the senate commerce subcommittee on transportation and safety yesterday held a hearing on trucking regulations and safety issues. we'll hear from representatives from the trucking industry and road safety advocates. >> the hearing will come to order. good morning. welcome to today's hearing of the senate subcommittee on transportation and safety. both by weight and by volume, trucks move more than any other form of transportation. this includes first and last mile connections, laung haul transportation, and everything in between. it's also a major source of employment across our country. the trucking industry is a key component of our transportation network and transportation network and it is vital to our economy. today we're going to hear from stakeholders about the current state of trucking and how federal policy could aid in its safety, efficiency, and productivity, particularly as congress considers a surface transportation reauthorization. federal trucking policy has gone through many changes in the past decade, including changes in both the industry and regulatory changes at the federal motor carriers safety administration. the many trucking issues i hear about from nebraskans, hours of service is at the top of the list. the concerns i hear from truckers are consistent. these regulations are inflexible and do not reflect real world situations. further, because the trucking industry is so, a one-size-fits-all approach fails to satisfy all the different situations. we want to avoid drivers being fatigued. most recently, fmcsa issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to update the hours of service requirements. i'm encouraged that the agency is taking steps to update its regulations and that interested stakeholders have made their comments known to the agency. one group in particular that has faced challenges with the hours of service regulations is our livestock haulers. they have the critical responsibility of moving live perishable products. for that reason, livestock haulers can easily find themselves in a regulatory bind between the hours of service requirement and animal welfare laws. while the hours of service regulations have received significant attention, several other regulatory changes are worth discussing today. recent regulations set to go into effect include the entry level driver training rule and the drug and alcohol clearinghouse, both of which will improve safety. however, in both cases, fmcsa has had to delay parts of these rules. i look forward to hearing from the witnesses more about the intended impact of these rules on safety. additionally, the fast act required fmcsa to take down those scores from public view. after a study by the national academy of sciences, fmcsa is now considering how to move forward with this program. i expect to hear from the witnesses about the impact sms and the broader compliance safety accountability program has on trucking. other areas impacting truckers and the trucking industry include the availability of safe truck parking, advances in vehicle and load matching technology, freight availability, and the amount of time that truckers spend detained while they are waiting for loads. here to provide input on the state of trucking and feedback on trucking regulations are chris spear from the american trucking association, jake parnell representing the livestock marketing association, lewie pugh from the owner/operator independent drivers association, dawn king from the truck safety coalition, and sergeant john samis from the commercial vehicle safety association. i want to thank the witnesses for traveling today to participate in this hearing. i know all of you are widely respected within your organizations, and you have unique experiences and perspectives that are valuable to us as we continue our work to improve the safety and efficiency of america's trucking industry. i look forward to your testimony. and now i would like to invite my colleague, ranking member duckworth, to offer her opening remarks. >> thank you, chairman fischer. and i want to apologize to everyone for being late this morning. for a former soldier, missing your sp time is really an embarrassing thing. thank you for your patience. and thank you to the chairman for holding today's hearing. i also want to thank all of our witnesses for joining us today to discuss the challenges and opportunities facing u.s. commercial trucking industry. as i said during last week's hearing, our global competitiveness is closely tied to a safe, reliable, and efficient transportation network. the nexus between interstate commerce and commercial trucking clearly demonstrates the close relationship between federal infrastructure investments and our nation's economic prosperity. the 18.6 billion tons of freight goods that are moved across the united states in 2018, 12 billion tons valued at more than $12 trillion were moved by truck. illinois is at the epicenter of our nation's great transportation network, offering unparalleled access to global markets. over 1.2 billion tons of freight valued at nearly $3 trillion moved through illinois each year and trucks carry over half that tonnage, about 664 million tons valued at more than $1 trillion. investing in my state's freight infrastructure keeps goods flowing through the entire system and tlifdelivers a tremes return on investment for industries and customers in all 50 states. yet the most important aspect is safety. unfortunately safety remains a work in progress and we have a long way to go. bottom line, we can and we must do better. our nation endured 36,560 roadway fatalities in 2018, including 4,951 fatalities involving large trucks. while it is technically accurate that large truck fatalities declined 69% from 1980 to 2017, it is important to recognize that over the last decade for which we have data, from 2009 to 2018, large truck fatalities have actually increased by 47%. we need to keep a close eye on evolving trends and their impacts on roadway users. right now safety trends is a reason for concern. meanwhile, federal agencies like fmcsa, nhtsa and gao are pursuing a number of data collection efforts including pilot programs and investigations to analyze the impacts of safety-related trucking initiatives. these agencies and others like them should have the opportunity to provide congress with the technical analysis and stakeholder feedback needed to minimize uncertainty associated with untested initiatives. as we move towards fast act authorization, congress should promote the use of new safety technologies and enhance supply chain efficiencies. we should consider and reinforce the important role that states play in commercial trucking and provide the necessary space for critical collaborations and partnerships to develop for the benefit of improved safety outcomes, finally, congress should continue to promote meaningful benchmarks and metrics designed to enhance safety and performance while informing future policy discussions. i look forward to debating these and other important topics with an eye toward safety as this committee works bipartisanly to establish surface transportation policies. i want to thank today's witnesses and our chairman and i look forward to your testimony. >> thank you, senator duckworth. at this time we will recognize witnesses for their opening testimony. and i would like to recognize senator peters who has the really pleasure and honor to introduce our witness from michigan today. >> thank you, madam chair, thank you for the opportunity. i would like to extend a very warm welcome to our witness, a native michiganger, dawn king. nearly 15 years after suffering from a terrible tragedy that took the life of her father, ms. king has made it her life's work to advocate for measures to improve safety on our roadways. ms. king currently serves as the president of the truck safety coalition. in this role, ms. king is passionate and a tireless advocate for safety legislation and an invaluable voice for victims, both the state as well as the federal level. ms. king hails from davisberg, michigan, just northwest of detroit and is here with her husband bruce who also advocates on truck safety issues. thank you, dawn, for your testimony today, and thank you, bruce, for taking time to meet with me earlier this morning and for your work on these very important issues. i look forward to your testimony as well as the testimony of all the member of this very distinguished panel. