tv Politics Public Policy Today CSPAN May 22, 2012 1:00am-5:59am EDT
issues and bill clinton could have run against a combination of mother teresa. in five or six states. that is what the election comes down. my view, if gdp stays between 2% and 3% and job growth is static, under that formula, the president wins because he has a decisive advantage on the trust issue. if you have gdp below 2%, it becomes -- [unintelligible]
any time you get to that close of all level, every single tactic, the gore campaign you can look back in retrospect. it was that close. give in her election becomes that close it will have that type of an impact. there are some larger macro issues. >> we have a bunch of questions from the audience. let me read them. will web 2.0 lead to national voting or issues on the internet? >> i love this question. i do think this is -- [unintelligible]
that transformative tool. i do them on the progressive side. i am on the campaign to raise the tax on tobacco. $1. we are going to spend a couple of million dollars. the initiative was put in place to be a bulwark against major powerful [unintelligible] control of the state house. it has become a tool for powerful special interests and used in any number of ways and progressive groups have gotten money and put it on the ballot. if you give the electorate to do this over twitter facebook. in the state and other states, there are 30 states that have
initiatives. we will get the process back where it was originally designed and i think this will be a battle that will become more complex. and do other types of democracy those are ways that will be enormously transformative. the final one, and i am sorry to talk so long, butearlier there was the twitter debate and we talked about this earlier. you had romney and the others, and twitter basically gave a green or a blue [unintelligible] whether they thought they broader public was responding. romney had a difficult debate
that set up his negative story line. it is going to last throughout this campaign. imagine if you're in a world where candidates will get constant [unintelligible] on an ongoing basis. you can have something in front of you that tells you how the crowd or the public is responding. i do not think you are that far from seeing some technology used in that way. to me, you can see it manifests itself in a good way. people have to be authentic and trustworthy. tenants. they manifest themselves.
>> you can see a world someday where a politician is giving a speech and he says yes or she says yes, and the screen turns green and the politician who says by yes i mean no and the screen turns red. >> people talk about singularity. imagine if you have something implanted in you somewhere. it can have communications. -- technology can liberate my inner bill clinton and help me understand and relate to people. to do that topic justice. we're moving toward a place more informed decisions because people will be able to targeted
way. it maybe the most important issue to you is fisheries. about fisheries in the -- a bet you you did not hear anything about fisheries. because of the targeting nature advertising, there will be able people who care about fisheries on what their position is on restoring wildlife and ensuring upstream fisheries. in many ways, there are going to evolutions to the way we're communicating with the campaign that will help us make better, informed decisions as opposed to response feedback to the candidate which the can conform to. you will know more about the candidates and feel better about the choices you are
making. >> there is a question that deals directly with this. communicating about complex policy issues using conventional media is almost impossible. using new technologies to do a goes beyond slogans and talking points? >> i thought it was. technology could get deeper into what people believe about what matters to you. here. what do you think? >> maybe you could talk about the cell phone example. >> i was going to say something this is what goes along with what tucker was saying.
campaigns -- they are able to be individual voters want, you could give policy papers and speeches and constituent letters and everything targeted to you on an issue-specific basis which i think is probably the of the technology i could think of to answer that. >> a couple of examples. there is the challenge of how that plays itself out. folks to come up with the best tv spots. we offered to run the winnerthe ad was better than any of the ads the campaign put together. it was a pretty good spot. we engaged a broad audience. they could look at the
analytics. they were running at more than just on the start program. someone called to try to buy our site from us. they saw the analytics. it was a great demographic. and i am sorry to bring this up but during meg's campaign. we created something called megpedia. that was a crowd sourcing site for opposition research. we had folks who worked at ebay. a number of items that reporters took and tested out. that was an interesting way in research way.
that might not be the most [unintelligible] but it was a tool and you may see some elected officials began to use those types of tools as they develop. the president has done it. with the town halls that he has done and the conversation he had was -- involved the public. i think as someone who runs for office, there will ask their followers to create an ad. to come up with a policy position and maybe that person gets in office and is reflected government.
source campaign. >> i have another one for you. will what is being discussed appear make campaigning [unintelligible] as they push these to voters? >> i think it is timely, recently. there was some debate about the internet. this was a huge news story, which i am sure you all have seen in the last month or so, and i think that was an example where, they are called net rates. this is what they were originally called. but they came of the woodwork, and people were communicating to congress and really communicating in energetic and active ways to the individual
members of congress, and it wasn't over an whelming success to the technology community, at to an earlier point that was made, which is we can talk about campaigns and elections, and that is great, because there is so much information being pushed out to different people, but probably the most important thing is that what the people actually governing are doing, getting feedback on specific policy debates that are going on so they can get an idea in real-time about what positions they should take into account. i do not think i am forsaking any confidences that there were some individuals that came to work with us to explain that they were actually able to determine the traditional writing your congressman and letter, and your congressman writing you a letter back, it has decreased dramatically as a result, because members of congress are on facebook, and
are actively every day talking about what they are doing in congress, and they are getting feedback from congress in large amounts, and they are able to communicate in a timely manner, so they are not getting a bill and sending a letter back. and by the time they get someone to consider, they have the christmas cards. that is probably the back and forth conversation that people are benefiting from most. >> what do you think? is this movement, or this set of technologies that are now available, and it seems like they are springing of all over the country at a rate that those of us are not aware of, is this going to make government at the end of the day more responsive because people are going to find out more quickly about what they really care about? >> i think they will.
i think that as a citizen is interested in what is going on in washington in congress with someone who is running for office, to the extent that they are paying attention and want to be involved, they will receive a dialogue back. everyone has a voice with the incumbent, and they get a dialogue back. one of the great things about facebook and twitter is that members of congress become real people. they engage with constituents on both platforms. they do not typically only talk about the vote that i took on health care or other issues. the often say, looking forward to being in menlo park this weekend for the family barbecue, or looking forward to taking my daughter to college next week. as real people, and they can interact with the voters, on a more normal basis and have a dialogue, and i think it will be more responsive and also more
human. >> is that dangerous? because when you become a real person, and you put a lot of things in play, none of us have a perfect pass. maybe it would best be left out of the public's fear? >> obama taking the anthony wiener pledge. there has been a number of folks who have run for office, and then there are facebook editions posted there. i see it with my kids. they are being taught and learned there is a whole cultural process. i do want to come back, because i think there is tension between social media and how it is affecting technology. there are so many structural issues right now that are designed to push people not to
find a compromise, from both sides, and these go to the opposite end of the field, and i do not know what the answer is going to be in terms of the social media and technology, how it can alleviate or address that, as operationally. i certainly hope that is the situation, but it will play itself out in a really interesting way. i think if you look at citizens united, it creates structural issues. you saw this last night with the candidates who won in indiana, the basically said they have no intention of getting the middle ground or compromising. >> the ledger? >> that is the type of politics that are taking place here and in d.c. and all over the country, and my belief is that
the vast majority is there with what the political process reflects. can this be used as a tool and a vehicle to provide an incentive to get back to reach a compromise, and i understand there is an election, and we have to deal with issues. >> do you feel that the public as a whole is less extreme than the representatives that are getting elected? >> absolutely. >> i think what chris mentioned is exactly right. you see two people that i cannot determine what it is with the political process, yelling back and forth. when i see views that are taking place, where emails that i am getting from my friends, in particular, i can see people
that i may not agree with on a political issue or maybe even know that they have that view on political issues. i know her? she is a good friend and co- worker. they have strong views about it, and they think and will determine about the issue. it opens up my ears to considering things i have not before, and that dialogue is lost with a lot of what we are seeing, and a big on-line communications and social media, i think it is a positive force. >> when people have gathered around post offices they are waiting for the mail or the newspaper, with the single exception of 1860, they have power every four years in this country, depending on that, without violence. there are very few countries in
the history of the world who can say that, so with all of the faults of our system has, it has worked that well. i think the question is, is this going to make it better? is it going to be more of the same proof what i saw as people were coming over here is quite interesting. i think there was a five-term senator from indiana, and the idea that he would lose a primary, four or five years ago, this would be unthinkable, and it happened because he lost it to an uncompromising opponent, and uncompromising people are easy to admire because they do not compromise. we have proof of that.
we are sort of in a catch-22. what is going to get us out of that? and what role will technology have in getting us out of that? >> aspiration to, i hope it serves to elevate this to make it more civil. but ultimately, have people actually finding common ground. i do not know how this is all going to play out. on the other hand, a mainstream publication, and then you go online. there were comments with people attacking each other. it is fascinating in some way, reflective of democracy out there, and the language is pretty tough and pretty strident. i do not know.
