Approaches. Thats right. We may or we may not but were not in a position to tell them what to do so they make that decision. So let me ask another question if you hear from people that it really hurts the economy of the United States when there is the clean air lot that goes on the books it is too dangerous to run the risk to make them air cleaner to reduce the number of people whose diets from dirty air and they say their air is clean enough. We will see a huge increase of people who dont die or i get sick so i have a chart to from 1929 through today that reflects the growth of the gdp of the United States of america including the 1970 cleanair act with the exception of around 2,008 it was a complete failure of regulation with the financial industry can you talk about that and the connection with that journey with the growth of gdp . I think the chairman eloquently stated weld they could reduce air pollution basically 70 percent reduction under the Clean Air Act while the gdp has tripled so every time we put out a new rule that is what we always hear frankly from some small groups but it has never come through and to we dont expect this will have an impact other than the economy to grow the u. S. To become stable or take advantage of new technologies or investments. We have been in this plan for the last seven years and something quite remarkable has happened. So were not the perfect these sunny state that the storm state that we will move for word but now 80,000 Clean Energy Jobs with another 7,000 this year bringing it up that 90,000 . Now up 13 . And by 6 it is not too dissimilar for the whole country and with 23 expansion with the capntrade system in place i think it is important to understand the model is already there it could be made to work. It is flexible but it does have a lot of evidence that shows it can be done. I understand that some states have already passed the Energy Production levels built into those titles are you considering building more for those that are already going through those levels in the proposed rules were looking of commons we have grown Comment Period were looking at for Public Comment hearing so we will make appropriate changes one way or the of there. Following up isnt it possible the proposed rules you are considering lower electricity costs for people all across the country . I think that is contradictory for what they think but we have seen that have been but talk about nationally. we are projecting is consumers will see a lowering of their energy bills because were getting waste at of the system with the cheapest way is to become more efficient. In massachusetts we say it is working smarter not harder so explain that a goal what you give them the flexibility. As fast as you can read your accent. [laughter] there are two ways to get the of reductions with the pollution it emits you can run them lessor make them more efficient. With both of those you can do that to increase efficiency at the facility but also by providing consumers in many low income consumers new building codes , a more efficient appliances and when those things happened there dollars go down how much they need to spend every month. It is smart and effective and ultimately cost effective. Why did you let highpowered washington and lobbyist with the National ResourcesDefense Council region to the epa to right your Climate Change rules for to . I did not. The ntrc had up log july 8th introduced into the record through 10 by a one of those crafting the rules the New York Times ran a very nice article yesterday about the end rtc part to develop the innovative proposal for the fossil fuel electric power plants we are proud to have played a role so they are proud for what they wrote. Will you attend the un Climate Change conference as your predecessor did with the Climate Change conference in 2009 . I have not made a decision. Vicki part of the strategy is to have us believe that he and his environmental allstar team can arrive in paris that the Climate Change conference to convince the world to follow his lead. His plan hinges on president obama is Foreign Policy prowess by his record is a series of empty threats and miscalculations and lead from behind failures like syria russia and ukraine libya and iraq. After all of those missteps he wants us to believe he and his team can demand china can stop using fossil fuels. It still would not be enough. The rest of the world, he said, is appealing to much Carbon Pollution. That means that the present Climate Action plan which includes the epa knew proposed rules on their own do not reduce Global Temperatures or prevent any of the serious impact that are predicted by the u. N. It cannot make a dent permits of the question is to mccain you guarantee success in paris . Is not card keys Climate Change policies of paying for america and the citizens of these countries in the ladin globally . What i know about this rule is it would relieve the United States in 2013 with a more efficient and cleaner Energy Supply system in more jobs and clean energy which are the jobs of the future. No matter what happens internationally this is the significant benefit to the United States in terms of those in the audience