing equivalent of what we are trying to build and replicate is moveon.org or organizing for action.s;ip the story i tell, i was at a
3:18 am
ohio state university football game in september 2012, and i saw 11 full-time staffersn]a registering voters, literally taking people by the collars to i don't see any grassroots equivalency on our side. i didn't see organization. i think it is a mistake to say the liberals invade higher they occupy higher education. it is two totally different things. i saw the necessity and also the grassroots enthusiasm amongst lots of young people that wanted to elevate their activism level have a group or a chapter but to do something of substance and get more voters on the rolls, expand the electorate, gather data, make a wider impact. it's really been an amazing environment. we've been able to create on over 750 campuses in all 50 states. or activists go from we believe the bad guys are doing a better job in that arena, and we have to stepobaqip r(t&háhp
3:19 am
&hc% our game and compete. >> representative love, if you were a little girl today coming to america -- &pç[rceu >> the environment is a lot different than when my parents actually emigrated to the united states. i am going to say legally. because i have to tell you that when they came in my father said that he learned the english language. he learned about american history. as a matter of fact, he learned about the constitution. he knew more about american history than most americans did tñ and when he pledged his the first time, not only did he know what he was saying but he meant every word of it. and it is really difficult now because we have made it difficult for people to come
3:20 am
here and be able to work, start off with just $10 in their pockets, have three jobs and save up for their dreams. most people now when they graduate are spending most of their time -- [ audio difficulty ]we/s3! 6ú" >> there's this evil voi(suj r(t&háhp &hc% hello?f[zñ0e$&ñ okay.ú2 there we go. i'm sure you didn't hear anything i said. right?i anyway, i just talked about my óç/ìáhp &hc% parents who came here and workedsúz really hard and studied the english language. learned how to speak english and studied the constitution and american history. when they pledged their allegiance to the american flag for the first time they knew ex7$[ hat they were saying and they meant every word of it. my parents also had opportunities. they came here with just $10 and they had opportunities to work
3:21 am
several jobs to make ends meet. it's difficult today. i don't think that someone can come here legally today and do the same thing, because we have made itwlqcnpossible -- when i say "we," i'm talking about the government. centralized government has made rñ it impossible for people to save and start their dreams. mosñw: the federal government back or you've been paying into their py]hçñ system and not your own home, not into your own communities. and it makes it very difficult for somebody to be able to start their own lives. and we've got to change that. [ applause ] >> so, i think that you are v(v three great people, very successful, i would say./u%ñnx' say, what advice do you have to other young people who are looking to get involved or looking to run for office, not only what would you say to them, but how do you do it, how do you go about building a coalition,
3:22 am
to take that next step? >> i'll say something that might? u;d$ g&y be a tiny bit counterintuitive. but i think we need more people that believe a little bit less in politics, serving in politics. you're going to hear a ton of politics over the next day and a half, and you're góu'p+e 2r bk some red meat moments that are going to feel great to cheer. and they should. and yet, at the same point, if ddx we sound like liberals that we really believe that if we could elect the one right guy or gal and we could pass the one right will be fixed, that isn't true.6:r z and real voters know that isn't true.4wjpç and they want a world where people believe more in america government and politics because almost everything that's meaningful in life happens upstream from politics. politics exists to create a framework for ordered liberty for altq$eát(qáhq)e real life and vitality are lived. i would say as a non-politician, 52 days or something into the u.s. b+
3:23 am
corrupted, i think we need more people thatwbkzñ really ajg8n]ip r(t&háhp &hc% obsessing about politics. sobñc@>hr would urge folks+ky to be able to tell the story of the meaning of america, that only a small part of it. so if you can't do that running for office is the wrong choice for you. because it will be cracked. >> i agree a lot with what you're saying. i find so many individuals on the left, they make politics their career an their livelihood. that's why they continually vote not for the interests of the own and their obsession is growing government and that is their business, just as any business owner wants to grow their enterprise.uíq a even many peop27ysq republican side are the same, they want to grow the enterprise. the thing i'll say to you young people in this audience, especia#dm$n your campus, don'tgs be afraid to be bold and courageous and do things that rñz would stand up against the professors or the establishments that be. 'm there are forces across campuses across the country that try to silence opposition try to
3:24 am
silence conservatives. if anyone finds what our organization is doing of interest, there are sign-up cards on every single chair and red shirts are ready to collect them at the door.br÷1÷+m$[ there's lots of other exciting initiatives to do on campus. be active. it is a once in a lifetime opportunity to be on a type of college campus environment where you can have that kind of energy and enthusiasm and have real results while you are still in the formation stages of some of u7i÷ these ideas and take advantage of that while you can. law that what was meant to be " used as a shield shall not be used as a sword. i'm actuallm$t (váhr' congress also, and i see that all of these programs that are meant to help the poor and the most vulnerable among us, are the programs thatis9z actually hurt those that they vow to protect.+5 so this is government that was set up by our forefathers which 1ú÷fxarcnç m>@ eant to be a shield. now it is being used as a sword against us, against hard working
3:25 am
american people. so what i would say -- the advice i would give to the youth, the advice i would give to every american is to recognize that. recognize even though something has a really pretty title, you have to ask yourself, does it give you more power or does it give washington more power? ope;n and we have to be very cautious toié about those things because that is a tool that is being used to take freedoms away from us. we have to trust ourselves.xóg÷ we have to trust ourselves to ég?ìáhp &hc% take opportunities and rise on our own because independent people are the ones that give back.j÷ independent people are the ones that make families work, communities work, their states work. wash9azñ$q)pá. and so if i'm doing my job, you q5e guys need to make sure that you're looking at me and my state certainly is looking at that washington gets smaller so that people are bigger. [ applause ]+é0vñ.g=x
3:26 am
>> there are obviously obstacles facing our youth today in terms de of trying to succeed, finding the right career path. what do you think some of those obstacles are that didn't exist for you and how do you think that we can go back to providing=-h a path to the american dream for everybody? $ >> great question. i think because we believe that most everything that's important happens outside of government, it's important for us to be able to talk about the problems and the crises we face without assuming that there's necessarily any governmental 2a+ i do think this is an addiction of the right as much as the leftf a lot of the time. there is some data that suggests that 18 to 24-year-old males /ok play, on average, 5 1/2 hours a day of vid i'm not disparaging one month poorly spent your sophomore year in college with that addiction, but at the end of the day if yougqkx believe that one-third of your waking hours are spent in a con sum yfp! -- con
3:27 am
i worry about whether our forefathers hadi.z4ñ perspective of what life lived well looks like. government doesn't give us rights. nature and nature's god gives uss rights. we're free to live out a life of gratitude to god by serving our neighbor and working in our communities to do productive things. if we don't have a sense of the meaning work, if we don't pass w]m that on to the next generation, isn't going to make a lot of sense to you. i went off to college 25 years ago, pretty much everybody i xó+é knew had worked growing up. i got bussed out to walk beans and to tassel corn in the fields of nebraska. those of you who aren't from ag pw states, i don't know how you get your kidsf> character but you must have some ideas. if what's happening now is the next generation is never around work and productive activity and they don't know that work is a way to live out a life of gratitude and to serve and produce, then we've got a crisis and politics can't fix that.