>> to pay attention to what is in people's ears and eyes. if you spend an enormous amount of time on facebook and the conversations with friends and family about the issues of the day, you are probably hearing a general back and forth and having a civil conversation. you turn on cable news, and they are putting a spotlight on the most obnoxious person who is able to screen the loudest, and then they put a spotlight on the next over who can screen the blood test on the other side, and when that is the 24/seventh thing on cable, it brings this up. it makes people think that politics is like that. i think it is like that a little bit. >> to some degree. >> when you have the media that rewards poor behavior and
screaming and partisanship, a live television camera on things that they know will outrage people and bring about fights, like a church population of nine people in arkansas who is going to burn the koran. putting television cameras on something that will drive a wedge, i think that is where we end up when people put a spotlight on that versus people having a very simple conversation in most parts of the country. >> this comeback to at the end of the day, -- this comes back to getting things right, where we are feeling our way through. i do have great confidence that historically, sometimes we may make a mistake or two. this is going through one of those period and i think there
are sort of cultural understandings and that people will not discount them and respond. i think as people become more attuned, and hopefully as you get more and more people, broad segments of the population actually living in their daily lives, online and engaging, that will then serve for that leveling process and actually work to bring people together over the long haul. >> we are running out of time. let me just ask the three of you a question. that i amfor a moment mitt romney, and i call you up, tucker, and i say, "i need some advice. i want to win this election." what would you tell me to win. >> that is interesting. [applause]
i would tell governor romney that he should check my track record and should call somebody else. [applause] i think there are things that the romney campaign can internalize. there are some things that can drive people apart and address the problem that we are talking about, which is held talks in the environment has become in politics, and say what you will, governor romney, he is an outsider in washington, and i do believe that he is able to be effective in a very blue state, and he is a person who understands compromise. i know that is difficult to say, but then he will go back to considering being able to agree on certain things and agree to disagree on other things, but
this delivers real results. it is something that the electorate is looking at before. they were doing just as well in ohio and virginia and north carolina as they did in massachusetts, and i am confident that he will, and i think that governor romney has a very good chance of being president of the united states. >> i just heard tucker say that mitt romney has a very good chance, and i assume that you're talking about 2012, not 2016. i am watching c-span, and am going to be on it, and i need your advice on how to run this campaign, and i am obama, what would you tell me to do? >> i would say that the way that you reacted today is a perfect reflection of the president that people love and that -- [applause]
i think one of the things that people love about the president is how authentic he is, and he showed that today. i think he appreciates that, and the voters appreciate that. one reason i have such confidence in him is his record. i think he is an excellent campaigner, and there is no one better, and he approaches campaigns, and they are important, and they are decisions, decisions about the future, and you do not go down in a campaign for not sitting in what you think are not saying what you feel are not saying what you think is the right way forward, but i think they will go in guns blazing. i think he will be the authentic president that we have seen for the last few years, and i think he will be quite successful and be just fine. >> what do you make of the comments? >> i think obama is very self-
effacing. -- i think that he is very self- effacing. we were all excited when he moved into the private sector. as someone who wants to see the president gets reelected, i hope that sarah can move back over. i think both comments were right on. i think the commonality you heard was exactly right. campaigns, particularly in this day and age, come down to trust. there were decisions about you and the family. the best job of that is going to being this. sarah, you hit it right out of the park. barack obama has got to be
thrilled. what it means for our country and his reelection. >> i have absolute confidence in john. let me personally think the three of you. i know you are busy, and this is complicated. thank you for coming here to educate us, but let me turn the floor over to john. >> please join me in thanking the panel. [applause] i think you know one of my favorite quotes that was given to me by a member a couple of years ago, he said that this is the switzerland of silicon valley, so i hope we have had a very swiss but very provocative panel tonight, thank you for all of you for being here. richard, thank you for leading it. have a good night, everyone. [applause]
[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> i think this is one of those markets that the people do not vote for the party. i think the city votes for the candidate. i think you have seen a lot more of that, even the heavy republican midwest, which is dynamic, but i think you are seeing more of that in recent years here in the midwest. they are really voting more for what the person stands for. >> booktv and american history to be explored the culture of wichita, kansas. -- and american history television exports more -- export -- explore the culture of wichita, kansas. >> this is the headquarters of
the wichita company that came down here to create commons shall we say, the city of wichita. >> watched on june 2 and 3 on c- span2 and c-span3. -- watch it. >> coming up, president obama at the joplin high school commencement, and later, the supreme court justice. later, the future of the navy combat fleet. several live events to tell you about tomorrow. the senate energy and natural resources committee will said government policy. that is on c-span3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern. also on c-span, the head of the securities and exchange commission, mary schapiro, and the head of the commodities futures commission.
they testified before the senate banking committee about senate regulations, derivatives, and jpmorgan. dnr wrote to the white house coverage of the presidential campaign continues, with a new hampshire speech on the economy. this is at 1:45 p.m. eastern. >> congressman, there are people looking at what happened for jpmorgan. they made a stupid decision, did something done -- dom. this is how this is supposed to happen. >> to some extent, this is true, and i take some credit for it. i think you would have seen much more panic in the economy, much more concerned.
the financial institutions to be much better capitalized. this is different than what it would have had otherwise. >> this past weekend, congressman barney frank spoke about the over $2 billion loss, as well as the state of the u.s. world economy. the dodd-frank lot and gay marriage. watch the comments on line at the c-span video library. >> president obama delivered a high school commencement address at the joplin high school. a deadly tornado hit the town one year ago. this is a little less than half an hour. >> thank you. everybody, have a seat. first of all, you have an outstanding governor.
the superintendent, the principal. the faculty, the parents, the family, friends, the people of joplin, and most of all, the class of 2012. congratulations on your graduation, and thank you for allowing me the honor of playing a small part in this special day. the commencement speaker, the job is primarily to keep it short. they have given me more than two minutes. and the other job is to inspire. but as i looked out at this class, what is clear is that you
are the inspiration. to this country and the people all over the world. last year, the road that led you here today turn that no one could have imagined. just hours after the class of 2011 walked across the stage, the most powerful tornado in six decades toward a path of devastation through droplets that was nearly a mile wide and 13 long. in just 32 minutes, it took thousands of homes, hundreds of businesses, and 161 of your
neighbors, friends, and family. it took a classmate, will norton, who had just left this auditorium with a diploma in his hand. it took lantz hare, who should have received his diploma next year, and by now, i expect that most of you have probably relived those 32 minutes again and again. review work. what you saw. when you knew for sure that it was over. the first contact, the first phone call you had with somebody you loved. the first day that you woke up in a world that would never be the same. and yet, the story of joplin is not just what happened that day.
it is the story of what happened to the next day and the day after that. and all of the days and weeks and months that followed. as your city manager, mark rohr, said, the people here chose to define the tragedy not by what happened to us but by how we responded. class of 2012, that story is yours. it is part of you now. as others have mentioned, you have had to grow up quickly over the past year. you have learned at a younger age than most of us that we cannot always predict what life has in store. no matter how we might try to avoid it, like shirley can bring
some arctic -- life surely can bring hearted, and at some point, it will bring a loss. but here in joplin, eva also learned that we have the power to grow from these experiences -- you have also learned that we have the power to grow. we are fine -- defined by how we respond. we can choose to carry on. we can choose to make a difference in the world. and in doing so, we can make true what is written in scripture. that tribulation produces perseverance, and perseverance, character, and character, hope.
of all that has come from this tragedy, let this be the central lesson that guides us, let it be a sustaining -- let it sustain you through whenever challenges lie ahead. as you begin the next stage in your journey, wherever you are going, it is safe to say that you will encounter and greed and selfishness and ignorance and cruelty. and sometimes just bad luck. you'll meet people who try to build themselves up by tearing others down. you will meet people believe that looking after others is only for suckers. but you are from joplin, so you will remember. you will know just how many people there are receive live differently, those who are
guided by kindness and generosity and quiet service. you will remember that in a town of 50,000 people, nearly 50,000 more came in to help in the weeks after the tornado. perfect strangers you had never met. and did not ask for anything in return. one of them was mark carr, who drove 600 miles from rocky ford, colorado, with a couple of chain saws and his three little children. one man traveled from japan, because he remembered that americans were there for his country after last year tsunami, and he wanted the chance, he said, to pay it forward.
there were americorps volunteers, who chose to leave their homes and stay here in joplin until the work is done. and then there was the day that the mizzou's football team rolled into town with an 18- wheeler full of donated supplies. of all the places, they were assigned to help out on canvas ave. [laughter] [applause] i do not know who set that up. and while they hauled away washing machines and refrigerators from the debris, they met a woman named carol mann, who had just lost the house she had lived in for 18 years, and carol did not have a lot. she works part-time at mcdonald's and struggles with seizures, and she told the
players that she had even lost the change purse that held her lunch money, so one of them, one of the players went back to the house, dug through the rubble, and returned with a purse with $5 and side. -- insdie, -- inside, and carol's sister said, "so much of the news you hear is so negative, but those boys renewed my faith that there are so many good people in the world." that is what you will remember, because you are from joplin. you will remember the half million dollar donation that came from angelina jolie and missouri native -- an up-and- coming actor brad pitt. remember theso
$360 that was delivered by a nine-year-old boy who organized his own car wash. you will remember the school supplies donated by your neighboring towns, but maybe you'll also remember the brand new laptops that were sent from the united arab emirates, a tiny country on the other side of the world. when it came time for your prompt, makeup artist melissa blayton organized an effort that collected over 1000 donated dresses. and liz easton, a law lost her home and bakery in the tornado, made 1500 cup dates. they were good. there are so many good people in
the world. there is such a decency, a bigness of spirit in this country of ours. so, class of 2012, you have got to remember that. remember what people did here. and like that man who came all of the way from japan to joplin, make sure in your own life that you pay it forward. now, just as you have learned the goodness of people, you have also learned the power of community, and you have heard from some other speakers how powerful that is, and as you take on the walls of co-worker and business owner, neighbor, citizen, you will encounter all kinds of divisions between groups, divisions of race, religion, ideology. you will meet people who like to disagree just for the sake of being disagreeable.
you will meet people who prefer to play up their differences instead of focusing on what they have in common, where they can cooperate. but you are from joplin. so you will always know that it is always possible for a community to come together when it matters most. after all, a lot of you could have spent your senior year scattered throughout different schools, far from home, but dr. huff asked everyone to pitch in so that schools started on time, right here in joplin. he understood the power of this community, and he understood the power of place. the teachers worked extra hours, and the coaches put in extra time. that mall was turned into a classroom. the food court became a
cafeteria, which may be some of you thought was an improvement. [laughter] and, yes, the arrangements might have been a little noisy, and a little improvised, but you hunkered down, and he made it work together. you made it work together. that is the power of community. together, you decided the city was not about to spend the next year arguing over every detail of a recovery effort. at the very first meeting, the first town meeting, every citizen was handed a post-it note and asked to write down their goals and hopes for joplin's future. more than 1000 notes covered an entire wall and became the blueprint that architects are falling to this day. i am thinking of trying this in congress. [cheers and applause]
together, the businesses that were destroyed in the tornadic decided that they were not about to walk away from the community that made their success possible, even if it would have been easier, even if it would have been more profitable to go somewhere else, so today, more than half of the stores that were damaged on the range line are up and running again. 11 more plan on joining them. every time a company reopens its doors, people cheered the cutting of the ribbon that bears the town's new slogan "remember, rejoice, rebuild." that is community. i have been told, class of 2012, that before the tornado, many of you could not wait to leave your once high school was finally over.