who want to breathe healthy air. The redmen then it has no impact at all on Global Climate. Is Significant Impact on the tone and tenor of the discussion no impact on Global Climate, though, youll admit that feed beneath you ever said anything about of this will Impact Global climate. Average persons campbell. Freeze for a minute. I dont think we should be putting words in a what is of. She never said what he says she said. Can you define what he said . Of the woodstock she did us a. It is is not right. They keep coming up and share take from your response and the secretary of states comments that these proposals you are putting forth will have no impact on Global Climate as a result of the failure of brothers to corporate as the secretary of state has stated. This cant be some rich person is campbell perugias has an impact on people. Here, we are asking coal mine years, seniors on fixed incomes profamily sense of the to suffer higher electric bills and the employer to make this expensive debt, and have a lot of problems with doing it to people around the to achieve because servers lobbyists and powerful lawyers in washington now reaching into the epa to regulations. Countries are on the world already are abandoning fossil fuel because of the need for affordable energy. Pier seeing it in australia. The Parliament Just repealed their current tax. The Associated Press last week see a show in Prime Minister who says a useless, constructive tax with standards jobs and hurt families cost of living in did not actually. Why are we following his lead . Her. Climate in action is with friends seniors and kids. That is what is threatening our communities today and the viability of the plan is in the the future. And what i am responding to is a ba. That is my job. You want to sit for another round of questions, your local. Now, would like to ask karens consent to place into the record to documents. One is up old just recently taken the edge as a 70 of the peoples support your plan. Not withstanding the fact of other senators say that they are defending the people to you are defending the people in my opinion. Secondly, i want to put in the statement made nine men who appeared before this committee as a suggestion in. We like to speak of american exceptional as an. Everyone to be truly exceptional the we should begin the difficult task of leading the world aware of the unacceptable impact of our increasing appetite for fossil fuels before it is too late. Unlike the stick of backtoback if there is no objection. Hair going to turn to senator gillibrand was not here. She gets six minutes. We will work backandforth. Yellow clothes, so i will withhold praised. So grateful for your lead. I want to thank the chairman for rolling this hearing. Color changes will of the biggest crises we face. Have they watch the destruction after super storm sandy, it is only a sternly coslet the proposal is in their lives because were not acting fast or boldly enough. We have to do more. The cost of an election is enormous. We continually try to continue to pay for disaster after disaster or we can make a really smart steps to reduce Carbon Pollution and foster innovation for Clean Air Energy sources and more advanced and nosy. I think there is a picture of success that we have to grab ahold of and achieve. The york state is a member of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative criminal youre familiar with the plea to the regional greenoughs destinations of 40 lower than 2005. Projected to produce one half billion dollars in net economic benefit which i wish my colleague are still here to here. This is an economic engine. 16,000 additional jobs. Year as seven of every 55 million retained plead appear other states use the example to implement a Successful Program to cut grain s gas emissions . And other states and regions expect the same type of that at net economic benefit . I am incredibly proud of the work of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in those states because i think it was specifically designed to take the waste out of the system and to continue to grow the economy. Those numbers are great. The individual states can develop their own plans orders of the legion and other regional approaches with the original green house guests initiative palin provided information as to when that is inexpensive, a good thing to do, and then the opportunity to of additional. The most important things is that they have shown us that they are costeffective and practical place in which you can make this work to address Climate Change and grow the economy, not just not hurt the basis of our determination on best system, Emission Reduction medically demonstrating, really just been the holocaust the United States. The sober bill them. Rebought every state to come to the table and looked at the same things. The same idea of success that seless brother region. Undermines the results. Kayseven ally where success will then help we spend this across allspice . I think we learn from some of those lessons strictly. I think that we also learned from a lot of the work that congress did in trying to design a captain strip program for the u. S. Those are things you learn