3:28 am
we need a cultural recovery of ;y:úv the sense and dignity of the individual and what she and he can build. [ applause ] >> charlie, i know you're engaging with young people all across the country. i went to a very liberal school myself. i oftentimes found myself in classrooms, conversations being dominated by the left and i'm the only one on the right speaking. how do you engage in these conversations? especially when they can get a little hostile. & what's your 30-second elevator speech that gets them interested and gets them caring? because right now i feel a lot of young people aren't as informed about politics but more it is a cultural thing to them. >> it is interesting. the liberal professors are very tolerant of other beliefs as long as you hold their own. and this is widespread. a lot of young people, increasingly apathetic. as i mentioned in my remarks. our generation wholeheartedly enthusiastic about barack obama in 2008 and 2012.)ú7c
3:29 am
you've seen a decline not just in voting trends but activism and campaigns in local politics. some of the messaging we use, how do you describe the ails of this administration over the last six years or big government for that matter the last 40 years?ita'ñ how do you describe that in a sound byte? because we're always losing the sound byte war. somebody one time said to me, big government really sucks. and i'm like, you're right. so we came up with "big government sucks." and it >zz it works really well on college campuses to say this is what we stand for, we stand for individual liberty, freedom in the marketplace. i think we're seeing trends that young people are being able to experience the fruits of the free market on a firsthand basis, whether uber, netflix, twitter and facebook. :í between oligarchic crony 8j capitalism and -- literally on your smartphone when you use uber, you can see how inefficient taxis used to be and how uber and everybody in this
3:30 am
room who uses it understands it completely. i think we're seeing those trends grow.useo we have to be unafraid to articulate them and empower our youth to advance it on these college campuses. >> terrific. thank you. [ applause ] representative love, i asked the senator this as well. but i'm very curious. the hurdles that existed for you, as compared to me and how do you think that we can overcome them as a generation or my generation to overcome the new hurdles that are facing us? >> you know, there's this -- i don't know if everybody realizes this, but there's this fourth branch of government that's created that's there now which is called the federal bureaucracies.úkqñ they don't hold any elections. they are not accountable to you or i. they're not voted in by any of us. and they make the rules.q ád%+@pwhat's difficult now, as opposed to then, they just py decide they
3:31 am
make up a rule and congress and if they want to change it, they have to get it out of :!kcommittee and then they have to go ooh into the haas, and pass it in the house. senate -- the senate's slow, guys.(r they're slow. they have to go through the senate, get 60 votes in order to get it to a vote. then(w:e1b uu uj)pá. then it gross to the president's desk. the reason why the three branches of government work slowly is because the forefathers didn't want it to be easy for people to make policies against the american people. and what's happening is that now we've got this slow process up against this bureaucracy that can do whatever they want to do. let me just tell you right now, their job is to keep their job. that is their job. and we have got to do everything:rb we can to cut the bloodline which is the funding to those bureaucracies.=meiç and so those -- what i would say#ái is that, you know, we have to make sure that we rally with each other in that cause.a
3:32 am
we have to make sure that we are immovable in that cause and we
3:33 am
ourselves in culture and how we become a bigger influence there. i would be very interested. senator? >> yeah. so it is partly how-to.! but i'm a business turnaround guy by background but i'm a historian by training and we have to know american history if we're going to pass on a free country to the next generation.'8ev ò
3:34 am
and the[5+g europeans couldn't make sense of it, and they wanted to underskx!jeey so they hired a guy to come to the central planners had done this. right? he came from europe and he was going to explain american vitality and dynamism so he came to washington, d.c. to figure out how, as mia rightly said, the bureaucrats awç"the fourth branch must have centrally planned all this std!jn and he got to washington and he realized this is a swamp and nothing here is really the source of this dynamism. so he left washington and he went out to 18 of the then 25 states and he tried to make sense of why america was blossoming and flowering. and he wrote back a series of b"3'÷ book reports or travel logs to the french and more broadly to europeans explaining american dynamism. rotary club. fundamentally american dynamism isn't about the coercive powers of government. it's about all that happens in public life and culture and neighbors have better ideas than bureaucrats and they go and
3:35 am
persuade a neighbor to join them in that not-for-profit cause or to buy their better mouse trap.s)9d and if wmwor+$uq&l that story of an america that's much bigger than federal bureaucracies, k5h% we're going to lose. so we have to become great story'+ tellers, optimistic, cheery, sqes happy warriors who believe in a3 the dignity of people and the dignity of work and lots of those cultural things that happen dynamically in american life well upstream from politics. >> terrific. [ ñyuum ñ >> charlie?af"t culture, everyone -- whoever #ú@tñ watched the oscars saw how far left they hijacked that whole stage and they advanced lies on the national stage. my only advice to this -- i'll keep it brief -- is if you engage with individuals on social media and other circuits that continually advance these si falsehoods, do not be afraid to discussion and discourse conservatives across the country, young and old that are b" afraid -- i don't know if i want to get in that conversation.
3:36 am
well, there's unbelievable intellectual ammunition out there. we have the best think tanks in the world.o let's be more like a battle tank in the movement and use that ammunition in those kind of discourses and conversations because you can't allow the culture to continually be q&9< hijacked by the bad guys because.so they're going to continue to jjurñ spread falsehoods and it seeps then into the minds of our youth.cug@ [ applause ]j >> representative? >> i'll end with this because @ all up. i was given the opportunity to go to the university of chicago to speak to some black aspiring éóq attorneys. and i was told i shouldn't go because these people love barack obama and they're going to hate me and eat me alive.dvá6 i just thought, well, if i can't go and speak to them, then ø there's no point in me doing this. so i went and i told them my story, i told them where i was from. szztiu$em about my parents' ukvhs story. one lady stood up and said i don't understand how you can be pqñj8-
3:37 am
a black female from utah, lds, republican, living in today's america. it makes no sense. and i said, it's because i refuse to fit this mold that society says i need to fit into. imagine if people like martin luther king decided to take that government, said that he was a second-class citizen, we wouldn't be here today. so, you don't have to listen to my policies. you don't have to even follow them but preserve your right to make your own decisiodqysjvá family and in your own communities. because unlike washington, i believe you're capable of doing that.umg,u i can tell you -- [ applause ] >> i can tell you, i am so proud that i come from the state of utah, because i was elected not because of, or in spite of my color. i was elected not because of or in spite of my gender. i was elected because of the policies and the principles that believe in americizrñìáhp &hc% exceptionalism.
3:38 am
i believe in this country.m$ [ applause ] just to finish off. i want you to know, we are not done. we are just getting started and fñ i believe that we can build an even greater nation than we've ever seen.ókj we just need to make sure that we believe in ourselves.z:ul [ applause ]5/ç( >> wellúfnt to thank all of you for participating and giving this great insight. i [iii'p" a great c-i] discussion here, especially [$u$e american dream and how we can make it accessible to all.w i think it is one of the big hurdles we have facing us. the most important take-away for youth, get out into communities and reach out into culture. it is not just about politics because so much of america isn'tba based in d.c. but it is actually based with the people, with the rotary clubs on college campuses. so i want to thank you all for taking the time, and thank you for being here. >> thank you.