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you, senator peters. ms. king, you are recognized. >> good morning, chairman fischer, ranking member duck worth, and other members of the subcommittee. my name is dawn king, and i am president of the truck safety coalition, and i'm also a board member of c.r.a.s.h. which along with parents against tired truckers forms tsc. thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. i'm here today to give a voice to thousands of survivors, victims, and families like mine who have had a loved one killed or seriously injured in a tragic but preventible truck crash. here in the hearing room we have another victims family member, whose daughter and unborn granddaughter were killed on the beltway in d.c. several years ago, and she's here to provide support as well. i'm here because my father, bill badger, was killed two days before christmas in 2004 by a tired trucker who fell asleep at the wheel. every year, thousands of people are dying needlessly in truck crashes. the national highway traffic safety administration's most recent data shows that 4,951 people were killed in 2018. that's nearly a 50% increase from 2009. additionally, 151,000 people were injured. and 885 truck occupants were killed, the highest since 1989. yet even with this horrendous rise in truck crash fatalities, important and lifesaving truck safety laws and regulations are under relentless and repeated attacks in congress and in the administration. i assure you, these safety rollbacks and repeals would never be tolerated in any other mode of transportation, especially one with such an unacceptable death and injury toll. for example, fmcsa is proposing unsafe changes to the hours of service regulations. furthermore, in every session of congress there are attempts to exempt special interests from the hours of service rules. my written statement goes into detail about how harmful these proposals will be to safety and we urge you to oppose each of these attacks. even more difficult to understand is they introduced legislation, the so-called drive safe act which lowers the minimum age from 21 to 18 to allow teens to drive in interstate commerce. there is ample research showing that teen drivers have significantly higher crash rates and are much less safe than older drivers. there is absolutely no evidence that introducing teen drivers will in any way improve safety. tsc strongly opposes this change and so does the american public. today, advocates for highway and auto safety released an opinion poll that shows that 62% of the public opposes this change. what we should be doing is focusing on what can be done to promote truck safety. crash avoidance technologies like automatic emergency breaking have been proven through years of use by leading truck companies to reduce the numbers of crashes and to mitigate the severity. several bills including s-2700, the protecting roadside first responders act, have been introduced to require the installations of this lifesaving technology. we commend senator duckworth for her leadership in this, in co-sponsoring that legislation with senator durbin. additionally, there is clear and convincing evidence that speed limiters make trucking safer. this lifesaving technology is not new and has been used in other countries for years. in the u.s., it's been a standard component on most trucks since the late 1990s. many truck companies voluntarily set their trucks to a safe speed but all trucks should be using speed limiters. truck underride crashes, particularly when violent intrusion occurs into the passenger compartment. bipartisan legislation, s-665, would strengthen rear guards where also improve underride protection on all sides of a tractor trailer. this is co-sponsored by many member of this committee including senators duckworth, markey, udall, blumenthal, and peters. all of these technologies can prevent serious and deadly crashes. however, when a crash involves a truck company that is underinsured, the results can be devastating. today the minimum amount of insurance required per truck, per crash, no matter how many victims, is only $750,000. that was set 40 years ago and it's never been increased. many victims of truck crashes struggle to pay for lifelong medical and rehab expenses. we urge senate introduction and support for hr 3681, the insurance act. this bill will increase the minimum insurance required and account for medical cost inflation, and that would be indexed every five years. in conclusion, the families of victims and the survivors of large truck crashes remain hopeful that members of this committee will make sure that safety never takes a back seat to industry profits or political pressure. and i would like to take a moment right now to wish my dad a happy birthday. had he not been killed 15 years ago by a tired trucker in a completely preventible crash, he would be turning 91 today. i can't call him. i can't talk to him tonight like i would have, can't send him a card. but i can offer this testimony. thank you for the opportunity to testify. and i'm pleased to answer your questions. >> thank you, ms. king. next, i would like to introduce chris spear, the president and ceo of the american trucking associations, which represents the 50-state trucking associations and other trucking industry stakeholders. welcome, mr. spear. >> thank you, chairman fischer, ranging member duckworth, and subcommittee members. for 47 years ata remains the largest association representing the trucking industry, encompassing 34,000 suppliers, every sector of the industry, and 80% of ata membership is comprised of small carriers. trucking moves tonnage worth over $10 trillion. more than 80% of u.s. communities rely exclusively on trucks for their freight needs. the trucking industry is 7.7 million people strong, counting for one in every 18 jobs in the u.s. where a truck driver is the top job in 29 states. my written testimony focuses on safety and technology, workforce development, and infrastructure, and it's grounded in data. from 1980 to 2017, america witnessed a 71% drop in combination truck-involved fatal crashes. yet fatalities on our nation's highways climbed in recent years. we can and we must do better. the cause is clear: distracted driving. 72% of large truck crashes had no factors recorded, fueled largely by the growing addiction to speeding and texting. technology is key, including cameras, automated emergency braking and adaptive creuise control. the future will be based on driver assist solutions. we applaud the secretary of transportation for her leadership on technology, including preserving the seven bands of 5.9 gigahertz spectrum for safety, connecting cars and trucks for infrastructure, and using aeb to save lives. the sec wants to hand that spectrum to a shameless assault on public safety. technology that detects marijuana impairment. employers must be allowed to use hair testing as the sole screening method. it's been three years since this committee instructed hhs to issue such rules. sounds to me like a few cubicle dwelling bureaucrats are thumbing their noses at you and public safety by keeping this scientifically proven method from enforcing the law that you passed. they need to be held accountable. trucking is now short 60,800 drivers and must hire 1.1 million new drivers over the next decade, made harder by a 50-year low unemployment. we need more women, minorities, veterans, exiting servicemen and women, and a focus on improving the safety and health and wellness of our current workforce. we need access to the next generation of drivers. 49 states currently allow an 18-year-old to drive a class a commercial vehicle. making it legal to drive an 850-mile stretch of california. yet it's federally illegal to drive from providence, rhode island to re hob october, massachusetts, a mere ten miles. the heavily by partisan drive safe act would require 400 hours of apprenticeship training and safety technology. 