your student council president, julia louis -- lewis, she is you went there is to raise her hand. i am quoting you, julie. she said, "we never thought joplin was anything special." "but seeing how we respond to something that for our community apart has brought us together. everyone has a lot more pride in our town." it is no surprise then that many of you have decided to stick around and go to missouri southern, go to colleges, community colleges that are not too far away from tax. that is the power of community. that is the power of shared effort and shared memory. some of my strongest bonds are the ones we forged when everything around us seems
broken, and even though i expect that some of you will ultimately end up leaving joplin, i am pretty confident that joplin will never leave you. the people who went through this with you, the people and you once thought of as simply neighbors or acquaintances, classmates, the people in this auditorium tonight, you are family now. they are your family. and so, my deepest of for all of you is that as you begin this new chapter in your life, you will bring that spirit of joplin to everyplace you travel, to everything you do. you can serve as a reminder that we are not meant to walk this road alone, that we are not
expected to face down adversity by ourselves. we need god. we need each other. we are important to each other, and we are stronger together than we are on our own. and that is the spirit that has allowed all of you to rebuild this city, and that is the same spirit we need right now to help rebuild america. and you, class of 2012, you are going to help lead this effort. you are the ones that will help build the economy. [applause] you are the one that is going to make sure that this country is a place where everyone is going to put in their effort can find a
job that supports the family. [applause] you are the ones to make sure that we have a country where we lead the world in science and technology and innovation. america only succeeds when we all pitch in and pull together. and i am counting on you to be leaders in that effort. because you are from joplin, and you act -- you have already defined the odds. there are a lot of stories here in joplin of considerable courage and of resilience over the last year, but still, there are some that still stand out, especially on this day, and by now, most of you know joplin high see near, quinton anderson,
and he is embarrassed because somebody is talking about him again, but i am going to talk about him anyway, because in a lot of ways, his journey was .oplin's when the tornado struck, he was thrown across the street. the young man and found him could not imagine that he would survive his injuries. quinton of up in a hospital bed three days later, and it was then that his sister grace told him that both of their parents had been lost in the storm. quinton went on to face over five weeks of treatment, including emergency surgery, but he left the hospital determined to carry on, including to be there for his sister. over the past year, he has been a football captain who cheered on from the sidelines when he was not able to play. he worked harder so that he could be ready for baseball in
the spring. he won a scholarship as a finalist for the high-school football rudy awards, any plans to study molecular biology at hardin universityg this fall. [applause] quinton has said that his model in life is "always take that extra step." -- his motto in life is that. for him, and for joplin, and for the entire class of 2012, that extra step is about to take you towards whatever future you hope for an whatever dreams you hold in your hearts. yes, you will encounter obstacles along the way. i guarantee you, you will face setbacks, and you will face disappointment. but you are from joplin.
and you are from america. and no matter how tough times get, you will always be tougher, and no matter what light throws at you, you will be ready. you will not be defined by the difficulties you face but by how you respond, with grace, with strings, and a commitment to others -- with strength and a commitment to others. langston hughes, the poet and civil rights activists who knew some tough times was born here in joplin. in a poem called "youth," wrote -- we have tomorrow, and dawn today, the broad arch above the
road we came, we march. to the people of joplin and the class of 2012, the road has been hard, and the day has been a long, but we have tomorrow, so we march. we marched together, and you are leading the way, because you are from joplin. congratulations. may god bless you, and may god bless the class of 2012, may god bless the united states of america. [cheers and applause]
that, even the heavy republican midwest, which is dynamic, and that is great. i think you are seeing more of that in the recent years in the midwest. they are really voting more for what the person stands for. >> booktv and american history tv explores the history of wichita, kansas. >> this is a house, and this is the only part of the structure from the 1800's, and it is a very important building in our history in that it is in residence, but it was also the headquarters of the wichita town and land company that came down here too, shall we say, create the town of wichita, kansas. >> watch this on c-span2 and c- span3. >> on "washington journal" tomorrow morning, we talk about race, politics, and the 2012
campaign, with a democratic strategist, jamal simmon. and a look at the government role in the housing market. and then, the ambassador to morocco in the 1990's. "washington journal" is live on c-span at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> from 1971 to 1973, president richard nixon secretly recorded his phone conversations and meetings. this weekend on c-span radio, hear more of the tapes, with conversations between the president and the cia director and the fbi director j. edgar hoover. >> make a statement about the freedom of the press. my inclination is to not say so. i kind of think i should stay
out. what is your public relationship? >> you should remain solid about it. >> you would? >> i would, yes. >> you can listen. and nationwide, we are on channel 119 and streaming on c- span.org. >> former supreme court justice john paul stevens on monday commented on the decision of the florida recount in the case of bush v. gore. he was nominated to the supreme court by gerald ford in 1975 and retired in 2010. from the american law institute, this is a little less than half an hour. >> justice stevens is in my mind the very perfect justice of
the united states supreme court, but let me tell you why. because his life experience is so broad, his compassion so deep, and his intellect so very far reaching, let me tell you how i first met justice stevens, because i think offers an insight into the kind of human being he is. many years ago, in albuquerque, new mexico, justice stevens and his wife took part in a bridge tournament, and one of and one the time happily had been his clerk and invited he and his wife and barry and i to dinner. i couldn't even imagine meeting a justice of the supreme court let alone having dinner. and we had an incredibly wonderful dinner which justice stephens told us all about what it was like to be a justice of
the supreme court and telling everybody playing bridge and they told him what they thought of what he had just played. but at the end of the evening there was a kind of uncomfortable silence. and justice stephens finally said to his former law clerk, greg, don't you want to invite me to come to your firm to m having been bold enough to ask him to do that. and so in albuquerque, new mexico in a law firm of 21 people, our law clerks thought we were the smartest human beings on the planet. but what happened was even more remarkable. when justice stevens sat down in our very small conferences room in the old building which had been most famous to that because the movies "the muppets
take manhattan" had taken place in that conference room, he spoke for a few minutes and he said but i have questions to ask you. and he spent the rest of almost two hours asking people what it was like to practice law in albuquerque, new mexico. what it was like then to be a law student, what it was like to come to a firm, what things people were worried about, what was important to them, what they saw as important and possible in the life of the law . that kind of desire to continue to understand what is going on in the lives of all kinds of people is when combined with his great scholarship, combined with his great intellect and combined with his great compassion has made him to me the very perfect person to sit on the highest court of the land, justice stevens, it's an honor to have you here and we thank you very much.
[applause] >> thank you. thank you, roberta. before i read you my prepared remarks, i have to acknowledge what a nice introduction that was because i remember that occasion very well too and that part of the reason that i was very happy to be privileged to talk at the american bar association convention in florida when roberto was -- roberta was the first chairman of this association. and it reminded me it's not particularly relevant but it reminded me of the fact they talk about bar association honoring women because i had talked to the chicago bar association ban -- back in the
1970's when ester keegan was the first woman president of a major bar association. of course, roberta followed up and as greg told me the time, she was going to have a sensational career, which of course, was an obviously correct prediction. but this afternoon, i thought i would make a brief comment on bush against gore. because there have been so much discussion of the remedy issue in that case in which a majority of the the united states supreme court issued a stay that asked for the recount in the presidenttial election of -- presidential election of 2000. the significant of the courts of the equal protection law of the 149 amendment has been generally overlooked. as you may recall in the 2002
election, florida used voting machines to count ballets on which voters had used stylists to punch a hole in the small circle opposite the preferred candidate's name. voters who successfully followed the written instructions punished -- punched a complete hole in the ballots and they're votes were accurately counted by the machines. so-called overvotes an undervotes. the overvote category included ballots on which the voter had tried to vote for two or more candidates for the same office. the under vote category included ballots on which the voter had designated just one candidate but had failed to make a complete hole in the ballot. there were two sub categories
of under votes hanging chads and dimple chads. in the hanging chads sub category, the punchdown piece of the category remained only partially attached where as the ballot with the dirple chat continued with indentation but no hole. the florida supreme court ordered a manual recount to be conducted according to the intent of the voter es standard accomplished by florida law. that court did not require a recount of overvotes. presumably because a re-examination of those ballots would seldom reveal the identity of the voters preferred election. in the typical case either a hanging chad or a dimple chad
opposite the name of one candidate would both identify the voters' preferred candidate and indicate his or her intent to cast a vote. during the recount election officials differed on the question whether to count dimple chads or hanging chads or just the ladder. in other words those for which light could be scene through the edge of the chad. in palm beach county for example, the officials began to follow a 1990 night line that drew a distinction between hanging and dimple chads. but they ended up counting both sub categories of under votes. in his opinion, the united states supreme court described that change in a way that gave the reader the impression that the official stayed engaged. the opinion stated "palm beach
county for example began the process with a 1990 guideline which precluded completely attached chads, switched to a rule that considered a vote to be legal. if any light could be seen through a chad, changed back to the 1990 rule and then abandoned any pretense of a per se rule only to have a court order that the county considered simple chads legal." the paragraph is misleading in two represents. first what it describes as switching to a new rule was in fact only a clarification of the original rule which considered only hanging chads as valid votes. to count new unquote rule, the hanging chad was one within
light could be seen since that was the evidence that the chad was not completely attached. second, what the describe described is changing back to the 1990 rule was just a continuation of the prack says of not counting dimple chairs. the county ended up treating dimple chads adds valid votes before the united states supreme court rules. other courts for curry is misleading in other respects. for example. the failure to order a recount of the estimated 110,000 overvotes with error. despite the lack of evidence or argument discussion which candidate the voter intent to support. the president concerns the absence of any rationale supporting the opinions reliance under the equal
protection claws. the equal protection clause requires states to govern impartially and in particular force in protecting the right to vote. there must be a neutral justify cation for rules and practices that discriminate for or against individuals including groups of sidges that are defined by race, by political location. the one person vote rule for example probet states then to vote in dense populated cities. if members of the democratic party were more likely to produce dimple chads rather than hanging chads there might be reason to vote.