3:39 am
♪b common core is the@m# national education standard for teaching the basics, english, math science and so house republicans passed a bill today to shift the responsibility from the federal government to . &ñstates.úk÷e obama administration has threatened to veto the legislation. this morning, the conservative political action conference hosted a%uuel discussion on whether common core is necessary. m% ♪xá[]/w:ádv ñ
3:40 am
>> all right. good morning. so glad to be here with a full room.m 8iñ thank you all so much for coming to this exceptionally important panel that we're going to talk "írç about what's next for comms0acy core. the political future. and i just wanted to say a quick thank you to dan schneider and matt schlap and carly fiorina. for including me and tq independent women'sstót forum at cpac this year. we're always so happy to be here. and it's great to be down closer to everybody.&0÷ it's a great setup and we're so excited to have a wonderful conference with you. what a testament to cpac that they're starting off the first day with such an important topic about education and the common core because i think that when we consider some of our most critical problems facing the n0!iñ country, whether it's x#.;ñ
3:41 am
joblessness or poverty, crime, so much of it -- the root of the problem really starts with our failing education system.t) i think we all realize that who really don't have an opportunity to start life on the right foot./ but, while we all have the same goals in mind, i think that we also realize that t,(hs lot of differences in how we believe we xt p'd change the situation that we have.0 so of course, one side of the % y conservative aisle laments the absence of a marketplace in education.0@8÷ they believe that we need more ç decentralization, more competition in order to have a vibrant education system in america.iq5kçqq- and on the other side we have something very different where we believe that we need to have more consistent standards through the common core in order to keep schools accountable and to prepare students for college,'ehúñmqmx for life, for their careers. so the debate over common core has become one about standards, are they too rigid, too weak, too political.
3:42 am
it's become about costs, does it costevl states more to implement?ñ common core than they'll receive in their subsidies. it is about freedom, the role of parents versus t(gyw. government.m, and:;e what it means for the upcoming elections. so here to discuss this really 0 critical issue, not only g=el dividing the country but at risk of dividing conservatives and the rep fantastic education analysts who know this issue not only as policy experts but also as hzsd[arents. neil mcclusky on the left here is the director for the cato institute for educational freedom. he served in the army. he was a free lanced covering municipal government and education in2oík :n]ñjersey. he holds an undergraduate degree from georgetown university, andh:< recently received his ph.d. from ujjy
3:43 am
neil has two school age children.x emmitt to my left )$+íi the director of the education program at the principles program. he is the co-author of co top, why common cor l$(p" for america. he is co-founder of truthinamericaneducation.com, a v&9 nationwide network of individuals and organizations ,[df that shed light on the common core system. also a graduate of georgetown university and fordham school of law.wwke÷ z children. neal, i'd love to start with you.> i think a lot of people here today know the basics about common core but others may not.'zñ i thought it might be good to start with what is common core vt and what are some of the misperceptions that we might have about it? >> yeah. so t-p misconceptions about common core. most basically what it is is, you can say, i think with most
3:44 am
people agreeing, at a minimum, klqu it's a set of standards in math and readingkmc developed bymwqf the national government association of state schoolin officers. and that iú
3:45 am
somebody mugged you and then, ifpa you'd like your money back, all you have to do is give me your >b2dñwñ car and you then have voluntary 1íi given your car, then you can say it is voluntary.btcp the reality is the federal government first said in 2009 if you wanted part of $4.35 ély ñ billion, the race to the top, you had to, among other things, ;úqhñ adopt the common core.,%:nw) then they said, if you want a bk waiver out of the no child left behind act -- and almost every state wanted a waiver -- you only had two standards options.!ytíy either the common core which almo)ery state had already promised to adopt to try to get s race to the top money or you could have your state -- or a state college universityw system certify your standards as college and career ready. so the reality )@1ey what common core actually is, is it's very much curriculum standards, not just standards, but about your
3:46 am
specific curriculum and it is federally driven.n#ñ!ñ >> neal says common core is all about curriculum. i know that this is what's really important to you, the )km÷ñ content that we're finding is becoming so controversial, whether we are talking about climate change or sex ed or american history, evolution. all of these topics are becoming sort of at the center of the debate.hñ1@ what can you add about the content of common core that's so concerning? >> well, here's what's happening.g0ftr(t&háhp &hc% this is why this movement -- it is a movement. it is a national movement pby,exñ taken off so quickly and i think, frankly, caught many politicians on both sides of the aisle by surprise.jñá% what's happening is that parents are looking at what's coming home in their children's backpacks and they're appalled. they're doing researcd they're finding out that the oñb common core locks children into an inferior low-quality education. to put it briefly, in math, h7%
3:47 am
common core ends in grade 11 rr with half an algebra 2 course.u!b even the chief architect of the common core math standards said f 9#24ñgi$d common core is not for s.t.e.m.r"$i common core is not for admission9xb[í to a competitive four-year private or public university if you want to study the f igk humanities. so in brief, what happens is starting in the early grades, et÷ common core before it teaches the standard w mandates the teaching of fuzzy math or strategies for approaching problems. wbp(u re these strategies? they're things like counting on your fingers drawingo pictures working with head nods to solve problems.e ç 3$ñíq3yojbo and then common core teaches theca standard way of solving problem called a standard algorithm.q!q
3:48 am
so what happens is the needm7iáp progression gets slowed down. so that by eighth grade, as one v e/ñ>u of the foremost mathematicians in the world, and a standards expert from stanford said, by g eighth glade, a zw stñdl common core is about one or twooñb years behind their peers in+ç high-performing countries. or their peers in states that have good standards.gyéñ then common core gets even worse in high school. it throws out euclidian geometrytí(dbñeelú in favor of a method of teachingn geometry that has failed everywhere in the world it's been implemented k-12. thatjá of teaching geometry. then it goes on to algebra 2. but it only teaches half the w/
3:49 am
algebra 2 course and#qb throws out half of trigonometbddd÷n you're left with a child who 0 does not even have a pathway to calculus or precalculus by 12th grade. ÷ >> i would think even if we could come to this perfect curriculum that everyone in this room could agree on, what's left for parents?%-ux what if you have a child that's really strong in the sciences, another child that's really ydqíw strong in the arts. dv&#árp+e any say in their curriculum under this core? >> this is the second part of vcc% what is driving this movement.8e parents were upset with this process that neal described.1ñgb1z they started peeling back the layers of the onion and they realized that neither they, nor ?%hfñ their elected legislators had any say in what was being billedbñ as a transformation of education for every child in america.+w,yi i)j t that in the figurative 0ml$kkc÷/x
3:50 am
they're going to war against -- sjéa! against anything that interferes with their right to have a say in what their children learn. and that includes -- that includes republicans in congress, that includes democrats 1ld9 m1jey includes the current attempt to reauthorize noc bld left behind. this is a very, very strong movement. movement, and it's one that is growing by the day. lot of work to do, because you're saying that parents don't have a say.7jpb but if i'm correct, neal, 45 states and the district of columbia have adopted common core. is that correct? we only have alaska, nebraska, texas, my state of virginia that initially refused, right? then we had minnesota who only r:spo adopted the ela or english language arts standards.gvh now indiana and oklahoma have dropped out.gé south carolina looks poised to drop out next year. is that correct?