49 states require none of this, making the drive safe drive safp toward safety and recommended immediate passage. and lastly, america cannot lead with third world infrastructure. trucking is 4% of the vehicles on our roads. we pay half the tab of the highway trust fund, and we're willing to pay more. here's why. trucking now loses $70 billion each year sitting in congestion. that's 425,000 drivers sitting idle for an entire year. 67 million tons of co2 being emitted. passenger vehicle drivers now lose $1600 a year due to traffic and repairs. these are the costs of doing nothing. under ata's build america fund, one nickel, one nickel a year, for four years, would generate $340 billion in new revenue. shoring up the soon to be go broke highway trust fund without adding a dime to the deficit. it's immediate. it's conservative. less than one cent on the dollar to administer it. versus 35 cents on the dollar for tolls. business and labor are 100% behind the build america fund. and your passing it would be a major victory for america's roads and the millions of voters that use them each day. thank you. >> thank you, mr. spear. next, i'd like to welcome mr. lewie pugh, the executive vice president of the owner-operator independent drivers association, a role he was elected to in 2018. he began his career in trucking in 1992, as a motor transport operator, in the united states army reserve. welcome, sir. >> thank you. good morning, i'm lewie pugh, the executive vice president of the owner-operator independent drivers association. prior to working at ooida, i was a small business operator and trucker for nearly 23 years, with roughly two and a half million safe miles of driving. prior to that, i was a truck driver in the united states army. i still proudly hold my cdl. in short, my entire career has been in trucking. from the perspective of small business motor carriers and professional drivers, the state of the trucking industry is dysfunctional. this is because too many people who know virtually nothing about trucking have an oversized role in shaping trucking policies. drivers feel the negative effects of this firsthand. myself included. the hours of service rules are broken. there's hundreds of regulations that have nothing to do with highway safety. the lack of available truck parking is a national crisis. enforcement is often motivated by profit. and drivers work extremely long hours for notoriously low pay. if you ask most drivers what congress has done recently, to help their profession, the answer would be simple, nothing. in fact, most of our members will tell you, that congress enacts laws that drive truckers away from the industry, and decreases highway safety. this isn't a partisan attack against republicans or democrats, but yet, an honest reflection on how truckers view congress. don't get me wrong, while washington has contributed its fair share of the dysfunction in trucking, there's plenty to go around. plenty of blame. too many drivers are forced to haul cheap freight. too many motor carriers mistreat drivers and underpay them. too many shippers and receivers detain drivers for extended periods of time. too many enforcement agencies prioritize profits over safety. too many safety advocates seek mandates that do not work. and too many motorists don't even attempt to operate safely around big trucks. i make these claims from firsthand experience. i've seen it. and i've lived it. we're all responsible for creating this mess. so we're all responsible for fixing it as well. as congress considers the next highway bill, there are several ways you can make a positive difference. repair the fairdy mandate, repair the overtime exemption for drivers in the fair labor standards act. provide dedicated funding for new truck parking capacity. create a fair process for drivers to appeal inspections written in error and fix the nation's crumbling infrastructure in an equitable way. you should abandon meaningless, unproven, unsafe policies. do not mandate speed limiters. do not mandate front and side underguards. do not mandate higher insurance minimums do. not enact dmts for trucks only. and do not expand tolling authority. and do not pass the drive safe act. i want to take a moment to focus on the drive safe act. considering what other associations would be constantly, there is no driver shortage. the notion of a driver shortage isn't supported by facts or data or reputable research. in other words, it's a myth. we oppose this bill because it's a solution in search of a problem, and we urge congress to reject it. washington has allowed truck policy to be overly influenced by executives looking to maximize profits. activists who would like to regulate truckers into oblivion. state and local governments who view truckers as rolling piggy banks, and self-proclaimed experts who don't even know what the in side of the cab of a truck looks like. this has to change. most truckers don't wear suits on a daily basis. they don't have advanced degrees in engineering and economics. but they know trucking. truckers aren't the problem. they are the solution. and congress should treat them accordingly. thankfully, there are some lawmakers such as chairwoman fisher and congressman basken who see much dysfunction in our industry and understand that just maybe, it's time to start listening to what real truckers have to say. we appreciate beng a part of this hearing. we have some sensible ideas on how to fix the end, and improve highway safety and i look forward to sharing them with you. >> thank you, mr. pugh. next, we have mr. jake per nel, who is the manager of the cattleman's livestock market in california. he is also director of the livestock marketing association. welcome, mr. parnel. >> thank you, chairman, bisher, ranking member duckworth, members of the subcommittee. thank r-thank you for allowing me to testify on the trucking industry and regulatory environment. specifically we appreciate the input from agriculture, as a whole, and in particular, the livestock industry. my make is jake parnell, i mention the livestock market in gulf, california. i am testifying on behalf of the member of the livestock marketing association, an organization which i serve on the board of directors, and a member of the transportation subcommittee. live stock markets serve as a hub to gather and sell livestock from farmers and ranchers in a competitive bidding environment. i'm also a member of the national cattleman's beef association, manage my own 500 head heard of commercial cattle and run between a thousand 2,000 yearlings who graze on the west coast. every wednesday in gulf, livestock truckers drive to the livestock market and facilitate buyers gathering loads of livestock to be shipped to the next part of the production chain. the cornerstone for our business is the ability to gather livestock from farmers, ranchers and dairymen who raise them and market them to buyers throughout the united states. this movement of livestock is entirely depend ent on the use of a very limited population of highly-skilled haulers who drive livestock commercial motor vehicles. it might surprise you to hear that livestock producers and livestock auction markets are specifically impacted by transportation laws and regulations. for example, in california, which ranks fourth in total number of cattle, there's only one major feed yard. so the cattle we raise in most cases must be transported to the pacific northwest, or more commonly the midwest for feeding and processing. time is everything for the well-being of the animals, while being transported. the key to safely hauling livestock, especially in times of great heat and humidity, is to stop as infrequent as possible and to keep the trailer moving to provide ventilation. unfortunately, although the majority of livestock hauls can be concluded within the time frame of the outlined hours of service regulation, livestock located in states outside of the center part of the country cannot reach their destination safely in the 11-hour drive time. when a driver runs out of time while hauling live animals they are given the grim prospects of unloading the livestock if they can find somewhere willing to receive them or leaving them on the trailer for a ten hour stretch to surfer from the elements and lack of ventilation and possible injury. a hauler of live animals cannot unload on the side of a roland or a local hotel. there are a few public pen systems along highways and the owners of managers of private feed yards an livestock markets rarely accept livestock in transit due to liability, staffing, and bio security concerns. further the act of loading and unloading livestock has been reported to be more stressful than the effect of transport itself. the drivers that transport the animals work hard at safety. a livestock hauler is forced by nature, by the nature of their cargo, to drive more cautiously than conventional cargo haulers because the live animals move throughout the trailer, and can be severely injured if the driver turns too suddenly, or drives too fast. safety is so important to the livestock industry that many livestock haulers have participated in additional specialized training. including the beet industry's master cattle transporter program. which provides instruction on proper animal handling, transportation methods and focus on preventing driver fatigue. due to all of this, livestock haulers boast a fantastic safety record. for instance, a study conducted by the fmcsa and the national highway traffic safety institute showed