it would violate the equal protection clause. but there was no claim by anyone in the case that the method of couning undervotes had any of that significant significance. the mere cat possibility that accidental and ran the mirrors and i declared it through the voting about recount processes would not describe anyone against a preidentified group of voter and would not even establish any unintend of intended impact on either company. and surely there would be nothing either arguably discrim na tore. they call it dimple chads just like victoria chad. they orders the recount of under votes was flawed.
if that omission was a flawed, it could have been remedy on remind by quoting the following two senses from an illinois case. pull them against mulligan. the objection that to be couned the chad should be fully punched out or at least there should be a a changing chair. many voters could be disenfranchised with without their fault. if for example demrass' only perforations could be regarded as the voters intent on the vote. i have never thought that florida's supreme court was flawed. however because it seems obvious to me as i did to the unanimous supreme -- illinois supreme court in pull a.m.
the florida supreme court rely. was sufficiently clear. my principle purpose in calling your attention to the equal protection clause in bush against gore is to emphasizes how that provision of our constitution. properly construed but would invalidate a form of inappropriate political behave behavior. if it can violate the state's duty to govern impartially, surely it must follow that the intentional practice of drawing bizarre boundaries of elector ral districts in order to enhance the party. in recent cases, however, members of the majority of the supreme court have written opinions including that the absence of judicially
manageable standards. several separate opinions of members of the court including one written by jeff lewis powell in 1986 as well as several of my own have identified such standards for reviewing partisan gerrymanders. and even the majority of the court has applied manageable standards. the unwillingness of the supreme court majority to recognize those standards has left this category of intentional discrimination against orders unchecked. so long as the discrimination is predicated on the basis of political party and not race. for example just last year, a court rejected a challenge to marilyn's restricting plan because the plane had not shown
that the state moved sfrim voters from one district to another because they're african-americans an that's simply because they're democrats. even though it is plain that democratic politicians had redeuced the number of congressional health in the easiest claim to accept factually unquote. the supreme court has declared partisan gerrymandering. ly refrain from making the same agreements. it seems appropriate to remind the memories of this distinguished awe yens that both legislatures an courts have adequate power.
the tools to doing so have already been involved. racial man dering and in a number of supreme opinions by members of the court discussing political journey man. thank you for your attention an for your continuing efforts to improve the law. [applause] >> justice stevens, i think it's tomorrow that we go to our election law project. so we will do so with some serious words in our minds. justice stephens very kindly
say that he might answer a question or two. i told him there might be some reluctance of people having these days listened to oral arguments on at least the radio. but if there are people who would like to ask questions, please stand up to one of the microphones. and identify yourself. yes, sir. >> good afternoon, justice. my name is paul molliker in chicago. did you see that the supreme court decided the case. that was a part of the gerrymandering case. [inaudible] >> did you -- is there a follow-up question part? >> i wonder if he had news or
bad news. >> rockfield, maryland >> could you speak up a little bit? >> justice stevens, since your analysis of the supreme court's opinion in bush vs. gore indicates how seriously flaws that opinion was do you think that politics played a part in the decision. >> did you hear the question? >> i don't know. [laughter] [applause] >> well, if there are quick questions in the three microphones.
three, five, and whatever microphone that is. four. jess, john oakley from davis california. for nearly 40 years since the 1974 decision, the supreme court by a 5 four has great difficult go getting the law state sovereign immunity right. you said in ben hurst state school that the court's 11th amendment law ill william nates the character of an institution. i've always wanted to ask you to expound on that analysis. >> well, i had written a great deal on that issue and i'm sure i don't have much to add. i would really recommend that you read a book called five chiefs. it has a lot to say on the issue.
>> jose anderson, baltimore, maryland. i was wondering if you have any thoughts, you think the election that eighth amendment juris prudence what it would look like in the coming years or in the supreme court. >> of course, that's a very difficult question because it depends on the attitudes of who is sitting at the court at the particular time on the particular issue. i i really think with regard to the death penalty which is in the back of your mind in this question, i'm not sure that the democratic process won't provide the answers sooner than the court does. because i do think there is much -- really a significant growing appreciation of the basic imbalance and the
application of death penalty does a lot of harm. really does very little to go over and beyond to be in position of of life. and then these continuing risks of a -- that the dealt penalty were rejected on the basis of two men were executed and then later accomplished. and the state by state basis reached the conclusion which i think the cushion constitution would also demand. >> thank you. justice. [applause] >> michelle fields from washington, d.c.
can i just get your thoughts on the supreme court ice imbasketting hale care decision and whether you think -- health care decision and whether you think it looks good offer bat bad for the administration? >> it's an ed yes to answer because i don't know the briefs. without hearing both sides of the case. justice stevens, i want to tell you they finished reading "five chiefs" last week and what i hope that everybody does is not only get the book and read it, but it is the perfect book of people who are not lawyers. it's the most amazing, accessible explanation of the really profound importance of the court and its decisions in our country and it includes which is so important because so many people have never read it, the united states constitution at the end.
so i give it a five-star amazon review. >> thank you very much. >> ladies and gentlemen, and justice stevens, what an amazing event for all of us to have here. thank you. >> thank you. [applause] >> from 1971 to 1973, president richard nixon secretry recorded his phone conversations an meetings. this weekend on c-span radio, hear more of the nixon tapes. saturday at 6:00 p.m. eastern with conversations with richard helps. and also f.b.i. director j. edgar hoover. >> some court think i ought to
make a statement of the freedom of the press and that we are trying to sensor them. my inclination is not to say so. but what's your public relationship on it? >> you should remain absolutely sigh lebt ant it. -- silent about it. >> you would? >> i would. >> streaming at cspan radio.org. >> in a few moments a discussion on the future of the navy's combat fleet and in a little more than an hour half watched the committee on the new farp bill. and then president obama's high school speech to students? joplin, missouri. we'll talk about race, moll ticks and the 2012 campaign
with democratic strategists. johnny isaacson joins us to look at the housing market and will discuss middle east diplomacy to mark ginsberg who was ambassador to them in the 1990's. washington at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> there are people looked at what happened with j.p. morgan. and they say here's a company who made a decision. fired the people who were responsible. this is how it's supposed to happy. >> i take some cre for it. it's because government has played a role. if this had happened five years ago, if j.p. morgan, i think you would have seen much more concern. what we did in the discussion
we past and through other things. wants to require the financial estimate. so one of the things that we have is you have to have more capital. that helped give people reassurance. >> this pass-week. barney frank talked about the $2 billion loss. as well as the state and u.s. world economy. watch his comments online at the c-span video library. the navey is changing the composition of its surface combat fleet, building more complex destroyers an introducing a class of new vessels. >> this is a little more than
an hour and a half. >> well, thanks everybody for coming. and welcome also to those watching on c-span or online. i'm ben friedman i'm a research fellow at the homeland security studies here in cato. i accept the promotion and assume it comes with a race. we at cato or what i call relative navalist that is that we want to have a smaller u.s. military to have few we are wars but we like for the force to come from the sea and not stick around that long.
please assume that thanks to the strange likeness in name and expertise that the reporter meant to call me. i was planning to tell him that there wasn't enough room for both of us in d.c. but then i noticed that he does good work, great work as a national security investigator at the project on government oversight pogo so i allowed him to stay. he specializes in the department of defense personnel issues, weapons procurement, focusing on the combat ship. he also looks at the impact of lobbying by foreign governments on u.s. foreign policy and has a book coming out i believe soon. soon, right? >> yes. >> prior to joining pogo he got a p.h.d. at texas a&m. then we have eric labs who has
worked since 1995, had the congressional and he specialized in procurement and budgeting and the sizing of the forces to the department of navy. his reports on naval ship building in programses sort of required reading if you want to be up to date on the navy. he got his p.h.d. at m.i.t. where he was part of the world's finest security studies program, right? >> absolutely. >> and then we have robert work who has been undersecretary of the navy since the obama administration. he serves as the deputy and principal assistant and handles the day-to-day management of the department. he served 27 years as an officer of the marines working as an assistant during the
clinton administration. after that he worked at the center for strategic and budget assessments. in these positions he worked on a defense strategy and programs, d.o.d. transformation and produced a lot of writing that ended up in my piles. and he has a master of science and system's budget. a master in science in space system operations from the other degrees from the naval postgraduate school and the johns hopkins school of advanced international studies, which gives him one fewer masters than normal cato speakers. we made an exception. last we have christopher preble, vice president here at cato. he is the author of three books recently. he has another book that he was
lucky enough to co-author with me. before joining cato, chris taught at st. cloud university, where he got his ph.d. in history, and he was a commissioned officer for the navy and served on the u.s.s. ticonderoga. with that, i will turn the microphone over to ben freeman. >> thanks, ben, and thanks to cato for having me, too. i have been investigating the littoral combat ship. it's been asked to represent 1/3 of the surface combatant fleet. so it is a good issue to talk about today. we found some issues with the first mature role combat ship,
the u.s.s. freedom. it was recently learned about equipment failures and design issues. some issues had been previously reported, but many, like a stern door with a large gap underneath, or the ramp with corrosion, threat the interior of this ship. the navy called these class issues. these should have never been issues in the first place. the ship builders told us this is shipbuilding 101. we are confident that the officers will and support this investigation. i hope this will clarify questions i have been asking about the program.