from and in a repeat. A think we very well understood helicon ratio the reductions are trying to achieve or verifiable aqaba accountable, and how we can do it in a way that provides the flexibility to put investments in things that were actually going to be beneficial economically. Avenue, a your position, other governors, and other systems really try to adopt this and be successful . How do we expand this . Frank to make sure their is a table set for every state to look at these issues of work together. I dont think the epa is trying at this point, nor should we tell states how they should meet these goals. Or trying to provide them and of captivity to get as much technical a bearish as they can taluca the absence thereof will to live. Weve been having meetings kimberly energy and there are rental regulators together so that they can understand how to design a strategy that works for them if. We talked about the cost savings. Health benefits that we can expect from the pace of reform. Can you talk a little bit about some of the Health Benefits we can expect from the implementation of the new power plant proposed rule. I certainly can. The Health Benefits in this role are actually quite large. You actually have an opportunity to keep temperatures are rising, mozos from being formed which result in more as well attacks. This rule also is going to be directly reducing particulate matter emissions, so two emissions, mercury emissions as a look at the regional the are i a that was developed. Just to name a few things, we are avoiding 2700 premature deaths, up to 6600. Return a already producing more than 100,000 asthma attacks. In the u. S. One out of ten kids face asthma. Lowincome, minorities to those on the front line. Those numbers matter. Senator, thank you. Well, the Supreme Court statement that wind and agency, epa, claims to discover in a long statute and unheralded power to regulate a significant portion of the American Academy we typically treat its announcement with a measure of skepticism. What the American People need to know is to have marked been given explicit statutory power to do what you are doing. You received it by a 54 ruling some years ago by the Supreme Court, and it ought to be viewed with skepticism. The American People run this country. You dont. The epa does not. You are accountable to the people for the best interest of the entire nation. I take that the Congress Never approved this which is one of the problems you face. The epa proposed emission targets for alabama would require 27 reduction in their rate of co2 emissions relative to 2012 levels reaching a target buyer assuming that it is technically feasible for our benefit to retire 10 millionmegawatt hours of coalfired generation capacity, which is significant to increase naturalgas generation by an equivalent amount, generate over 14 millionmegawatt hours for renewals as well as preserved existing the nuclear capacity. So first you have been talking about consulting. Did the epa consult with the state of alabama above those assumptions and sigell assessments per. Fiftyfive. Working with the energy and environmental regulators. When in no event individual meetings. I can get back to you. Said of think you have been doing that accurately. And completely with them on these assumptions. Your talking about a huge 14 millionmegawatt hours for renewals. Are you aware and not sure about those numbers. , happy to go with you. Our response to an enquiry from my question. Of course i will. Think you. Section 111 d of the proposed rule references extreme weather 0. 6 at least come close above projections to increase severity of hurricanes and tornadoes. Do you have any doubt that you can show this committee to reestablish that we can expect an increased number and severity of hurricanes and tornadoes. Well aware that the air National Assessment in the case that we should be expecting more intense storms, more heavy precipitation. There is i still believe there is any assumption native of the frequency of her hands at this point. Its expected to increase. A category three hurricane. We have now had a category three hurricane. Aaron burr when frederick did my town of mobile. Ten years ago for that we had to mills said the. It is pretty clear. I just want to tell you, your sks to alter policies economically at great cost. One of the bases of that charges increased arms. And then we are not seen them. It may happen. I dont know. Adelle believe you have a scientific basis to legacy any thoughts you have to justify that position can legally use suggests that the up 2030 predict in your written statement yet average electric bill for American Families of the 8 cheaper. And every single year during there. How the average sedate six perahia understand, is half a percent. Are you confident . How can you have confidence we would have a racial reduction in cost of electricity for america. We feel pretty confident that data indicates Energy Efficiency is one of the least expensive most effective ways of reducing Carbon Pollution the states will take a advantage of. I agree that Energy Efficiency as a bipartisan issue. If you maintenance window of and did the other thing, we would have a