that 1123 accidents involving trucks hauling cargo and a mere five involve livestock transporters. similarly trucks involved in fatal accidents in 2008, a report conducted by the trrngs research institute, shows a 4252 trucks in fatal accident, livestock haulers were in 0.6%. with this great track record, safety, with this great track record of safety in mind, american agriculture needs some help. the current hours of safety provide too rigid, one-size fits all framework. increased freight costs and a shortage of qualified drivers can result from the kale in the coasts and the southeast being severely discounted this. can lead to producer and livestock hauler dropout and can be felt by the american consumer trying to put an affordable meal on their table. live animal haulers need more flexibility in order to get safely get live cargo to the destination. we certainly appreciate the several members of the subcommittee, many of whom serve on the senate ag committee for their diligence work to safe and practical solutions for our nation's agriculture haulers. >> they're, sir. and finally, i'd like to welcome sergeant john samis, with the delaware state police. he is the president of the commercial vehicle safety alliance. welcome, sir. >> good morning, chairman fisher, ranking member duckworth, and members of the subcommittee. thank you for inviting me to participate in today's discussion. as a sergeant with the delaware state police, i supervise our cmv enforcement program and serve as president of the commercial vehicle safety alliance which represents people who enforce cmv, safety regulations throughout north america. as the trucking industry continues to evolve, technology is playing a leading role in constantly redefining the industry. the enforcement community must prepare for the future of trucking, in order to meet our shared goal of reducing crashes, and fatalities involving cmvs. in my written testimony we highlight the progress made under the fast act and propose a number of recommendations aimed at further improving cmv safety. one of the most significant things congress can do to help improve safety is provide the enforcement community with the flexibility and vourss needed to address a growing industry that becomes more sophisticated by the day. cbsa members work with industry and fmcas to reduce crashes and save lives. enforcement officials inspect vehicle, interact with drivers, review motor carriers and work to ensure that those operating on our roadway does so safely. the roadside enforcement program has helped to significantly reduce the number of crashes and fatalities that involve a cmv. however, the program provides only the foundation for a comprehensive approach to reaching zero fatalities. states built on that program with initiatives designed to meet their unique need, all with the goal of eliminating cmv involved crashes. enforcement is only a portion of what the state does. there are outreach and education campaign, technology deployments, and a focus on crash prevention in high risk areas as well as other creative programs designed to help industry understand and comply with safety requirements. congress can help by giving the states the flexibility and funding needed to address their own unique safety needs. meeting their core responsibility of conducting inspections, and ensuring regulatory compliance, but also innovating to keep pace with industry. for example, we're asking congress to make two small changes to the grant program that helped fund state cmv enforcement activities. if we're asking for an additional year to spend grant funds. we're asking that fs, like fhwa be given the authority to real kuwait unspent funds rather than return to the treasury. we need to keep every dollar allocated to critical safety programs where they belong. in addition, states need the tools to operate an effective program. giving the growing size and complexity of the trucking industry, jurisdictions do not have the resources to inspect every vehicle, driver, and motor carrier on a regular basis. as a result, inspectors interact with only a fraction of the trucks on the road. to maximize resources, jurisdictions use a combination of methods and technologies to identify vehicles, drivers, and carriers, for intervention. work is being done to update crash causation and recording data, to give jurisdictions better information on which to build their programs. if we can better understand where, why, and how, crashes are occurring, we can do more to prevent them. cvsa encourages congress to provide d.o.t. the resources to maintain the data set that will inform the next generation of safety programs. specifically, cvsa supports funding on updates to the crash causation study. in addition it is important that regulations keep pace with the evolving motor carrier industry. for example, as we move to more and more advanced safety systems, and cmvs, the enforcement community must have the resources to effectively regulate industry. cvsa has asked nhtsa to have an universal identifier for all cmv. the ability to identify each truck from a short range would revolutionize the road side inspection program and improve roadway safety. finally, as you draft transportation safety policies for the next decade, please consider how the enforcement community will implement those policies. establishing new policies without considering the practical impact can lead to inconsistency, and unnecessary tension between industry and enforcement. cvsa is asking the congress incorporate an implementation window requirement in any future exemption. this will allow states time to receive guidance and train inspectors leading to greater uniformity which benefits both industry and enforcement. thank you for including me in today's discussion. we like our partners in industry and at d.o.t. are committed to saving lives. to recheck, it is important that everyone involved has the tools that they need to do their part. for the states, that means program flexibility and funding. to support comprehensive innovative programs that take dangerous drivers, vehicles, and carriers off the roadway. thank you. >> thank you, sergeant. and thank you to all of the panel members for our opening statements. i would like to beginning my questions with mr. spear, and mr. pugh. i share many of the sentiments that both of you expressed regarding the need for more flexible hours of service requirements, across the trucking industry. and i also appreciate the efforts that we've seen from the fmcsa, to update those requirements. could each of you briefly explain what you see as the key change that's going to be needed in the hours of service requirements, to help provide truckers with the flexibility they need, while also making sure that we don't see any kind of negative impact on safety. >> yes, i think one of the key facts, one of the things that was petitioned for, was this three-hour, to be able to extend your clock by three hours, as far as if you need to take a nap, traffic, something to that effect, but with that being said, there needs to be the added protections for the driver to where the driver has control of that time, and not a motor carrier, not a shipper, not a receiver, or anything, to that effect. the driver feels that he needs to take a nap, or there's unsafe weather conditions, or whatever, he has that opportunity to do it. but not be forced to do it, again by a carrier, or someone like that. with that being said, that's where the law comes in, fmcsa has the hot line and that's the one thing we've been asking for is for fmca to be a little more stricter on that. at ooida, we never hear anything coming back from any of these complaints that are being filed by us for our members. so that's the one main concern. put the power in the drives' hands giving that added flexibility. >> thank you. mr. spear? >> yes, chair, i want to be quick to point out that this is a live rule malking. it is one that we do believe is necessary but we haven't seen the final product yet so i don't want to prejudge it but in the advanced notice of proposed rule making we see the four parts that the department has proposed looking at it. we're encouraged it is moving in the direction, they have taken all of the comments an it was voluminous, back, adjusted it and we believe this year, we will see a final product. without seeing the results of those comments yet, it is a bit difficult to predict what it's going to say. but i do think it needs to reflect the realities that are happening out on the road. the flexibility that the industry and the drivers need, we share that concern. adverse driving conditions. when a