when i first began looking at the ship and working with these whistle-blowers, i learned about so many problems that one of the first questions i asked was, do you think the navy should use this ship? the answer was no. it was an emphatic no! now with the pushback to singapore in 2013, they're not convinced that is a good idea. the ship continues those issues and cracking problems. equipment failures continue to plague the ship, including engine failures. the question that i kept asking was, we know the other version,
the general dynamics. we know that has problems. there are a lot of core issues. which variant is worse? initially the plan was to do it as a down-select plan, have two ships built, pick the best ship. i have not gotten my hands on other whistle-blowers, but based on information, i think the lockheed variant is the weaker of the two. we're not sure dod knows. their office says they have not received foundation reports, formal, from the program testing office. the navy says they are working on the reports.
we know we are buying a lot of these ships without knowing what we are getting. a fellow panelist said we are not sure how it will operate in the fleet. the question i asked him then and one i would like answered is, why do we have to procure well under contract if we do not know that testing results? another question is should we be purchasing two very different variants? it is better for lockheed and general dynamics, but for taxpayers, and the cato crowd, i am not convinced it is a good idea. if you're concerned with readiness, i am not sure it is a good idea.
for the first time we are seeing these two ships side by side. that is pretty cool to see them out there. when you see them side by side, you really see how different these ships are. it is hard to imagine two ships that do the exact same mission looking more different. we have lcs1, and then lcs 2, a very intimidating looking ship. they do exactly the same thing. the differences go far beyond the appearance. they are very costly down the line. the crews of one may not be able to operate the other. your spare parts and other those supply chains will be
different. there may be issues with compatibility of the mission modules. this drives up costs and can decrease readiness. if these ships can do the exact same thing, why should we pay more for two? another question is whether not lcs is a combat ship. even though that is its name, i am not sure. it will only conduct independent operations. why do we need it at all? i would like to believe the navy keeps the seas safe. near the iranian coast, it will not be in a low-threat area and
it may not have a superior strike group there. the lcs is not prepared to fulfill the mission. the development of the module has been slow at best. currently we are looking at a mine hunter that cannot see or stop mines and we're looking at a sub hunter that does not have torpedo detection. i would like the lcs to do a lot of things. with that, i will hand over the rest of my time to the panel for the rest of the surface combat fleet. >> i want to thank ben for inviting me today. at the outset, the views i
expressed here are my own and not those of the cbo or congress. i would like to frame my remarks with these three questions -- is the navy buying the right ships? if there uncertain answers to their questions, are there alternatives? the short answers to the question -- can the navy afford the plans? probably not. can the navy afford its plan? for the last 30 years the navy has spent $16 billion a year on new construction, refueling of submarines, delivery, everything. the navy's 2013 plan proposes to spend on average over the next 30 years $16.8 billion a year for new construction alone. when you add in all the other
things, you're talking about $18.5 billion a year per year over the next 30 years. of that money, a lot of this will be loaded beyond the fit- up. the cost of this is $13.7 billion a year. we do not know how the sequestration is going to play out, but regardless, it seems clear whether we get a change in the budget, that may have a further impact on the amount of funding available. is the navy buying the right ships? makingy's plan has been changes to the service combatant forces. it truncated a program, canceled another, it has
restarted another line, it is proposing to modify a line as the economy exists with an improved radar. it has maintained 55 lcs in that program. a recent report raised questions whether the 51 flight 3 is the right program for that future. it is a long report. some of the bottom-line concerns are that it may cost more than the navy thinks and there are questions about whether it will have a margin of stability and growth and power that a ship of its type is going to need to have.
lcs, that ship has been taking a lot of raps these days. i am not going to talk about the construction species. this is because i do not find them conclusive for the class as a whole. the concept of the lcs is an innovative one, being a mother ship. we did have a long discussion, but that is probably the future of the navy. i would be hesitant to cancel a program that has pursued the first excursion down the path of the mother and remote systems. the navy is going to have to prove this concept at sea in an operational environment. a few observations about the mission.
at the outset, the navy did not justify the ship in waters. the navy did not do an analysis ahead of this program. it performed what my counterpart has called an analytic version birth. it is not clear why it needed to be 40 knots in terms of its speed. it has a limited range at high speeds and has an average range when operated at slow speeds, and it was justified as a critical wartime asset. over the past two years the navy's destination has evolved more to peacetime missions, maritime security, engagement with allies, exercises, sanctions enforcement.
it will free up cruisers that currently do a lot of these missions because it is less intimidating to work with. even the cno said he would be hesitant to send it into a robust environment in wartime, but would be more inclined to keep the lcs because it will help prevent the war because it will be performing in this exercise-type niche, build a robust set of alliances, and reassure allies that -- are there alternatives? one would be that it could be cheaper is that if you think we are right to be buying 24 total, occurring right now, and for we have already appropriated 20 lcs for the navy, which has to come to its next decision point, and if it is like to be
using these exercises, you could get a joint high-speed -- you could put some weapons and combat systems on that. you could come up with a ship suitable for those missions that the lcs is going to be doing for less money. that is one possibility. that is a cheaper option. another would be looking at the coast guard security cutter. in a report, the undersecretary made the argument that he would buy nine frigates for these missions. in that report he wanted to buy that 55 lcs's that were part of the plan, but he found that nine frigates and exercise- building, sanctions enforcement, would be a useful contributor to the fleet.
this is not a cheaper option. the national security cutter is a more expensive ship and the lcs, even before you make changes to the cutter that would make it more suitable. it might be a better fit because it has three times the range and endurance the lcs. in terms of the large surface combatants, if you do not find the 51 flight 3, is that a good story, there are not lot of alternatives. you could use the 1000 hull, which would have everything built into it already. it will be a more expensive ship. where does that leave us?
here is what i call that iron triangle of navy shipbuilding. if you find you do not have enough money, you have three choices. you can spend more money, buy cheaper ships, or buy fewer ships. the spend more money often is not viable. the navy has gone down the path of buying cheaper ships. the contract price for the lcs gets you a $550 million ship. you go back to the question of whether it is the best fit. the result will perhaps be buying fewer ships, and then we need to talk about, how small a fleet is too small?
whenever we discussed today, this should be the question that for the background -- if we are going to a smaller fleet, how small should it be? thank you very much. >> good afternoon, everybody. it is a pleasure to be here to talk about the future of the u.s. navy surface fleet, and the lcs. you have to understand the fleet design. this is a radically different fleet design. i want to take a couple seconds and what you the different generations before i talk about the lcs. there is a myth that today's fleet is nothing more than a smaller version of the cold-war fleet. nothing is further from the truth. from 1945 on, the navy went all into the guided munitions
region, in which most munitions being fired at sea would be guided weapons. as a person said, one of the best technicians the navy has produced, all this is about is about a new weapon, a well-aimed missile to take advantage of our sensing and communication technologies and vice versa. the first generation had a specific operational problem. everything is about going after guided weapons, but each of the generations came a little bit differently. the first generation we had 6500 ships in august, 1945. within five years we were down to 634.
a lot of those ships were decommissioned, but a lot of them went into the reserve fleet. we could take a ship out of the reserves if a korea popped up. what you needed was to keep the soviet bombers away from the group, so you need a whole bunch of radar pickets. we feared the soviets, like us, got copies of the german submarine which was revolutionary, and made obsolete all our destroyer escorts. we had to cope with large numbers of those. the parity was to develop guided weapons and go after a couple things. in this generation, we only built for the new combatants,
and they did not have any guided weapons, with the exception of homing torpedoes. there was a giant depth charge gun and the five-inch 38. we had 67 conversions of world war ii ships. the second-generation was we are now faced with nuclear- powered submarines and anti-ship cruise missiles coming en mass. the focus was to get more aaw capability into the fleet. 121 new constructed ships. and they would have gone in under the high intensity combat? of course not.
you had 16 conversions where we took old cruisers and we put missiles in them. and we took 148 destroyers and we put them through a big thing called the fram and tried to make them capable. third generation now we are focused on war at sea against the soviet union. high intensity warfare. there was going to be a collision of battle networks. we built 106 third generation chips, 55 combatants at the high end, and 51 for protection of shipping combatants.
you never ever buy a ship to go into battle. you cannot afford it. it is not worth it. you do not need it. we did a couple second- generation ships, the new upgrade where we make those ships a lot better. we are going to all digital combat systems. we introduced all sorts of new combat systems. this fleet is all in the guided weapons regime, asw, and aaw warfare. after these three generations, the navy lost interest in small combatants. we had steel old submarine chasers. we had all sorts of gunboats. we were a small combatants may
become a very small percentage of our 6700 ships were large combat. in the first generation, we found that small ships cannot carry the guided weapons you need to fight the bad guy. we had 13 daily escorts. they were failures. in the second generation we tried something smaller. we built 70 of them. their average time of service was only eight years. the work was created because of the cuban missile crisis. they wound up doing other smaller commissions. in the third generations we developed 6 hydrofoils, really cool looking, very highly armed. they had an average year of service of 11.5 years. we come to the fourth
generation, and the u.s. navy has to essentially decide the smallest combatant should be about 4,000 tons. that is the size of a good-sized frigate. the fourth generation, the problem was a planned attack, all about rapidly defeating an enemy's invasion. you wanted to connect to the joint network because of generation 3, we were doing everything independently at sea. we divested all combatants that did not have the aegis combat system on them. we standardized everything. same combat systems throughout the fleet. we improved the battle networking. we were going to get rid of all frigates. we built 13 coastal chips.
we built 13 because operations said they needed them, but it was too big for them. we were going to go to a 14,000-ton destroyer in the smallest fleet -- we were going to 116 combatants -- the smallest ship would have than 9,000 tons. it would have been excellent at stopping an invasion, but as far as engagement -- the fifth generation, here is where we are. the operations, faced with aerial denial networks that have naval components, and you have to fight your way in to do what you need to do. you also want to maintain cost- effective presence throughout the globe. how do you solve those problems? we go to a high-low mix. multi-mission combatants are cruisers and destroyers with big vertical launch missile
cells, focused on the big fight. these all are multi-mission ships, carrying all their capability with them. then you go off with four small ships, but this does act a lot better than a swiss army knife. every ship is self-deployed. you used to have all these different things. every ship is now self- deployable. you need to be able to change combat systems quickly, with the emphasis on second systems. the surface fleet supports our fleet design. each is a total force battle network which is a series of capability containers from small to extra large.