much slower cost of electricity. Senator white house. Inky very much, madam share. My friend, senator sessions was speaking. I pulled up the story from the birmingham news. Its two years old, august or its off. Again named bert slauson in birmingham one of only 27 residents of customers of Alabama Power selling solar in the alleges the back to the grid with his full of some. Across the country and across the glow solar energy is spreading spurred by falling prices for equipment engineers incentives from governments and utilities. Drove across the border and solar arrays star springfield. A national leader. In georgia the first largescale Solar Development came on line this summer with plans for future projects expected to boost future generation. Alabama finishes at or near the bottom and sores surveys. It would seem that there might be some potential. It would be great, the answers to ellis most of the states. Well, we will certainly see about that. The cost is coming down. Like concern is that when the alternative to the solar is to burn coal there are costs of that the rest of us have to bear that are not in that decision anywhere. If you are in the count and europe during the books for a family or for business pick you have to look after the two sides to the ledger. You look at what the cards are, the incumbent when the and you get the bottom line. During the course of this area believe Little Village of one side of the ledger. As if our highest and most important goal in this exercise was to make sure that coal plant kept running. I think that the epa has tried to look at both sides of the ledger, looked across and look to a benefit. And on a net basis when you actually do accounting for the cost of this looking at both sides of the ledger and not just a 1sided view, what do you get as your net assessment of whether this will be good or bad for our economy and people. Its a net benefit of somewhere between 48 per unit and 84 billion. 48,000,000,084,000,000,000. Thats correct. Per year. Per year. Sold presumably it will have added up to considerably more than an overturned and burned. That would be the minimum. It gets a lot bigger. Very much so. And i just want to say, a concern of my colleagues chairman. I know that the senator barrasso is representing the state of wyoming. In the the state of wyoming has a significant coal economy. I believe that a billion dollars of the revenues of the state of wyoming come into its coffers from that industry. If there will be an interruption of that then senator breaux so is every reason to be concerned page every reason to expect rest of us to listen to his concerns have drive to work with him to see what we can do to help. What i cannot have is to have a dialogue in which wyoming gets its concerns belated but has no interest whatsoever in what is happening in rhode island. We have very serious asthma problems, 10 inches of sea level rise, winter flounder fisheries is virtually gone, prospects for having a ski industry are of operating its not much talk about it is there and we would like to keep up with the evidence appears to be from the estimates we have seen that connecticut, new york, massachusetts will lose their spirit if they lose theirs it is unlikely to the island will be as a luxury of snow. I have real costs on our side he will bear in mind that the cost like enchanted, actually our race the other side of the ledger and pure economic value by a loss. Those were 800 crosses. And the benefits of those are tremendous. But i dont purchase of billions of dollars apart by for and we can sure the benefits that we will achieve end stepping up climate. Devonshire cover if there is that turned a benefit it would seem to me reasonable that you could find a way to deliver some of that but it back to wilmington. To pretend that this problem, they cant do it we cant do that if we continue his pretense that coal is not our rain people as well as. Senator, thank you for your cards solution. I see senator sanders. I wrote to my round and then turned big gavel over i want to serine, a Center Sessions told you the you dont run america. Im not taking the brunt. No. Let the record show, you dont think you run america. Are you in implementing the Clean Air Act . Yes. Was there and in danger of finding this said that too much Carbon Pollution is a danger . Yes. Can you summarize for as the major dangers of Carbon Pollution . Kirsten major dangers of identified in the in danger of finding where the dangers related to increased temperature , increased floods to increased droughts, disease that is related to he strokes. There are a number of impacts associated with the changing climate. Is it your responsibility to protect the Clean Air Act and to protect clean air, clean water, safe drinking water, isnt that what used or that you would do . Yes, i did, and i meant it. I know you meant it. I just want to say to your colleagues, you know, for all the bluster on the other side about how, you know, mr. Mccarthy is doing is dangerous, poolside with the epa please let me just read other groups that support epa Carbon Pollution standards. What are want to say to everyone in the audience where they come out on this, what you