driver can take the 30-minute break. when they're tired, not when the government tells them they're tired. split sleeper berth. common sense really needs to prevail here. the rule needs to reflect reality. not suggest that is designed here from a cubicle here in washington, d.c. we're optimistic that this rule will do that. i like the fact that they took such time to, and attention to all of the comments across the spectrum. once we see the final product, it will be something that i think we can comment more in detail on. >> i assume your association made comments? >> oh, yes, definitely. >> were those the points that you made that you hit in your testimony? >> indeed, yes. >> thank you. >> mr. parnell, you mentioned in your testimony that livestock haulers must receive additional transport training, specifically you mentioned the transport quality assurance program for the pork industry, and the master cattle transporter program for the beef industry, can you elaborate on the training that these programs provide, particularly as it would help with truck safety? >> i can. these programs that have been developed through the beef quality assurance program with ncba and a couple of the other programs that you highlighted, it takes it from step one, all the way to the transportation, so it starts with, many times our truckers are involved in the loading of the actual freight, the live animals on the truck, it talks about the handling of them, the handling of the animals once they get on the roadway, the need to drive probably slower, probably a loss of what we do, because a lot of what we do is in rural condition, not always paved roads. there are parts of the program that speaks about judging their own fatigue and how to handle that and the proper time, again, it goes back to some flexibility, when they need to have a chance to pull over and take a nap, that, you know, that -- >> can you specifically address the flexibility that would be needed when you're hauling livestock, for example? there's a rule that you have to pull over at a certain time, what does that involve? >> well to do it the correct way, safely for the animals, you would have to pull over, either unload, unload those animals at a facility that can handle those animals -- >> and how many of those facilities do you usually run across, as you're transporting across country. >> close to highway, not very many. it's a very challenging part. >> thank you, sir. i'd like to recognize senator duckworth. >> thank you, chair woman fisher and illinois is one of the nation's largest pork producers so i am very sympathetic to the challenges. but i do want to start off by talking about the 5.9 gigahertz spectrum. in response to last week's d.o.t.'s first responders pilot program, the undersecretary stated that this new program is designed to demonstrate the benefits of v 2 x technologies for emergency response vehicles, using the 5.9 gigahertz safety band. in december, the federal communications commission released a proposal to reallocate more than half of this 5.9 gigahertz band to unlicensed operations like wi-fi. and mr. spear, you touched on this. in the interest of time though, by a quick show of hands, who here has concerns with the recent actions taken by the fcc to reallocate the 5.9 gigahertz band? thank you. with a quick yes or no, those who raised your hands, who do oppose fcc's propose kal? >> yes. >> anyone else? thank you. sergeant, thank you for your service protecting us. not just delaware's roadways but i'm sure you extend beyond the state as well. one of my priorities is working to reduce and eliminate law enforcement fatalities from roadside accidents. last year, chairman fisher and i asked the government accountability office to review state level move over laws. our subcommittee is seeking to better understand how these policies are working and to examine opportunities with the federal government to enhance these state initiatives. in addition, senator durbin and i recently introduced the protects roadside first responders act to. promote the development and use of safety technologies that reduce accident risk for those who need to stop along busy highway. your testimony mentioned the benefits of deploying universal electronic vehicle identifiers for commercial vehicles. could you please address how these identifiers could improve public safety. and what do you say to stake holders who raise privacy concerns? >> so first of all, thank you for your work to help protect my brothers and sisters in law enforcement, that's greatly appreciated. to your question, given the size of the motor carrier industry, jurisdictions do not have the resources necessary to inspect every vehicle out there on the roadway, obviously. so to maximize resources, states must prioritize enforcement activities, and utilize technology to continue to increase efficiency. so with the universal electronic vehicle identifier, it would help us identify which trucks or carriers might be more likely to have issues, and then we can concentrate our efforts on those carriers. and as far as the privacy concerns go, the universal vehicle identifier would not transmit any data other than that that is that specific truck going down the roadway. and then we would take that specific truck, and run it through the systems that we are already currently using, to identify the carrier, and their safety record. so the privacy does not seem to be a concern to cvsa. >> thank you. i want to commend chairman fisher and others for their efforts to expand career opportunities for service members and veterans. we should do more to break down barriers for those who have served our nation. however, i am wary of claims about work force shortages in the transportation sector, or any sector where there hasn't been a meaningful increase in wages. after all, increasing wages is the free market response to labor shortages, relaxing safety standards is not. and that's my conservative push by some aviation stake holders to weaken pilot training standards put in after the crash of 3347. so instead of increasing wages they want to allow pilots to fly with less hours of training. fmcsa is developing a pilot train to understand the safety impacts of allowing 18 to 20-year-old drivers to operate large trucks for the purpose of interstate purpose. ms. king, what data is available or unavailable that could inform congress about the safety of proposals to expand trucking to those with the least amount of experience? >> like, what has been said, there are at least 48 states that allow 18-year-olds to drive semi trucks within their state boundaries. so there is data available already on what the crash levels are for younger drivers. and we believe that fmcsa and the d.o.t. should be studying that data before they extend this offering to 18-year-olds to drive interstate. we also believe that these young people would be the new hires, and they're not likely to get the cushy drive where they get to drive a ten mile route back and forth in their home every night with their family. nobody that is in their first job gets the best routes. and so we're concerned that the younger drivers will ends up on the longer routes that will take them into states they're not familiar with. so we really believe that the crash data that is in the states needs to be studied first. >> thank you. and i'd like to give mr. pugh a chance to talk a little bit about young, especially military drivers, because having had, a military driver's license myself, i know the quality of the young drivers, especially those coming out of the military, who can be just as capable. would you like to address that? >> yes, i would be more than happy to. i would agree that the 18 to 20-year-olds we don't feel that they're safe. as someone who has a cdl, i've drove truck on a farm and got my cdl in the service i would agree i learned the skills how to operate a truck and maneuver a truck very well in the united states army and i'm thankful to that but i still think there is further training that needs to be issued because driving a truck and military life as i'm sure you are well aware, much, much different than driving a truck in civilian life. you are usually in convoy. you usually had people overseeing where you were going. you were usually on designated routes. when i turned 21 and went to work as an over the road trucker i was turned loose. and again i was fortunate to be trained with the skill but as far as real world skill and what was out there, i was lucky, i didn't have any accidents or anything that happened but real world knowledge, it would have been nice to have a little more training before i