our mission at the high end, an extremely versatile ship. you pour any type of capability into these ships. that is their fleet design. now, i say we have second-stage systems. a lot of people who look at the lcs break down into three general groups. the first groups are the people who did not understand that side. it is different than any the navy has yet. it is totally different. they do not get it. they did not accept what i just told you. we can debate that. the second ones are the ones who focus on the problems of the lcs in the early part of the program.
it was a disaster when we took over. there were all sorts of problems, but we think we are on the way to getting it on track. the third group of people are people who did not like the ship itself, the design flaws in the ship. some of the people in the first group want to see a frigate. the lcs is not a frigate. other people want to see gunboats. this is a second-stage system, with four remote systems on it. you can put anything on this, and the second state system, because everything we are
building is either self- deployable or we are taking it with us. let's talk about the patrol combat ship quickly and we will have some questions. the littoral combat ship represents the return of a small combatant in fleet designed. i have no doubt there are a lot of whistle-blowers. there are some of the people who believe if you are not any frigate that it is it not a warship.
a couple questions. after it is digested,what's left? what is the material that is left? >> we've run into a process and we take all of out of it and that is one of the biggest incomes that's come off technology. did irresponsible counselor we are running around 120, 120 marks and that is a big plus that the dairy industry. a good quality of milk in that figure. the nutrients -- it doesn't
take the nutrients out but it changes the form. it's more available in the first year of the planning so that is a big plus for us as farmers. we double crop a lot so we actually by no commercial fertilizer accept the nitrogen we need so it is a big plus all around. >> i couldn't quite hear you. the nutrient part for the first year, it's more available? >> that's right the form of the nitrogen. that depends on the universities as a study and so they tell me the first year the use of most if you don't get it through the digestion that takes up to three years. that's a big plus for the early digesters and the whole way of some of the watersheds and the nutrients will do all of them are telling conservation that's one of the --
the reasonsone of i've been so excited about this digesting is because it's creating energy sources and it's also has to do with the environment and it uses phosphorus we are putting on the crops in the first year it becomes soluble some medical question. supplies a big part, the second question, there's lots over in europe and we are doing some in my area but there's still only about 200 in the country. what do you see when you talk to big roadblock to put in the digesters? >> that's a good question, too. the number-one thing is for us farmers educating us. thenot doing some of pioneer work going from
different places and educating farmers and as for some of the seminars in pennsylvania just by seeing the efficiency of the digestion germany right now it's like 6800 digesters the have 100 dairies and i disagree with that we could go with the small farms and be very profitable with more digesters. >> aware what ballpark would you think would be the congressional cattle investment of small digester and how many cows would make it feasible? >> that's a good question. if you allow last to go down as low as 200 cows and that is the thing that is making it so profitable we are bringing some of this other food stock like a waste from the other food chains coming on board but i need more digest so we could go to as low as 200 of 300.
>> what would require? >> my digestive costs me 1.1 million. that is how much funding. that's the whole thing. some of the regulation is there with the new voters talking about a billion and a half,-- million and a half. somewhere like that. i've proven it can be done and can sustain a soft but we need more support to keep the farmers encouraged and say look there's money out there available to keep this technology going. but yes, it's good stuff. >>a quick question on the - b cap, what can we do to make it better? >> congressman, i think we -- a strong tendency to try to diversify to take as many projects in as possible and i think even though i can't comment of the people at the usda enough for sorting of the
complexity of the different programs because they are very complex and trying to understand them, but the emphasis needs to be on the programs to maturity, not just shotguns. they need to have more of an emphasis on the whole maturation process so the money doesn't just fall down their rattles. -- fall down ratholes, so to speak. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank the gentleman. another question to ask and extend to whoever on the panel would like to respond. the initial goal of the energy title in the 2008 farm bill was a further development of the voluble ethanol and advanced by yo fuel however i'm not sure -- biofuels. sure that anot single out one of sales have been blended into the fuel supply so it's a two-part question for the panel. what changes need to be
addressed to address that issue and does the current energy title provide the tools to move towards the of fans that -- the advancement of commercially viable cellulosic of ethanol? >> congressman, if you would like to start -- as i mentioned, first of all we have been in patient as well. -- been impatient as well. one of the things that slowed us down was the recent recessions that made it tough but as i mentioned in my original opening testimony, the plant is literally weeks away and the d and ure is complete it an they're going to be producing cellulosic at all literally weeks. so, we have demonstrated the science is there and can build a commercial facility and not being able to demonstrate that we can move the fuel into the fuel streamed for motorized vehicles is the final step to
prove the whole concept. >> congressman? >> if i make one short statement on that it since it has become common knowledge globally that we are actually amassing a significant amount as an example but 6,000 acres even at 12 tons per acre that we produce to produce a million gallons of cellulosic ethanol today we have -- today. we have had, in missouri, as japan comefar as jap to missouri. because of the awareness by all technology owners of the fact
that prison oil is significantly higher so they are more competitive but they are finally figuring out of the chicken and egg problem, which is you can develop all of the technologies that if you don't have a biomass, you have a mismatch and it does take a significant amount and because of the cap and what's happened just in our northern ohio congressman and ourproject area and northern arkansas and in misery we've had -- in missouri, we've had numerous global players come to missouri to investigate. >> estimate you asked about the biofuel and why i can't speak to the cellulosic one as commercially available today, and from our standpoint the bio diesel education program which has an honest account of -- modest amount of funding, we asked that that would continue because it does having the marketplace help and it's very vital to us acceptance of the school and marketplace comes from the advanced standpoint it is here advanced standpoint it is here and is available and is being accepted in the marketplace, we just need to continue that
effort. >> thank you. we recognize the gentleman for colorado for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and the panel for being here first a kind of comment for giving me hope with maneuver in terms of -- manure in terms of becoming a fuel if you need more supply we have horses in a very productive and i would be happy to send out to you. mr. taylor i guess i would like to ask a question because i am intrigued we told a subcommittee hearing in is the small business that i chaired talking about the campus to again test as a very -- campus gigantus as a productive crop to be able to put out, is that applicable for areas like colorado and the desert? >> it is more tolerant. our furthest established it does better but it can survive less water in fact in the 300 acre
propagation field which is northwest wichita kansas received only 7 inches of raynein and is the only thing ae out there and produced half a crop and survived it. so, it does survive and prosper in areas that would be typically east than what you expect. >> you comment in your testimony that you would like to see the existing projects through to maturity. can you define a little bit with maturity is and when you expect to receive that? because part of a ridge of -- part of our job obviously as well as the stories of the taxpayers' dollars we want to be given to see these. it needs to be all of the above and our alternative fuels to be a will to reach the point and affordable without the subsidies and ultimately in the marketplace. can you speak to that for me, please? >> yes, congressman. i spent several days in
washington and the last year since we have applied for the funding last winter i've had almost no conversations about exit strategies, in other words the conversations or about initial funding what you're going to do and what your vision. of the programs themselves don't seem to have an emphasis on okay if we get started what is your exit strategy to get off the public trough to see a return on the investment and we feel we clearly pointed that out we needed a three years because biomass is different than if you are funding a single technology. we are not trying to do that. we were trying to break the chicken and the egg cycle pi. we have to get enough biomass in place to the technologies and bring them even to this country not at a particular
locale . >> do you see the three-year window it will be sustainable on its own and we will be doubled to build those reserves. i believe it is going to be the next we got a lot of reserves in my area on public land did and down the standing timber. the areas we have all over central part of the country set aside which pays farmers not to plant. a lot of that ground we have had several people that have the land that would like to get out of that program and come to this program. it's a perennial even though you have one year of the erosion and it's in place for 1520 years -- 15 to 20 years. from the conservationist and it looks nicely. those pieces need to be put in place. >> one thing i think many of us have a problem with is the continual overreach when it comes to the regulatory process
and in your testimony the current for regulation of will advise the effect of pulling the plug can you tell us how some of incurring retinol or inhibit the -- regulations your are incurring right now inhibit your ability to be able to make the product if product? >> we welcome the environmental assessment process is very worthwhile particularly planted any numbers in this country. the regulations, i'm not sure in that statement if i understand looking at the regulations as it to this crop -- i have a >> i have a question on your statement where you've noted
some regulatory and additions in terms of being able to move forward. >> i think i am referring to how the regulation is written. we have one year worth of funding, we have a application this year. we may not receive anything which seems preposterous to us when we are actually a successful production because the emphasis is on starting in june of many new project so they can get going rather than seeing through to fruition in biomass because it's not a one-year event. it takes a long time. >> i come from a part of
wisconsin that is the second- largest dairy producing in the united states. digester technology is popular. would you share with the panel what type of capital expense you had to invest to put the digester technology on the farm? >> 1.1 million. >> how much that was subsidized through the program? a loan but the pure subsidy grants? >> right now it is low-interest money. >> sell $550,000. how long will it take to pay it back? >> two years.
>> in my safe to say without the subsidy, it would have taken four years? >> this past year we had a good year because we are bringing waste and from other sources. that gives us about a third of a percent from tipping fees. and for the former is that do not have access, you are going to be looking at five, six, seven years. right now there is a farm down the road that is replacing. he is putting in an digester with the new regulations. he is that a million. six. the cost is going to be -- he is at 1.6 million. the cost is going to be higher. >> are other forms of the minotaur and just as effective? -- manure just as effective?