3:51 am
so maybe you can give us a |tz$ lb'ns)q and. what's coming down the pike, where are the states going, are they pushing back now?za;j >> yeah, so if you include south carj.3er+áu$rp+e about 42 states that are with us. xx8d$ uhp &hc% but understand this year south carolina's actually part of it.p%ñ where you've seen actually b( across the country -- and you've seen it in the blue states like new york, you've seen it in red states like arizona. there's been, as emmitt ;óc$ described, a huge really grassroots parent-driven revolt against the common core. understanding that common core was adopted in a pr-7@çm2uj race to the top where governor and a chief state school officer just signed a promise that said we want this money and we kiqlñq promise we'll adopt common core. and then if anybody in the state objected, they would lose that money or the possib]46óurtd that money.?8p and all this happened during the great recession when everybody was focused on the recession, not a small part of the stimulus, relatively small
3:52 am
compared to the whole stimulus, that handed over control of the !]$. pev curriculum of their schools to the federal government.v3
3:53 am
happening. what we have seen, and this may be where you get thei9;ñ most movement, although iteç,n÷ñ is very important for states topb say we don't want if you can get out of task and ÷d4e your state8%:dv can run you task, then for all intents and purposes you can reclaim control of yourc gi#n#újy 9abstate's education s@fúeìáhp &hc% system.[ó%i:ejrh you can start to do what the constitution requires, was that the federal government not the state, local governments, and ideally parents through school choice control education. >> it seems like we have the potential to see like we did with obama the difference in theótct÷[ ai)/rategy or o approach we take x to rolling this back. on the one hand it is grassroots, on the other hand, politico wrote an article this week talking about how
3:54 am
republican lawmakers are trying to sabotage the law, the idea they're trying to defund it through textbooks and tests. roy be the better strategy? >> i'm even at a loss to call it a strategy because truly what is driving this is the mom sitting jy down reading through these laws and making -- connecting the cvjyhjñ dots and getting on the phone and talking with other moms. many of these have not been involved in paying attention to 8m+@u politics before. i'm also at a loss, the democratic party of the state of washington recentlyhy resolution condemning common core. to speak out against it. so i really don't think that this is just a republican versus democrat movement.ri9ñ,f) but i am certain about one ga+#ñ;,ñ thing.n6d what has changed is now people are starting to look at that division of powers between the
3:55 am
national government and the cñc state governments and they're yrpdp)ting to realize that meant to protect their personal %h rights and their ability to direct government and they're 5l kwq3f starting to have a personal ów!r attachment to making sure that we remain faithful to that m division of powers. i think that that is -- that's going to really dramatically change the political landscape nípc in the coming years.bnhú(kuváhp &hc% >> i think emmitt made a crucial point, which is that opposition to common core is not something orchestrated or engineered or 2vy]z even strategized from theìáhp &hc% yt#j our groups aren't coordinating grassroots opposition. this is something that we've -i'5mav-"pbq &háhp &hc% really seen grow in every state g really from the bottom-up.j2s3
3:56 am
generally speaking, common core ox>y!; support -- there are a lot of people like common core who i think are well intentioned, think we need certain standards for everybody.1!+ i think that that's wrong but i /br think they're well intentioned.g[um but a lot of the support for common core is i think more centrally strategized.ü2[f u.s. chamber of commerce and lh4z groups like that had very d
3:57 am
the fact of the matter is none of those things are true. but they're hanging on to those talking points because, really, vyi if people realize -- which is what's happening -- that those talking points are false, the >vlj common core collapses. that's what we're seeing. points is that all the opposition to common_hráh politically driven. i read one article this week where one of the more prominent supporters about common core say this is all about the conservatives' dislik8a$;r the president. i think we all agree that's far yñw[ from the truth. but it does bring us back to the$("mx(< %:x6 issue of the political ramifications of this and what does this mean. we're all thinking about the bb÷ 2016 election. what does this mean for the presidential election?1k we're seeing all of the different presidential candidates starting to throw h[= their hats into the ring. maybe we should take a minute and sort of think about what i÷ this hg, j_jár' another 9p nine, ten months from now. what can we expect from the different presidential candidates on the republican
3:58 am
side? >> i think the first thing r)7x06 that's important about this is, hp]deuip!solutely -- the jump off point is the common core itself. but this has really become a bigger debate about what is the role of government generally, what is the role of the federal government, then what is the role of government in education. and i think that what you're o½b& seeing is, yes, there's opposition to the common core. there's a lot in the common coreje as curriculum -- or as content j4 gpth] ads people don't likeà+÷!1' i think there is a fair amount of misinformation about what is or is not in there.÷3&r÷ for instance, sex education is dñch but what is clearly become the central part of now burgeoning presidential election is what possible justification is there for the federal government to beózs6j pushing one curriculum and -- ?ew#ñ because that's really what thesefx]+ standards are about, it is about shaping the curriculum, pushing
3:59 am
that on every school, and therefore every student -- at least public school and public student. although private schools are also affected -- in america. and so you start to see people like rand paul talk about this. you're seeing jeb bush talk about, well, we at least need to have high standards. maybe not the common core now but at least high standards for everybody. and the question is always goingok to be, but who is it that should choose these standards.@]ii i think that's how this debate is shaping up. then the question is, well, how crucial will it be to somebody, whether they're for or against the common core.)0yd that i don't know, but it is certainly a good indicator -- or one indicator of where candidates stand on the role of the federal government in education. >> i think the question in the q2ç republican nomination process isçe not going to be are you for or against the common core. question is are you going to be -- are you fighting the common core and are you fighting#;ldz for change in the federal government that will prevent 5 this travesty like this from qm)teé@c
4:00 am
ever happening again. and that's what candidates are going to have to answer. what are they going to do. i think the voters want y acknowledgement that the common core is a poor quality and was forced upon them because if candidates don't acknowledge that, then they're not facing the truth. and the indication and the fear then will be, well, they're really not going to fight this. but people realize that when the federal government is dictating education, they have no control over that. and why is that? it is because the federal government acts through the state governments. the state executive branch, to áé[ be specific.g@b so there's this conversation going on between the federal government, which has the conditional money. so the states look to the cm+by
4:01 am
federal executive and they start doing what the federal executive wants. they adopt their policies. it really doesn't matter who is in office. they tend to adopt those policies.f0pu to the exclusion of their xo legistxv5)$u)q xclusion of their people. and that's what people are tú÷ realizing, that as long as that conversation is going on for that conditional money, that extra money -- that's how that 10% of an education budget really controls policy -- as long as that conversation is ivgm)cac going on, people now realize vlkd they're being cut out. they and their desires and theirsx4!ñtkzu needs and their children are being cut out of the decision making. srñ so i think this represents a >ñg very profound change in america. people are realizing that that division of powers is very personal thing. temperatures a very, very zícñ personal concept meant to protect their rights and their liberties. >> well, neal, you covered new