was just turned loose. i would just like to follow up too, who is going to hire these younger drivers because who is going to insure them? that is the one of the biggest problems that i had, 21 years old, stepping out of the united states army with a cdl i only found two motor carriers at the time that would give me a job and as ms. king said, it wasn't a very good job. and 22 i bought my own truck, and i had trouble finding carriers that would lease me because of my age. i was 25 years old, until the door was pretty much opened for me to drive, for anybody, or everybody, and i understand why, because it is dangerous, and i needed those years to learn, and be trained, because there is no training and we need more training out there. >> thank you. i'm way over time and mr. spears, if you could submit a response via written format, i would really appreciate that. >> more than happy. >> thank you, chairman. you're very generous. >> thank you, senator duckworth. senator lee? >> thank you, madam chair. thank you for all being here, and for your insight today. mr. parnell, i would like to start you with. in your written testimony, you pointed out some of the unintended consequences of strict hours of service rules. these are rules that are certainly well-intentioned. and they are also rules that sometimes being the one size fits all tools that they are can put some undue and impractical consequences on all commercial drivers. and sometimes they don't necessarily yield the benefit that we want. sometime, for example, they can cause increased harm by encouraging drivers to stop in places where they shouldn't be stopping. where it's not safe for them to stop. along the side of the road, on an interstate highway, for example. in order to comply with an overly rigid regulatory structure that can cause safety problems. and this is of course setting aside the issue that senator fisher mentioned a moment ago about the harm and the stress that can come from doing that when you're dealing with livestock, or when you're dealing with insects like bees, that can cause some very significant problems. as congress considers updating its hours of service requirements, where do you see the biggest need for reform across all commercial operations? >> as it relates directly to agriculture, and like we talked about, the parts i'm most familiar with, which is hauling livestock, we're just very unique. we're hauling a perishable product. a product that can be injured. and the flexibility, i know that there are numerous options, or different, you know, legislative answers that have been put out there, in the last congress, some have been reintroduced this congress, at lma and ncba we petition fmcsa for a five-year test project, that they have not given a public decision on yet. i think it has been out for comment. we introduced it 18 months ago. 12 months ago they introduced it to comment and we haven't heard back yet. and that increased drive time and flexibility a little bit. there are specific solutions, you know, for me, and you talked about not the safest place to pull over, not the safest place to drive fa teegd, we talked about regulation 49 cfr 39.1 which is the ag commodity exemption, we have talked about that exemption on the end of hauls if they get close to where they're going and the roads if it is dark, narrow roads, tough roads they can pull over and have that flexibility to get to that part of the destination very safe. >> it also appears that there is some ambiguity within the hours of service regulations. as to what constitutes on duty versus off-duty time. and it appears that even rest stops, even rest breaks, can still be considered counted against the 14-hour clock. how might congress provide better definitions, better clarity to those definitions? do you think that is something we should clarify? >> i think it is something that needs to be clarified, especially in our industry when there are various times when we ask our specialized haulers to stop and check their loads and make sure everything is safe and they're still on the clock during that 10 or 15 minute time, it is working against them. well to me whose livelihood is dependent on the that livestock traveling safety, i want them to check but because it also affects my livelihood the increased price it would take if we had to switch trucks or do other things with the hours of service, i also want them to be able to make it there safely and on time. so yes, i do think we need to do that. >> mr. spear, the competitive enterprise institute has estimated that federal regulations, while, this is impossible to quantify with precision, but they've estimated that in 2016, compliance with federal regulations cost the american economy just under $2 trillion a year. just in that year alone. within federal infrastructure projects, this ends up costing not only consumers but it also ends up costing drivers, moms and dads trying to get home, to be with their kids, who are stuck in traffic, and it also costs state governments additional money to comply with federal regulations. there are many estimates that put it at about 20% when you're using federal funds, federal regulations, you have to comply with, often increase the cost of that federal project, by about 20%, as compared to what it would be if you were using state funds. there are instances that i've heard of where it could be more like 30 or 40% in particular projects. so this means that federal dollars are sometime, sometimes being used to fund a project that is unable to go as far as it would otherwise. you know, sometimes regulations are necessary, but not all regulations are necessary. and they can create harmful barriers to innovation, and competition, that ends up harming consumers, drivers, and commercial and otherwise. what do you think are the greatest regulatory costs in your industry, and what challenges, what are some of the challenges that you face that you consider necessary to address? >> i think simply put, infrastructure is safety. we need to look at it through that lens. when you talk about regulations, we talk about infrastructure, but they really are synonymous. they're the same. because if you have good infrastructure, you have less traffic. you have less accidents. you have more space in between the vehicles. to do the things they need to do. you also have obviously lower costs of impact, not just on the industry but the economy. so infrastructure, having more of it, and well designed, well engineered, really breeds good safety policy. in terms of the regulatory side, we're not fearful of regulation. what we do ask for is clear and concise regulation. when you have ambiguity, you have litigation and that adds costs on our industry. horrendous costs. so the balance between that, and maintaining good safety regulations, that have a true and measurable impact, we recommend supporting that. what we do think though is that having expanded safety policy applied to infrastructure, would be a good thing. we lose $70 bcs billion a year, as an industry, sitting in traffic. and we're only 4% of the vehicles on the road. as i said earlier, 425,000 drivers sitting idle for an entire year. in term was environmental impact, think about this for a minute. environmentalists don't want to speed up the permitting process. i cannot possibly understand why. because if you have more efficient infrastructure, you have less congestion. that's 67 million tons of co2 being emitted just sitting in traffic. those trucks are moving, they're not going to emit like that. one modern truck today, off the lot, emits the same amount of diesel particulate matter as 60 trucks in 1988. we're doing all the right things. we're buying the newer, safer, energy, and environment equipment, and without infrastructure, you will have bad environmental policy, bad safety policy and they're all interconnected with one another and the costs on all of that the impact on the industry and the economy goes down the more you invest in it. >> thank you very much. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you, senator lee. senator yen. >> madam chair and ranking member, thank you so much for holding this important hearing. our employment is reaching historic lows. the national investment climate remains incredibly strong. yet we have this substantial driver shortage in this country. and progressively, this threatens the long-term economic stability of our country. we want to maintain this longest period of economic expansion in american history. back lome, in indiana, we like to call it the cross roads of america and i've heard from countless constituents, both drivers, other workers, and ply employers about the detrimental impact that this driver shortage has on the ability to efficiently receive and deliver freight. the truck driver shortage is exacerbated by a rule mentioned by mr. spear, that prevents 18 to 20-year-old drivers from crossing state lines. kurmtly 48 states allow commercial driver's license at age 18 but federal regulations prevent those drivers from crossing state lines until you're turning 21. if you're from the state of indiana, you can drive to jeffersonville, indiana or new albany, but you can't cross the river, the ohio river and go into louisville. you can drive one end of dearborn county, indiana, but you can't go over to cincinnati or vice-versa. you can drive up to lake county in the northwest, you can't go to chicago. one can understand how this would really disrupt our commerce and threaten our economic expansion. that is why i've introduced the drive safe act, with senator tester and a number of my colleagues on a broadly bipartisan basis, that would establish an apprenticeship program that would address the driver shortage, create new career opportunities for young hoosiers and young folks around america and substantially raise training standards to ensure safety on our roads. as we look towards reauthorization of the highway bill, i encourage my colleagues to support this important truck safety and work force development bill, mr. spear, can you touch on the pilot programs that d.o.t. has already undertaken to address this issue, and reiterate why it's important that we pass the drive safe act to safely address the truck driver shortage. >> certainly, senator, and thank you for your leadership on this issue. and the commentary. the department of transportation, i believe, agrees with the policy, the path that you've taken legislatively, putting out the pilot program for military personnel, in this age bracket, is one step. it's also an agency looking at broadening that pilot to nonmilitary personnel. but i want to take a step back on this, for a moment. just so that we have some contemp contemp context, we're spending all our time talking about age, 18, 19, 20, 21, legal at age 21, one year differential, you're legal, it is really not about age, it is about training. your bill has 400 hours of apprenticeship based training in which 240 hours you have to have an experienced driver in the cab. you've got technology, speed governor, you've got cameras, you got anti-mitigation collision controls on that truck, not one of the four, it is actually 49, alaska just adopted so 49 states allow you to drive a class a, at 18 years old, you just can't cross state lines. your bill puts all this training, on top of that, plus all of this technology, in addition to that, this is a step towards safety. what i want to know is where is everybody that is opposing this bill, where were they on the 49 states that allow you to drive 850 miles in california, but you can't go ten miles from providence, rhode island, into rehobeth, massachusetts? that's got to be the dumbest policy i've ever seen. you remedy it with training. you remedy it with technology. that's exactly what your bill does, it is what the d.o.t. is doing. you served in the military. thank you for that. i have four kids. my oldest two, army. i got one who is going to commission next year as a secretary lieutenant in the army. i've got another one who just started a year at the united states military academy west point. i sleep pretty well at night. i don't know about my wife, she worries as mothers do but i don't, why, because i know they're getting the training of they need to go off and protect our country to fight for our freedom, how are we willing to allow 18-year-olds to go off and do that, but we can't teach them how to cross state lines in a class a? this bill is responsible. it's safety minded. it's the right thing to do. >> thank you, mr. spear. you had me until west point. as a naval academy grad. so i will allow you to have the last word, but i do ask unanimous concept to enter this letter showing broad bipartisan national support for the safety legislation into the record. >> without objection. >> thank you, chairman. >> thank you, senator senator capito. >> thank you. i am going to start with you, mr. spear, because you mentioned something in your response to senator young's question on training, and different aspects of the technology that's available for the newer driver, the untrained driver. i was approached a couple, probably six, eight, months ago, from a couple who lost their son who was rear-ended by a truck traveling in excessive speed on the interstate. and one of the proposals that they put forward, to honor their son's life, is to have a governor on your semi that won't let you exceed the legal speed limit. what's your position on that? >> we actually just revisited that position. partly because my self, my staff and members felt the 11-year-old policy that we had was outdated. it was 65, but it was just not trucks but cars. and so what happens is, if you, if you govern trucks at 65, and you don't include cars, states like texas, south dakota, where speeds exceed 80 miles an hour, for cars, you can drive legally, which means you can probably do a little faster, and not get pulled over, there's a big differential between what that truck is going and what the car is going and if people are speeding and texting, that's a recipe for an accident, possibly a fatality. so the differential is a big concern of ours. we believe that technology has a role to play. so we looked at the policy. we upgraded it. just last year. still 65 for trucks. but up to 70 if you have certain technologies within that equipment. >> let me just ask you that, though. but that's not, that's not on trucks as we have now, as a requirement or an option or anything? >> oh, yes. >> it is in the training -- >> a lot of our fleets govern at various speeds, some 65, some lower than that, some 67, some at 70. but we have plenty of fleets in our membership that govern. >> you do? >> we do. and they train to that. >> i didn't mean to interrupt. i wanted to make a clarification on that. does anybody else have a comment on that? >> i do. >> yes. go ahead. >> i don't think that the differential is that big of an issue. we already have differential on our freeways, and nobody, there's no freeway out there that everybody's going 65 or everyone is going 70 and most of us are driving 80 and many trucks are speed limited to 65. and we don't see that that is being a real issue. and ontario, they mandated speed limiters and there was a 73% reduction in speed related truck crashes in a study. >> excuse me. >> yes. >> i would like to follow-up as well. as someone who actually drove a truck, speed limiters are not a good thing. from the drivers perspective. due to the fact that there have been many occasions, someone driving up the highway and my truck, and i'm sure you all realize it in your car, that once in a while, i need the ability to get myself out of harm's way. whether that's speeding up momentarily, or whatever. to get away from something, to be safer for myself and the people around me. if i'm governed, i don't have that control. i heard over and over here about training for these 18 to 20-year-olds, when you train for no matter what your age is, the proper training, and when i hear about technology, all of these things are wonderful things, and they have their place, but nothing can replace a trained driver. and a trained driver knows how to control the truck and how to operate, it they don't want it go be going down the highway at 100 miles an hour, they want to be in complete control of their vehicle. >> thank you. that brings me to another question that i have which is the av capabilities of trucks. now i see a great future here in a lot of different circumstances. but the circumstance i described, with a crowded interstate, at night, or in bad weather, is lard for, hard for me to imagine, some of these interstates have a very high percentage of trucks, particularly at night, when a lot of drivers are driving understandably, how do you see the av technology with the trucks, and heavier weight vehicles? mr. spear? >> promising. we really applaud the secretary of transportation for her 4.0 guidance in this space. it's much needed. it needs to be including not just cars but trucks. and all cars, all 25 auto manufacturers agree to put automated emergency braking as standard on every vehicle come 2022. so in two years, we're going to have aeb on all cars being produced. you still have speeding. you still have texting. you still have distracted driving. two thirds of the accidents that