>> no. we have pig manure that is okay. chick manure, a task to be liquid. i know all about wisconsin digesters. a good place. >> i appreciate your comments on exit strategy. the closest thing to eternal life is this kind of a program. if you could respond, it seems to me, and i am a former business owner, that business owners have a tendency to build pricing based on whatever the subsidy is. based on of the subsidy is and without the exit strategy the you're always back here wanting the program to continue because now they've established a marketplace based on a false market promise be low-priced
product how do we know we are not just falling into the same trap here with you all? >> i can only speak to the biomass portion of that but i think that the rule as written absolutely the sinking was so dead on the top of the chicken and egg problem that came as we have received in the biomass didn't go to the mass came to the farmers they get them to commit acres into the program. and knowing they are in the program that we went ahead and invested the money on the environmental assessments which are hundreds of thousands of dollars in designing a plan with an english company actually that we are now producing in the center of kansas to plant this. it was planted by hand two years ago. the biomass is making all of those investments and what's
happening the role they play is the integrator is a very complex problem to solve because nobody knew where to start. it's not only in on existing crop for the most part in this country it's a non-existing industry so registered as a huge -- so where to start was a huge problem some of the fits and starts in the industry originally isn't what it was intended to do. it was intended to break the chicken and egg problem. the crop now is being planted the need to plant enough of it so we need a critical mass to support the processing facilities to attract a 25 or 50 million gallon cellulosic ethanol plant which we know that is advancing and takes 25 to 50,000 acres in this campus and the one project in central missouri we have to demonstrate that our three times rest that amount of available -- this is
land that doesn't compete in the food versus fuel debate this is land for the most part that is nonproductive . i think was very effective many spent get it did exactly what it was supposed to do but it can't be done in one year. it takes one, two or three years and we didn't have a planter when we started. we were planting 5410 acres a -- 5, 10 acres a day. >> is it possible that we are going to be here five years from now and another three years? >> in the technologies i couldn't answer that. >> the concern is, mr. chairman, cannot yield two more minutes? obviously is as technology advances there's always going to be the need to fund more technology and at some point the industry has to fund its own technology, so i appreciate your feedback and i mr. greenwood. -- i would like to go to mr.
greenwood. >> what we have done to bridge the gap is we have the three projects underway one as the traditional for us operation which we've developed to be all to supply agricultural meaning. that simply was 100 furnaces in play. the second one is the plant is rather remarkable and how it changes the structure down four and 5 feet and misery is made up the foot of somewhat topsoil and it's very drought resistant because the water doesn't go in and in northern arkansas the reason we are in arkansas is a state wanting us there because the kids a lot of the soil that's been abused we have had it and please is. -- places. there's a similar amount of organic matter in the soil and we are changing the complexion that we are processing now signed the contracts on the first installments of sewer
waste water, the epa and waste water projects that were paralyzed and cities in the midwest right now. you're actually planting this as we change the complexion with the forced below ground irrigation and contracting to take that. we are finding several industries to bridge the gap, to get off the public trough. we know when that happens we have a solid plan for three years. >> you have a unique perspective on this. you have seen both sides. what's your take? >> you're why is to express that -- wise to express that. the energy spectrum.
there are sources of energy whether it is nuclear power or oil and gas subsidized for very long time coming and particularly if the price build some of subsidy it can't compete close. without it and then you have that's not our vision. our vision is we will in a relatively short period of time, because of the assistance of the loan guarantees, which have provided the private sector with some sense of confidence they can invest in the $140 million private dollars and in a plant that is now ready to produce cellulosic ethanol and our scientists believe that this product once we go through this scale of the pilot planned full-scale commercialization phase will be able to compete head-to-head with gasoline particularly as we know if the price of oil not headed down, so we think it will be competitive and we don't think we have to be after yearyear wtiith the same
story. >> thank you for bringing your experience and testimony. i would ask if any of the members have further questions, and we for them in your direction, we would respect a response back. we appreciated. i would like to call forward the witnesses for the second panel. we will have mr. john burke the third, the chairman of the board of trustees, from woodforde, virginia, he is president of the national association of state foresters. charleston, west germany -- west virginia. the national association of
districts. mr. richard procurement manager on behalf of the american loggers counselings off the eastern from florida, and mr. michael jordan and executive vice president of the society of american foresters in bethesda . and looks like our second panel is seated, so why now recognize mr. burke if he would begin with your five minutes of testimony. >> [no aduudio] sorry. thanks for allowing me to appear before you this afternoon i extend that to train thompson and ranking member of holden as wella s the other members of the subcommittee.
as a way of a bit of an introduction, we manage a family forest in central virginia. i also have the privilege of working with the american forest foundation, a nonprofit organization whose mission among forests. others is to encourage healthy we speak for 10 million landowners, those are family forests and private land owners. allow me to set the stage for my testimony. the property and manage for our family has been in the family for six generations we grow both plaine and hardwood from those trees we produce paper products or are paper products all produce profits hard wood lumber dimensional lumber cabinets florent fuel wood and other uses. in addition to these very important products which are to the economy of our state and produce jobs we also pride ourselves on the water quality we also pride ourselves
.n the wild life the forests are nothing more than half the tab for the species that we cherish today i would try to truncate my oral testimony so that we end on time. comments to focus my on the two particular areas to thank and encourage this committee and to recognize the importance of the farm bill in strengthening conservation programs the second area of testimony is to speak about -- the need to focus the program to better recognize certain products that are not properly recognized now. there are a number of stories in my written testimony about landowners who work hard and to
benefit from the forest conservation programs. since i am before you today, i will share with you some of the things we have done like programs such as -- to eclipse the csb and we have been able to do things which would not on the financially viable without the assistance of these programs we improve the wildlife habitat and water quality and reduce the risk of fire through certain techniques. we've created jobs for the local holders and have improved the health of the forest. we have realized that this committee in congress as a whole faces a significant budget issue, and my request to you would be with that recognition of cutting has to occur forestry and conservation programs will not be cut disproportionately. my second area of focus in my oral testimony, and by the way i refer you to the testimony for additional details on the
first point as well as the second point is that the usda markets program is miss focus or an -- misfocused or an interpretation it does not fully support product set come from forestry materials. we are pleased that german thompson and -- chairman thompson and the congressmen are considering this is an equity and considering a bill which will be entitled to the forest product fairness act to better square what is going on with what should be going on and in particular this is a program that could be changed without incurring any additional cost it would stimulate and opened
and level the market for the product particularly with respect to the traditional forest products and could be of little or no cost around. seems like a win-win all around. we hope you will continue these forest conservation programs to landownersver's -- to be good stewards of our land. thank you. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, mr. burke. please, go ahead and proceed when you are ready. >> chairman thompson, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear today on behalf of the national state foresters and two-thirds of america's forest in the state and private ownership, state foresters deliver outreach, technical and financial assistance as well as fire protection and partnership as well as the forest service and
.ther u.s. agencies othe my recommendations for the 2012 farm bill endorsed by the state foresters that support the conservation and management of the nation's force. -- forest. my written statement includes a complete set of traer eddy the -- priority commissions from the ansf. these action plans provided analysis of conditions in each state and delineate a role. common among the threads, passed, and invasive species, wildfire, loss of forest to
development, threats to community forest, they also provide long-term strategies for applying state, federal, and other resources to where they can most effectively stimulate and leverage action and engage multiple partners. we recommend that the 2012 farm bill provide the necessary financial and analytical support to implement an update to the forest action plan. nasf joins the coalition in supporting recommendations that implement the action plan. the coalition recommends, including the provisions strengthening our trees, and inventory programs, adding in the asian species -- competing
invasive species. naff supports potential consolidation of conservation programs providing that forest isdowners' eligibility maintained in a streamlined program. we recommend the 10% cap and rolled be removed to allow landowners the same access to the program enjoyed by farmers and ranchers. strengthening outreach education resources and inventory programs, the forest inventory program managed by the usda forest service is the nation's only comprehensive forest inventory system for accessing the help and sustainability. fia provides data-related to
forest species composition, growth rate, and delivers a baseline inventory estimates used in the state forest action plans. we provide strategic direction for implementation including completing transitions to a fully implemented program in all states, in gauging state foresters and other users of fia data to foster greater cooperation between state foresters and research and leaders. combating invasive species. the early detection improvement program of the u.s. dea animal and plant service is vital to
rapid response to destructive invasive species. we support continued authorization and funding. improving forest market opportunities, reauthorization of stewardship contracting authorities, is essential to helping the forest service restored healthy ecosystems and provide sustainability and employment opportunitiesna. sf supports the reauthorization of contracting authorities which is currently set to expire in 2013. these recommendations represent conclusions and consensus view. striven by forest action plans authorized in part by the last farm bill. thank you for this opportunity and i am ready to answer any questions you may have. >> you are recognized for five
minutes. >> thank you, chairman thompson. on behalf of the national association of conservation districts, are 3000 member districts and 17,000 supervisors, thank you for this opportunity to be here today. i serve as a board member from the state of alabama. as well as chairman of the resource policy group. my wife and i own a proprietorship in alabama where we are in operation. my family has used a variety of practices over nearly 200 years. these include rotational -- we received our first farm plan in 1939 and we have been certified since 1941.