4:02 am
you're from new jersey. i'm thinking about this xúq? politically. i mean is this going to becom4q ñ one of these -- i was for it dgnn before i was against it kind of moments for the republican party. and just this last week i guess it was, chris christie sort of is it going to be enough to turn away from it or are we going to have to see our candidates actually start to attack it at its core for what it is?™ >> my suspicion -- and from what we've been able to observe -- is that states, whether they're red or blue, are all facing opposition to the common core. and even people who once were )uárpáur(k think, about supporting it -- or at yç leas they liked it, are now turning against it.ayfvñ i think this is, in part, though because they've started to really grasp what this means. because in particular which right now we have for the first npcix time states are giving these park tests, the sbac test, the federally funded test that go %0a0y with the common core. and across the political spectrum or the ideological
4:03 am
spectrum you see lots of parents who are just angry about this. they see how much time it is 7-gz taking up with ÷yjsmng. the infatuation with testing. they may or may not even like cé what's in the common core, but
4:04 am
constitutional -- for the federal government to try and impose uniformity and test obsession on everyone. i don't think many -- i don't get the sense many politicians nxqn are going to at least tx; full-throatedly say, yes, we should do things the way we've been doing them. >> it's not surprising that we as conservatives, by extension republicans, are having this c-) conversation. but )mnfq!%9-je)jr'teresting that we're going to see it come yx9ìáhp &hc% up i think in democratic circles.@%ip right? emmitt, i think when we look at how democrats will handle this, i was going to read a brief excerpt from a "new york times" article last spring where itû= said, "it is no the just conservatives who have turned against the common core. leaders of major teachers unions are also pushing back because of the new, more difficult tests aligned to the standards that are being used to evaluate both students and teachers." it is giving teachers a whole lot less freedom and flexibility for the good ones, it makes it difficult for the bad ones, they're always testing. where are the democrats going to fall on this? >> they'll be opposed to it. this is not a stagnant movement. i think almost all of the presidential candidates on the republican side will be against the common core.:> q that could fracture the vote and
4:05 am
you could end up with a pro-common core nominee.dd! so what will happen in the general. i think that pro-common core ]wi8 nominee will go against likely hillary clinton who does not really have common core baggage.9 and that is going to make the u@ri republican candidate i think unelectable at this time.t80f because you're going to have thesqu/@ conservative votes will be disappointed.1fó their turnout will be suppressed and low. i think you'll have the moderate votes or the apolitical votes will vote for the other candidate or the one who doesn't] and mrs. clinton is very smart, very shrewd. she will be able to criticize this and it will almost sound like a republican criticizing the republican nominee. she'll criticize it for the
4:06 am
decision making.ha she'll criticize it for the heavy handedness of the federal government.j/çj÷ she'll criticize it because all these leaders got -- signed on to the standards and c,gd to the standards before they ]0a were drafted.rs>> on and on and on. it will be very, very embarrassing for the republican nominee./;ty >> hillary'vá$r' bv÷ favor of stricter standards from 4-&&]lk]rsq is that right?vw ñ you think when puskb4sqáháo sçññ anti-government role. >> but the common core -- the promi las that these would be good standards. and they're not. they're poor standards, and they're not evidence based.vk[ the ela standards, english m standards shifts from the study
4:07 am
of classic litera12kháo informational text.d9#s informational texts are simpler (ózjñ texts.p$#(t they're text meant to clearly convey a message to a broad y;[bñ audience.dañ;j(t&háhp &hc% so you don't get those analytical abilities. you don't learn -- you don't get the acquisition of vocabulary or(cmkñ learn how to express yourselves in verbal and written form, as much as those who study classic literature. >> do they use primary text in the common core? >> common core doesn't exclude ú÷ó7:g primary text. but i think the difference is the quality of the text. studies show that people who read classic narrative 1jd literature are better readers, period, than those who read informational text. if fact of the matter is all kids are different.
4:08 am
this is something we lose sight of in this all kids learn different things at different rates and desires, abilities, goals and life.jñ to think it makes sense to have one set of standards that have an impact on curriculum is just nonsensible. this is why our fight from centralizing more,.< qñ federalizing.l! )& connect money way or the other give!fp[÷ educators free -- [ applause ] >> i'm glad4p>qñ to hear school9iuhd choice got some l[ñukmñapplause.÷ nobody knows what, ;+ñ even if there were possible to have one best
4:09 am
curriculum for all kids, nobody knows what it is. q toe see what< works best. something crucial that we never got to have a national debate on because race to the top took us to having nationalgt is there research basis to say that having national standards leads to betterl@ outcomes. when there was a little bit of talk of this when people who supported national standards thought maybe there would have to be a national debate. they would say well every lh'> country that does better has national standards so therefore we need them. the reality is most that have ñ[h done better have na standards but some don't. also countries that do worse on international tests have jññww6e national standards but some don't.
4:10 am
there's no correlation, in oth7vl6zlv.lúñ words, betw$6q%=91ñ standards and outcomes.g 4 and i should know. the neighbors to the north, cana on't even have any sort of the national department ql of education.3ms further looking at the research shows thereqí8= jut(á(r evidence to say having national standards leads to better outcomes. so the much of the promise about common core is if we just nationalize they will get better. and we never even got to talk about is there evidence to support it. >> in the larger culture that we live. in today in all areas of our life we're moving away from a7#0 standardization. tonight i can watch whatever i dif: want on tv at whatever time. i can customize my groceries and have them delivered to my door. i can go online and work with a íñh' personal stylist to make my prices. everything is moving away from standardization.5m?y yet when government gets into the business of running whether it's healthcare and education. we find it is the absolute opposite.pq"ñs&y;g so all of this4,k))hp!out well, republicans push back or democrats push back.6áy$ñ does t not matter? will this bill just fall of its
4:11 am
own weight because it doesn't fit with our culture today? fall of its own weight it. may.ú but there is a sort of simplistic power to the argument that says, well we want to do is hold everybody to the same high standard.%7 w the assumption is that all kids are the same.nf0 but people hear this in politics and of course nobody wants to be the person who says well i won'tz]vnñ hold them to high standards.uqo] r(t&háhp &hc% and all kids are different and we don't all agree on what high th4e and peotá;%11"ujur choose -- and we see this over jç.e in over not just in education. they will tend to choose the same things. to speak the same language as -m; other people to. know a certain amount of math, to know the same american culture and history.
4:12 am
that's how we interact and how we succeed. so you would actually have lots of national continuity and wouldn't try to force a single model on everyone knowing that one model doesn't work best for ? everyone. >> you would have competition for -- as opposed to monopoly, n!;.÷ that is common core.;zqx@0s and you brought up school choice. and i think it's worth bringing up two points when we talk about school choice. i think for about 20 or 30 years, the republican mantra on education has pretty much been school choice, school choice, school choice.'xmr and when people ran for political office on the republican side, they dropped a f5ep few lines on school choice and 3u56y the real principle is -- are parents empowered?< %)kf1 o do parents have a say in what's going on? and if you look at what happened to the school choice, in indiana there is a voucher law.