involve our trucks are caused by passenger vehicles. and it's usually distracted driving as the root cause. we love the 5.9. seven channels. preserved for safety. if you are connected to the cars and the trucks and the infrastructure, it matters that that driver in the passenger vehicle is texting and not paying attention, but the technology being able to talk to the trucks, see it coming, and apply that aeb, is going to save lives. that will take a dramatic reduction in the 40,000 fatalities every year on our highways and prevent those accidents from happening. >> thank you. madam chair. >> thank you senator capito. senator thune. >> thank you, chairman fisher an thanks for having this fisher. these are subjects that are very important to rural states like south dakota, and several panelists have mentioned the potential benefits of new technologies to truck safety. the efficiency of motor carrier inspections and improved quality of life for drivers. sergeant samis, could you provide some examples of how new technologies can help improve the inspection process for both drivers and the law enforcement community. >> yes, sir. it's important to remember that we are tasked with enforcing the regulations and insuring compliance by the motor carrier industry. but there will never be enough resources for law enforcement to touch all the people out there on the roadways. there is a vast number of truck and trucking companies out there. so one of the things that we're looking to do is introduce the universal electronic identifier, which would help us identify trucks and focus in on possibly the bad actor, and focus our resources to concentrate our efforts like that. >> mr. spear, you mentioned in your testimony the importance of technology, such as automatic emergency break braking and lane keep assist to improve truck safety. what can congress do to incentivize the adoption of these technologies in the trucking fleet? >> be tech neutral. let innovation thrive. it's so far ahead of anything we're doing in the government. and it's a good thing. if it's charged towanneled towa. if it is channeled toward things that will eliminate congestion. there is so much with infrastructure and safety policy that technology can solve. we don't want to restrain it. but you do need to keep pace with it. and make certain that it doesn't cause a ripple effect. right now, you've got a lot of localities from uber in pittsburgh, doing testing grounds to states like michigan. california. nevada. you have a lot of pockets of technology being developed. but in the end, it's going to be going over state lines. cars and trucks. we're governed by interstate commerce rules. i don't need a patch work of 50 different regimes governing what technology you should comply with, and what you shouldn't. so having a seamless standard is really, really important. so that if there is anything that i would recommend to this committee is maintaining that seamless one standard fabric. and not creating a whole patchwork. because that's really going to cause i think a lot of disruption to the economy. certainly to our economy, if that happens. >> mr. parnell, together with former senator nelson, i had sent a letter to fmcsa urging the agency to thoroughly consider a letter from livestock haulers and in response, an official notice to request public comments on petition in february of 2019. you mentioned in your testimony that fmcsa has not taken any further action on this petition. in conversations with the agency, has fmcsa indicated that any further action is forthcoming? >> thank you for your consistent support of our industry and of the livestock haulers. we did comment on that petition 12 months ago, when they released it for comment. we also commented on the new proposed rule making. in particular, the adverse weather conditions, to us, some of the adverse weather conditions are heat and humidity, when it comes to hauling livestock and having to stop on the side of the road. so we are continuing to, you know, be involved in that process. in conversations with the agency, they have not indicated to us when an actual decision or ruling on our petition might be ready, but we continue to be hopeful that they will recognize the petition and support it. >> just do a followingup on that. do you have any additional suggestions for actions that fmcsa could take to accommodate the specific circumstances of livestock haul erstwhile still maintaining very high levels of safety. >> i goat it get it. i am a dad of three children, five-year-old, and i take them out livestock haulers ag trucks any kind of trucks, i get the concern of the safety, but the concern of the product that is our livelihood is important as well and i think we continue the thoughts on that petition, the flexibility in hours of service, maybe the ag exemption for the 150 miles at the end to let these guys finish their hauls. there are options out there. there are options that have been introduced in legislation, i understand that we would love to work through and find that proper solution to give our kind of unique industry the help it needs. >> very quickly, sergeant samis, you mentioned in your testimony that changes made to the motor carrier safety assistance program, or mcsap would reduce administrative burdens for motor carrier enforcement. as the next reauthorization approaches which is upon us, what additional flexibility can we provide states to assist in improving commercial motor vehicle safety? >> one of the challenges we face is the limited time to spend the funds that we are granted. so i guess the biggest help we could receive is more time to spend that money. allowing fmcsa to distribute the funds rather than return them, if the states have to give them back. those funds were allocated towards safety programs and we would like to keep them for their intended use. >> could i just piggyback on mr. spear's comment on technology, you asked what congress could do in relation to, that i think it's important that we recognize safety, technology has promised, but we also need congress to require minimum performance standards, so that we don't have several different aeb technologies out there and we know what aeb should be doing. >> thank you. thank you all very much. >> may i follow up on that as well? >> yes. >> thank you. >> i'll be brief. you asked what congress can do for the safety of drivers. i've heard about the safety of cattle, i've heard about the safety of the motoring public, and i agree that is all very important, i've heard no one talk about the safety of the driver. truckers do die, too. truckers know better than anyone out there how dangerous the highways are. i saw horrific things when i drove a truck on the road. so truckers get it. truckers want to be safe. what congress can do, one thing they can do, is find some funding, some dedicated funding, support the bill that ooida is working on right now, in congress, getting ready to come out, for places to park. that's one. biggest crises we have in trucking right now is parking. our drivers are forced to follow rigid hours of service, they're forced to use the aebs, just like cows need a safe place to be, so do our truckers. >> all right. good. good answer. thank you. >> madam chair, thank you. >> thank you, senator thune. thank you to the panel members today for a very good discussion. appreciate you being here. the hearing record will remain open for two weeks. and during this time, senators are asked to submit any questions for the record. upon receipt, the witnesses are requested to submit their written answers to the committee as soon as possible. again, thank you for a good hearing today. we are adjourned. today, democratic presidential candidate pete buttigieg speaks with veterans at the american legion in merrimack, new hampshire. live coverage starts at 3:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 2, online at c-span.org, and with the free c-span radio app. the new hampshire primary is tuesday. watch results and candidate speeches, starting at 7:30 p.m. eastern, live on c-span, c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. during this election season, the candidates beyond the talking points are only revealed over time. but since you can't be everywhere, there's c-span. our campaign 2020 programming differs from all over political coverage for one simple reason. it's c-span. we brought you your unfiltered view of government every day since 1979. and this year, we're bringing you an unfiltered view of the people seeking to steer that government. this november. in other words, your future. so this election season, go deep, direct, and unfiltered. see