we have a mix of pine and hardwood on our property and in 1999 we introduced longley to our property. we currently have a forest management plan to assist us with our management. the importance of conservation cannot be stated enough. that is why we support the passage of the 2012 farm bill. districts throughout the country have been participants in supporting the programs which provides technical assistance to non investor in all corners. since the program's creation, it has produced 270,000 resource management plans for more than 31 million acres of private forest land developing a sound resource is the principal tenant. partners of the four
of the joint forestry team, including the forest service and my fellow panelists. the forest management plan template has -- serves as a primary guidance. our service -- i served as chairman in 2010 and saw the value provided to not just to the stewardship program but to the industry as a whole. on my own the land in the southeastern united states, i have seen the benefit of the program. my work with andy restoration has been a product of the storage chip program. today i have restored more than 700 acres in an effort to restore this native retreat to
our forest. the forest legacy program has done an important part by allowing landowners to protect environmentally important forest areas from expansion and by engaging with the process to develop conservation plans. while the senate from american now includes a program cap of $200 million, i do not believe it will be a negative impact on being able to carry out responsible conservation. insects continue to wreak havoc on our forests. it has been a particularly devastating in the western united states. it has an impact on our members and put their livelihood in danger due to the loss of timber and the increased risk of
wildfire. conservation districts feel that more needs to be done to address this mounting problem and the farm bill framework is a step in the right direction. in conclusion, these programs -- every dollar spent has seen a return. it is critical to ensure the health and sustainability of our forest for generations to come. i am happy to answer any questions you may have. >> now i yield to the gentleman from florida for the purpose of an introduction. >> i would like to thank you for the opportunity to review forestry and the energy programs. as many people may not be aware, florida's highest
agriculture product is trees. over $16 billion is infused into the economy from the manufacturing and distribution of a forest products each year. it contributes and supports many communities in our districts with 133,000 employees and provides an enormous economic bedrock to our community. it is the largest u.s. national forest in the state of florida and resides in my congressional district. i am proud to welcome a witness from our districts, it is an honored to welcome richard swab, with over 22 years of experience. he is representing southeastern what producers including 500 businesses in florida and south georgia.
i commend him for his commitment to strengthening the future of forestry for his family in our community. i yield back. >> co ahead with your five minutes. >> thank you for your introduction and i appreciate the opportunity to be here. >> give me a second. i apologize. i introduced to him for the purpose of consent request. >> thank you for your courtesy in think the witnesses 40 -- and thanked the witnesses for your testimony. i would like to have the consent to cement a statement of land trust alliance from the natural heritage foundation, the society for the protection of new hampshire before the house subcommittee on giving states
more options for implementing the usda forest legacy program. and i have some questions i want to submit for the record. thank you to my colleagues for the courtesy and would like to submit that for the record. >> without objection. >> thank you very much. we need to work together for the right reasons. >> i apologize. co-head and start over with your five minutes of testimony. >> i appreciate that. i am a third generation to clobber -- logger. i am here today representing my family's small business. we are in perry, florida and we have been practicing for 52 years. i am also representing, the web
producer's association which represents 500 businesses as well as the american loggers. our first concern is directed toward the inventory analysis program. it is the best resource we have available to measure outcomes. the data is also used to create jobs. i work with other companies to develop their markets in our region. there established in part based on the available data. we would ask you to reaffirm the analysis program to enhance its efficiency and effectiveness. we would like to talk about the contract in program which offers a forest managers to use of land. contracts are used for treatment to promote healthy forests while
expanding job opportunities. my family's small business has worked on them since they were first authorized. it was great to see revenue at the same time. wildlife habitats were improved created. we urge congress to reauthorize the contract in 2012. we would ask you to reauthorize the food and agriculture extension act. maintain the current funding levels. my company has worked with the university of florida by harvesting new types of biomass on their project. i have seen these crops and in excited about the future. without the extension, i do not know this research would happen today. other items found in section 84 a one is a provision for qualifying contract options.
our sector of the economy is in a state of economic depression. purchases for sales during this time are left holding contracts better now priced to hire for them to be able to harvest without incurring financial losses. i know many of these businesses and know they contribute to the communities where unemployment rates are between 15% and 20%. these businesses need time may, as we continue to wait for our markets to recover. please extend timber sales awarded beginning january 1, 2008 and ending on december 31, 2010. there are also some areas and that we -- the first is the definition of renewable biomass. we would like to see the
current definition maintained in the torrent of a farm bill. we need as broad a definition in energy policy. this is important to my business because two-thirds of my production is based on renewable energy production. we also do not favor any program that would allow for the artificial manipulation of the existing market. the program is an example, a well intended program gone awry. our company took part in the program and experienced nothing but market disruptions an extra paperwork. there was no new facility in our area of operation as a result of the program. it might have worked well but it was a disaster for our business
and others in the community. the last program our like to address this is the market program. under the current law, they have received an unfavorable position. we would like to see the language to create parity between the project's by focusing on those that apply an innovative approach regardless of the date of entry into the marketplace. i am working with the company that has completed construction on a wood ethanol plant in michigan. they will take wastewater and using it to produce ethanol. the company saw a need and realized what it took to saba and made the investment. thank you for allowing me to testify. i would be happy to try to answer any questions you might
have. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i am the chief executive officer and i appreciate the opportunity to be here today to talk about some very important programs and an important part of the economic picture. i am pleased with this panel, much of what i would like to tell you this morning has been said by my colleagues today. i will try to save as much time as i can. i do want to. at that we represent more than 12,000 people across the country -- i want to point out that we represent more than 12,000 people across the country. these folks have committed themselves to ensure that the forests of the united states are taking care of and managed in the best possible way. some of the programs within the
bill are important to their ability to do their jobs. we heard about some of the today and i will touch on them as well. there are other items i would like to discuss including authority, and also the damaging issue we have in the united states. when i think about the stewardship contracting, a really want to talk about the success of a program that really started off as a pilot project to see how things worked. we would make sure the tool is something that can be used on the ground in the forest service and they can benefit from an immediate benefit for the taxpayer as well. it has been very successful for both of these agencies. we would also like to advocate for permanent reauthorization of storage of contracting -- stewardship contracting. it is a success.
we have awarded somewhere over 900 contracts just the last five years. we're continuing to increase those contracts, as many as 200 last year in 2011. with the authority expiring in 2013, we are concerned that it's not reauthorize, a lot of the momentum that the contracting may scale back or not be invested in the way we think it should be. this is important because it allows these agencies to act like a business. many of you own land and understand what happens when you have a project being done on your land. someone comes in to do some management to reduce some risk on your property. maybe there was something that needed to be replaced. this is something that can be done through storage chip contract and that was not allowed for the -- from the federal agencies before.
this allows them to put it altogether, select good contractors, and get the work done. when i think about the mountain pine beetle, it is a sad story. since 1997, the mortality has devastated millions of acres in the u.s. the forest service estimates that up to 100,000 dead trees are killed by deals along -- beetles alone every day. 100,000 trees falling every day that have been damaged. we have got to do something. much of the forest in the west has created a perfect storm for problems. we have had a warm winters not killing them off. we have had poor management and we need to do something about this in a critical and rapid fashion. we are encouraged by many in
congress who are calling for increased actions in these areas. we are trying to do something about it to expedite the forest service's treatment. how would also like to touch on recommendations for the 2012 farm bill. it included several improvements by supporting conservation throughout the country. the 2012 bill, we are really hoping the committee will pay attention to the recommendations which we very much support. we understand the budget pressure you are under. this is a difficult time to be thinking about spending money. some of these programs are critical so we would ask you to think about programs that improve programs, strengths and outreach, education, research,
it is one of the most fundamental building blocks. doing what we can to improve market opportunities and focus on this fantastic green building material we have in the united states. thank you for your time. i look forward to your questions. >> we will proceed with her questioning. i will take the first five minutes. my first question is for you, i appreciate your exhortations. we have given court challenges. one of the unique opportunities we have in our subcommittee is the forest can be a great source of revenue given all of the public client -- public lands that have been secured. they have tremendous resources for this country to be a great return on investment if we are promoting the proper management, which includes harvesting.
you talked about the stewardship authority, what makes it unique and or different from other contracts? >> it is interesting you talk about the forest service and the asset they have because it really is an asset. if you go back and read a book from the 1950's called a forest ranger, he talks about it being one of the best agencies in the federal government. not only in terms of the way they said were structured and to management but also the fact they returned money to the treasury every year. you are exactly right. if this is a tremendous asset we have. it is different for the forest service because they are able to address multiple needs under 1 contract. they are able to keep money locally to get the work done. they are able to actually use the sale of forest projects from one part of a project and use
some of the money to improve something somewhere else. if they want to build a campground because there is a demand, they can sell a little bit of timber over here and build a facility over here. if there is a water issue, they can use some of the assets they have right there on the ground. they could improve that work somewhere else in their forest. the fact of the matter is, this authority can help the agency and congress in terms of trying to ensure the assets we have are used in the best possible way. i am encouraged -- i really encourage reauthorization. >> you mentioned that the bio- based market does not recognize your products. why is this the case? >> the way the legislation has
been incorporated, there is language that requires that it be a new product with a certain date. if you look at products, for example, that come off of my farm, hardwood made into a palace. there are pallets that are from overseas made of hemp that competes ahead and get the labeling and also would be what a federal agency would have to procure instead of the product that is made locally on my farm. that is an unintended consequence of the legislation and our recommendation is that the playing field leveled so that all bio based products, whether traditional or knew, would be recognized to create more jobs and stimulate economy. that is important in the forest industry at this time because the forest industry is still struggling with one of the worst downturn since the depression.
>> i have concerns that the current ratings system utilized by the leadership also disadvantages forest products. do you agree with this? is that your observation? >> what we would like to see is to have a level playing field so that procurement can be comparable or otherwise recognized. we would like to see a level playing field with respect to procurement across all of those categories. >> i have seen data suggesting that in pennsylvania, we have lost 13,500 jobs. i appreciate your mentioning, i will be introducing legislation to fix the bio based markets program to better recognize forest products.
i am obviously with the goal that this will help bring back or at least stabilize a job losses not just in the state of pennsylvania but throughout the country. i appreciate your remarks. i am checking to see if you would agree that that is a step in the right direction. >> i will be blunt. we think it is a brilliant solution. it is cost neutral. it will stimulate markets and create jobs. i think it is a very wise and sound decision. >> i appreciate that. i have been called a lot of things. this may be the first time my name and brilliance have been associated in the same statement. i recognize mr. gibbs from ohio. >> thank you for the offer to come in today. in your testimony you talk about 872, a bill i sponsored out of the house of representatives in march a year ago.