4:13 am
but the voucher law was tied to the state test. test. as a result now all the catholic schools in indiana are teaching common core. and what's happened since then is the states just keep attaching strings to the ívyi voucher.ppa aíhe(rp)ter school side, qk we have to be careful.q7[rmax many charter schools are corporate owned. there is even chains of charter schools. they can be even owned by ,r/ corporations that aren't based here in the united states. so through that mechanism parents could actually be r8(xycr> disempowered.(@éz
4:14 am
parents could be disempowered. >> and the tax method approach? would that protect parents from government intervention because it's their dollars.wñ t2x >> there are in charter schools. what they don't often realize is the charter schools are public schools. they have to go do a public entity, usually the school á$;#r(t&háhpp;ó&ti qráu)ict with which they want to compete, ironically and get a charter to operate. that means they have to follow tests, things like that. and then more people know is what people think of in order to go to private sc but emmett is right. what we've seen is that vouchers will certainly better than the .s"k÷añ status quo tend to get a lot of regulations placed on them because the people say look the yp state is taking my money and giving it to someone else and i want that school to teach what i want to teach and use 4]÷s=9 ñ how i want it used$?j and we've seen tax programs are the much less regulated. and although you get a tax '[zqoy credit when you send your child to public school. and that's certainly something you should get. and when an individual donates tçe/ñ to a organization that gives out scholarships, you get school choice but they are not
4:15 am
regulated. because one you choose whether to go to that school. and two, in many states you can choose among lots of groups that give out scholarships. more freedom tnif$urát_tááh regulation. and there is one other burgeoning option i should point out. the educatm báp+ings accounts.+wzr 3á and there is a problem in that ¢ y yaw get the money directly from the state. there is a regulation issue if]xa)f there but you essentially your child gets money into an account> they can use for any educational expense.s-p(t&háhp &hc% a computer going to public v,y school. a private tuition. it could be you save it and use it for college. again the important thing is there is more freedom involved and tends to lead to less f regulation. >> to wrap up i would love maybe your final policy and political predictions of whereas going to happen?ne;÷
4:16 am
what should people be looking for and where maybe people can take a little action themselves so they leave cpac feeling there yxp> we'll leave the recorded
4:17 am
they're going into their state house and meeting with their senators and> i'll just add it's not just women affected as mothers. i'm a mom of threejlqv÷ little children. i definitely understand that. also as teachers, women will still3l overrepresented as teachers andr definitely going to feel r) the impact of these new standards. any final thoughts in terms of policy and politics? >> go to s.nax3kh#cato.org. lots of good stuff ovñtt%it]w the common core. i think the message that needs to be sent to policy makers!j1 at any level and not just about the common core is that parents and families and ultimately students, especially as j older, they need to be the ones
4:18 am
empowered to make decisions as best for them as unique individuals. we can no longer say what's important is the systemt-éñ or we're all doing the.ó if you say that enough, if you demand school choice and real power forvñ that+xwould take care of the common core and all sorts of other things this they wanted to fix problems of a j]yqmonopoly system but they made a worse monopoly. demand you get power to make your own educational decisions. >> thank you for joining us. i hope you will check out more at the cato institute. seea29ek[4z you next time. scheduledqt@i speakers(t"ñq include
4:19 am
newt gingrich.úes2 f1 o live coverage begins at.ycñ 7:30 a.m. eastern here on :c-span3. here are some of our featured programs for this weekend on the c-span "& etworks. saturday night at 10:00 p.m. on after words. allanç communist party in the 1930;n sunday at noon on in-depth our live three-hour conversation with harvard law professor and author, lani kasz:rjv+.c?÷guinier. on american history")d tv½é on á. hy7f c-span# about the burning of columbia
4:20 am
south carolina.
4:21 am
administration's plan if the supreme court fights down the health care law subsidies. this is almost> sub committee will come tonloñ order. chair will recognize himself for an.:ç opening statement. discuss thejbq)ñ administration's÷kçuñ fy 2016 budget request for the services. earlier this year madame secretary you statedn,#)ñ that quote, the hallmark of effectiveafjur;59ç leadership is instilling a culture of transparency. i appreciate your verbal cìáhp &hc% commitments. your department's actions have?p failed6+séñ todgíñ adhere to the same stanvxkq we have only heardpúq+ silence from
4:22 am
the white house on how th4 anhj[s adverse ruling in king v n13r dñ burwell. wemkr. did receive 0vbvrreply from you. during y4ps testimony you were asked about the provide$:r4&1#ñhis is not the transparency we hoped for. we werem frustrated withxs-q the witnesses artfully dodging theckgtñ questions we asked here. i'm asking you today to let your guard down a little and give us direct and complete answers topz our questions.
4:23 am
real problem with our long term deficit has to do with our )!+o entitlement:; obligations. we had the simpson bowles1:ax committee, sequestration and government shut down.e$+ never once did the administration propose a plan to get the nation's fiscal house in order by recommending reforms to2fó]h@0ù2qñ entitlements. the =ñjwc"ñ medicare truste, s report which youm& signed tells us that medicare will be bankrupt very soon. ( lieberman1n÷ here.múj4z to pose serious hó 7:búny
4:24 am
reform. the proposals amounted to saving 15 days worth of program spending over the years.éú]-y medicare expenditures continue to grow without any of the reforms needed to save this critical program. this is not takeing. ownership. we have to do better than the president's budget. both partyies have to work together. we need to work together to save our entitlement programs and make them sustainable. we ask that you work with us. another subject you may also remember in early november of [bslast year we spoke on the phone about why hhs hasu to hold california ((sq under federal law. as you know on august 22nd 2014, the california department of managed health care issued a
4:25 am
directive mandating that :hçl)i all plans under dmhc authority immediately includezqc all legalv:áq blaabortions.nrj this is in direct violation of the amendment, civil rights 4÷8÷ statute tfk;ñt prohibits federalrrçi &háhp &hc% taxpayer funding that discriminates because health ä qdg entity does not provide pay for providevz$m coverage of refer f/,u what california is doing is clearly illegal. it's also
4:26 am
respectfully ask that you keep your+#vi answers concise'g point. dr. burgess do you want6ejñ the remaining time? >> thank you. that's very kind of?&!r be+0you. secretary thank you for coming to our humble little subcommittee. i after frustrated over the administration's lack of c1um transparency and the ability for congress to get information we've been asking for for the last four or five yearsvfsz butsñy] specifically around ac created entities. the prevention of the public health fund. the officeox0a of consumer -- year after ym7óf%they havexl# q failed to achieve their mission of reducing health cared improveing quality. we can't hold them accountable if we don't know how you're spnds spending the dollars.
4:27 am
i look forward to your responses to get thatlj regarding those agencies. >> thank you.$e7' now recognize raanking member mr. green. five minutes for opening statement. >> good morning. thank you.r budget is more thaneáfx a line of items on page. it's a reflection of the priorities of our country. our commitment must be to protect the progress we made so that progress will continue in fu this year marks the 50th anniversary of the medicare and medicaid. since the?ùt children's health insurance program was created most recently congress passed the[xxa affordable care act. the affordable care act took historying and significant steps toward laying the foundation for a better and more efficient health care system,ów,and expanding access the cover for millions of
4:28 am
americans for whom it was
4:29 am
this includes
4:30 am
inadequate funding. the u.s. will lose its status as innovation.e1]3÷ additional resources will help defeat our nation's most harmful>kññ diseases and ensure the united states continues to lead biomedical research andñwv scientifi8]wn'? breakthroughs.-+ it also includes funding to reenforce our nation'a÷p ability>gx to move quickly to defect oóe infectious disease outbreaks. maintaining strong expertise atp'nwñ the center and disease control and prevention. these are a few highlights that's included in the proposed hhs budget. i look forward to hearing more about the administration'szvll proposal during today's hearing. thank you madame secretary for( joining the committee and discuss the hhs > someone would like about 1:20 my colleague fromlç9sñ california. >> thank you for yieldsing me the
4:31 am
time. and youe'idñ have laid for in the fiscal budget 2016 department of hhs'h té =q services budget. we're seeking÷f9$ñ to movefg%4ñ our nation's health systemzr2íby rewarding volume and forgetting about the waste business. what we)%ñ try to do is working to achieve the triple"#dw aim in health care, better care, better out comes and reduce costs. we do this by making health care more affordable and by encouraging)?c clinical research. many of the proposals in the budget find savings in the medicare and medicaid programs by streamlining processes and realigning systems to is6(ensure that patients get the right service at the right time. sy budget will make the#áu qjo@q) face permanent whichrh we need to do so provide stability for
4:32 am
doctors and seniors;zceu and people with medicare program. the budget will extend the children's health insurance program or c.h.i.p. toql affordable care act is working. over 11 million americans[ up this year including 500,000 in californiaahhz alone. 9.5 million people with medicarepui= have saved over $15 billion in this is what we set out to do. 6@t(reciate working/ie with you as we move forward. thank you. yield back. >> gentle> thank you. secretary burwell welcome. today marks your first offici3zo r(t&háhp &hc% appearance before the health subcommittee. i know thise is not your first time in this room as you participated in one of our 21,'j5ñst century round%yt
4:33 am
we appreciate that particiq your tesbldnátátjé very pivotal point in health policy fromx"é our exciting cures effort to next week's supreme court oral arguments. we look forward to hearingpi+ the administration's perspectives of the important issues facing the american people. you've said that transparency accountability thñw1ks department to demonstrate. we look forward to straightforward answers today. there's been quite a few red flags raised in the recentx[nx÷ weeks to implement key piece offensesr law. 800,000 households learned that key tax forms contained major p%?pñ errors. they werebé asked to delay taxjxñ filings also delaying their3@-i2vsñ refunds. recent analysis estimates the
4:34 am
majority of obama care customersúñ0 arev )÷ being forced totd some of thosed!zs!0ñ subsidies. backlash has been so intense that the administration has resorted to aúf period to quell some of the anger of those coming to1f1 learn$ pççççç about/óy the mandate penalty. the back end functions of the l:::@eñ exchange would undergo a two-year development plan.
4:35 am
care by empowering states.z=cçñ ir we have concerns with the president's"e$l signature lawfbqñ but there are others that we believe are fertile3xx1ñ#@]ii $w÷ for collaboration. thisef@ the cures initiative to accelerate the pace of the discovery development and njjf< treatments and cures fors american pashtss.ejc(cajáju effort is also important to many jobbp whetherkñ it's striker or phizer. staff th%ijbq work and time inñ effort to]iu &háhp &hc% help us improve the ideas released at the end4
4:36 am
month. we established a5tx veryé;u foundation for bipartisan ñ success. i will yield to other republican membersûz% on this side.ykcz÷ >> welcome secretary ?zbnburwell.+++#snñ
4:37 am
it will be my top the 21st century cures initiative(8p÷ continues. i was also pleased tonhqh+q the budgetk'!u unds a four-year extension of c.h.i.p. we must act immediately with more than vy+ñfour-fifths of state legislatetures june. it's become enormously,
4:38 am
ñù3ñiçów3ñiwozv÷!-o v(7o:!+[ts ay
4:39 am
implementing this law with limited resources. despite what i call obstructionism, the affordable care act is working.[pivñ
4:40 am
i think this is a sound budget. i look forward to hearing from youáoday. i would yield the remainder of my time from the gentlewoman from florida.4 for yielding time. i welcomejku secretary burwell. we're very excited to hear about the budget, the investments in medical research, improvements in medicare and the centers for disease control. i couldn't help butr minute to>e(o highlight the florida enrollment numbers under the aca. it's orremarkable. i know you've seen the- and we talked about it. as of february 15th over million mt÷floridans have signed upc0ìáhp &hc% for health insurance? the federally#dr facilitated marketplace.
4:41 am
about $16,000 a year in scholar scholarships he was able to#o>r for $10 a♪÷ñ month zero deductible. there's stories like that again and again. i look forward to that.+++íd- your testimony. we appreciate your being here this morning. you're recognized for five minutes for your summary.
4:42 am
>> thank you. we all share common interests and we have a number of opportunities for common grounds. we're treating substance abuse to advancing the promise of precision medicine and strengthening the american middle class. the budget before you making critical health care and maintains our responsible stewardship and prepares our nation for key challenge at home and abroad. this is a $4.8 billion increase
4:43 am
which will allow our department to deliver impact today and lay a strong foundation for tomorrow. it's a fiscally responsible budget which in tandem would save taxpayers a net estimated $250 billion over the next decade. in addition, it's projected to continue slowing the growth of medicare. it could secure $423 billion in savings as we build a smarter health care system. in providing americans with quality, affordable health care, it builds upon our historic progress in reducing the number of uninsured and improving cover for families that have insurance. we saw this progress with about 11.4 million americans who signed up or re-enrolled in this past open enrollment. it extended c.h.i.p. for four years and covers newly eligible adults in the 28 states plus
4:44 am
d.c. which have expanded medicaid. it improves access to health for native americans. to support communities throughout the country including underserved communities. it invests $4.2 billion in health centers and 14.2 billion to bolster our nation's health. serving nearly 16 million patients in high need areas across the country. with health center mandatory funding ending in 2016, we estimate that more than 7 million americans may lose access to essential cost primary care and this could result this 40,000 jobs lost. to advance our common interest in building a better smarter healthier delivery system the budget supports improvements to the way carriers deliver, providers are paid and information is distributing. on an issue for which there's bipartisan agreement, it
4:45 am
replaces medicare's flawed sustainable growth rate formula and supports a long term policy solution to fix the sgr. the administration supports the bipartisan support taken last year. it increasing funding for the nih by a billion dollars to advance biomedical and behavioral research. it invest $215 million for the precision medicine initiative. an effort to focus on development treatment, diagnostics and prevention strategies. this budget outlines an ambitious plan to make affordable quality child care available to every working class, middle class family. to keep americans healthy, the budget strengthens our public
4:46 am
health infrastructure with $975 million for domestic and international preparedness including critical funds to the global health security agenda. the budget will support cdc critical infrastructure to facilitate rapid response like the recent measles outs break. finally, as we look to leave our department stronger, the budget invests in our shared priorities of cracking down on waste, fraud and abuse initiatives and projected to yield $22 million in gross savings from medicare. we're inviszesting in diebcyber security. i am committed to responding quickly and thoughtfully to
4:47 am
members of congress. i've made it a top priority to respond promptly as work thoroughly with you. i want to thank one moment to thank the hhs employees for all their work on ebola. i look forward to your questions. thank you. >> thank you madame secretary. i'll begin with questioning and recognize myself five minutes for that purpose. let me start with king v burwell. in a few short days the supreme court will be hearing arguments. in january we sent you a letter asking for any actions analysis and or contingency plans that hhs has undertaken to repair if the irs rule is overturned. while we received a letter from you earlier this week, your response failed to actually answer our question. the letter simply stated that you believe no administrative
4:48 am
action by hhs could reverse the affects of decision in favor of the plaintiffs. madame secretary your statement of opinion does not answer our simple question. let me ask the question this way. have you or senior department officials instructed counselors within hhs to prepare any potential actions or approaches if the supreme court rules against the irs? >> with regard to what is in the better, one of the things i think is important to reflect that's in the letter is the analysis of what would happen. that is a part of the letter. in terms of what would happen, i first should state we believe that the court will decide in favor of the position we hold which is we believe that this law says that people have traveled across the country, people in texas should have the same subsidies as people in new york. it's an important starting point. with regard to what would happen because i think that's an
4:49 am
important part of eanswering the questions. when the subsidies go away, 11.4 million people that's the number i gave you, 87% of the individuals in the marketplace are eligible for ubsubsidies. they arest estimated to the $200 per month. that would go away. >> i understand that. i'm asking if you know of any plan to respond to approaches if the supreme court rules against the irs. has the white house has omb or other administration officials directed or asked you about any approaches in response to king v burwell or work on potential responses?
4:50 am
that's my question. >> in order to respond about the question, one needs to analyze is problem which is what i was articulating in terms of the the three major things that would occur if the court decides with the plaintiff. >> let me ask it a different way. i would like to provide you some more information as why we expect you an answer from you today. the committee received recently specific information from a source within your department about an existence of a 100-page document related to potential actions hhs may take if the supreme court rules against the administration in king v burwell. are you or senior staff aware of this document? >> mr. chairman, this is a document i'm not aware of. with regard to the question that you have asked as i said in the letter, we believe and i think it's very important to
4:51 am
understand the damage. it's related to the answer. the damage comes in the number of uninsured that would occur. number two, it occurs in what happens in the individual marketplace where a group of less healthy individuals come in and that drives premiums up in that marketplace. number three, the indigent care that occurs from the uninsured and what that means in those states in terms of their economies as well as for employer base. that's the ramifications. with regard to those things which we believe are the damage as i state in the letter we believe we do not have any administrative actions and therefore there is not. >> let me go into another issue. we discussed over the phone i'm deeply concerned about the lack of hhs action regarding california and the dmhc authority to immediately include coverage for abortion. this california mandate is a
4:52 am
clear violation of the amendment that provides civil rights protection and government entities discriminating against health care for following their conscience. do you agree that the weldon amendment prohibiting funding for states? >> we take it very seriously. since you smokepoke with me, we have opened an investigation to investigate the concerns that you and others have articulated. we take this seriously and are trying to move through the investigation. >> since it's clear that california is in violation of federal law, can you project a date by which you expect the violation to be stopped? >> with regard to the issue of the investigation, that's not something i need to let the investigation go. i've asked the team to make sure they do it as fast as possible. in order that i stay away from the investigation in terms of my
4:53 am
interference, i want to let them go forward. i have asked for due >> thank you. the chair recognizes the ranking member. >> madam secretary it's been almost five years since the affordable care act has been passed and have yet to seen any legislation introduced by our republican colleagues introduced to replace the act even though we've had votes to repeal it. given all this talk are you aware of any request for technical assistance that would replace the affordable care act with an affordable proposal to provide comprehensible health coverage to millions of mesh americans? >> i'm not aware of the request. >> if the million of americans would lose care, are you aware
4:54 am
of financial assistance to help them with affordable health care coverage? >> i am not aware. >> secretary i want to get your input. myself and a lot of our committee, there's a funding cliff that's facing our community health centers. health centers serve nearly 22 million patients and are projected to serve 28.6 million patients in 2016. because of the current patient demographics and statutory mandate to locate in underserved areas or to serve underserved populations, health centers are well-positioned to provide health care service to newly insured americans. they're important in our district, in houston, texas. i was pleased to see the budget included funding for the health
4:55 am
centers. as you know, they face a major lace of access in a few months if we don't act or to prevent the funding cliff caused by the expiration of the mandatory funding at the end of the fiscal year. can you speak about the importance of community health centers? >> we believe they are a fundamental underpinning, not just in terms of health care in the communities but the economics of communities, when you think about the fact that we could lose up to 40000 jobs if we don't extend. one in 15 americans actually are served by these health centers how integral they are to providing primary care throughout the country. so we think it's extremely important to continue that. we can, as we reduce the number of uninsured, we also want to make sure that they are having care. especially in our underserved communities across the country
4:56 am
not all, but many of which are very rural. >> can you kwomt on the impact the funding cuts would have on patients' access to care? can you estimate how many fewer people would be able to receive services at our local health centers? >> our estimates are that if we aren't able to extend, it could be up to 7 million patients who would no longer be able to have access to that care. over 2,000 of the centers would shut down without that and there are other patients who would not be served because people would have to scale back with reduced funding. >> in those 2,000 centers do you know how many jobs would be lost? >> approximately, the estimates are up to 40,000. >> thank you. the health centers are a crucial part of our nation's health care infrastructure for 50 years and have had bipartisan support. and last year along with my colleagues on both sides including representing lance supporting our health centers in calling for a bipartisan
4:57 am
solution, we had 250 cosigners including 31 members of our committee. similarly, there's the senate gathered 66 votes in more than 100 organizations have called for a fix. consensus is something that has to be done and we have to act as soon as possible. this is a top priority of mine, and literally republicans and democrats across the country look forward to working but and our colleagues on the committee on a bipartisan basis to find a solution to avert that funding cliff. mr. chairman i have 43 seconds left, and i'd like to yield to somebody for that 43 seconds on our side. anybody want to buy 30 seconds now? okay. well, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> thank you. chair now recognizes the chair of the full committee for five minutes for questions. >> thank you, again, mr. chairman. secretary burwell, there are a number of health care law
4:58 am
implementation issues that trouble us. in the interest of time i would ask that you submit answers to the following questions in writing within two weeks. the ceo of healthcare.gov recently stated there is a two year plan for the back end, could you provide us with an estimate of when the back end will be fully automated. second one is hhs recently announced that 800,000 americans enrolled in coverage through healthcare.gov received inaccurate tax forms under the aca. we'd like a detailed assessment on when the department expects these taxpayer also have accurate documentation in hand so they can file this taxes. and third many americans were automatically re-enrolled in exchange plans raising concerns that individuals and families may be getting unexpected premium bills or inaccurate exchange subsidies in 2015. we'd ask that you submit specific data on the number of
4:59 am
americans who have been automatically re-enrolled in those exchange plans. that would be helpful. >> be happy to. >> now i'll return to 21st century cures and appreciate your assistance with this. i want to thank dr. collins, dr. woodcock and dr. suren countless others. because of that participation and participation from folks across the country have been able to learn about the status of this and the delivery of cures and treatments for patients. as we heard in our first round table, there are over 10,000 diseases. and we have only cures and treatments for about 500. so we have a great deal of work ahead to do. we released a discussion document last month and have been working with a congresswoman to get, mr. ranking member pallone mr.
5:00 am
green. and other sides of the aisle to improve that document. one is precision medicine, something that the president talked about in the state of the union address and subsequently a white house event a couple weeks ago. we put that placeholder into the draft, and we hooklook forward to continuing to work with you, the white house and the administration on that. can you give us background on t that. >> thank you. it's exciting to have the energy around these issues including the precision medicine, which i think is a subset of the broader issues you're looking at. our precision medicine is $215 million. as we think about it from a budget perspective. one part of the initiative is creating a very large database of 1 million people through nih, but we'll access that from other channels t

23 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on