to think when i mention these names who these people really fight for. Of the alliance of nurses for help the environment, the American Academy of pediatrics from the American Lung association, the American Medical Association and to read the record Public Health association, the american thoracic society, the asthma and Allergy Foundation of america, chicago physicians for social responsibility, the Cleveland Clinic as a center, Health Care Without harm, National Association of county and City Health Officials to a National Hispanic medical association, National Medical association, national verses united trust for americas health. Ask unanimous consent to put this list and the record. I think if everyone listens of this you would say they represent the American People, the children, families. So and is very, very key. I also would like to know are sorry that some intercessions had to leave it, but Hurricane Katrina and 05 cost taxpayers one never 25 billion piperidine sandy, has Center Sanders said, cost 60 million. No, i think this whole country live through those disasters. We want to mitigate those disasters in prison and his what your rule is about where precisely, i want to make a point. My colleagues, want to make a point. My colleagues, want to make a point. This is my porridge, and i think it gets overlooked my colleagues are certain informed on this. I just think this is one other huge piece of deprivation that is rather new to the debate. Under this proposal and 2030 air pollution benefits, the other pollution benefits will total 62 billion per year. What does that mean . Reduction of particular matter, 50,000ton reduction direction of sulfur dioxide, 425,000ton reduction. Nitrogen dioxide, 410,000 reduction. This is huge, and this speaks to the issue is senator white house put to, that we can move to clean energy or clean up the energy we have, which i believe is possible. And save our kids, some of the families, save our health, premature death, asthma, missed work, missed school. I want to say the ministers are mccarthy, i cant tell you how much appreciate your taking your job. You and of little hand in it. I want to say, new did you would step up to the plate to the you had the experience of working across party lines, that you really have in your heart exactly why he wanted to do this work a little help of family and, frankly, our economy and our leaders. I just cant think of anyone else he could do better. Wanted to say that. I want to say even though my colleagues are not here from the republican side, they were respectful of you. Appreciate that. But i also agree with senator white house and senator sanders. Having the argument about what is clear as can be. I am pleased with this hearing. 70 percent of the American People agreed with that of law and the gavel over to senator sanders and suggest that we sit over here and finishes hearing. I need to go to a meeting. I think everybody. I especially think the people yeartodate little ones that actually were pretty geared so that no, i appreciate everybody being here. Rinse a lot. Senator sanders, the gavel and timer yours. Thank you so much for what youre doing on this issue whenever they chanted mccarthy does not run the world war america i just want to make a few points in and then give them over to senator winehouse. And its just two points, and im sorry my republican colleagues arrive here. A what to understand there was some argument by the senator from women about how will the liberals have course you and to moving forward in this correction. I find it is really remarkable that my republican colleagues would dare to raise the issue of Campaign Finance and the amount of money focused on putting into the political process. Let me recite a few facts for the record. According to the center for responsive politics in 2013 the world gas and Coal Industries invested at least 170 million in lobbying the federal government. According to the center for responsive politics to where and the tories 12 election cycle the same industry spent more than 93 million in recorded Campaign Contributions and enormous number which is itself brought by the amount of money invested in dark money, super pak spending. Then we go to another level that is hard to understand. We have the brothers to work today as a family worth 80 billion beta spent hundreds of balloons of dollars on political campaigns and setting up think tanks. And they are doing that in this election as well. According to the Washington Post and the center for responsive politics, where did they get their money . Unblock they have invested for under 7 billion according to the Washington Post supporting conservative fossil friendly candidates in the 2012 election. Is there money coming into the political process . The answer is yes, but that money is clearly torre by the amount of money coming in him crow and the fossil fuels industry. My would also add that i do find it remarkable that some of my republican colleagues in this debate have expressed there deep concern about the needs of lowincome people and the elderly. And i would remind the people of this country that these are the same folks whose compassion and love of lowincome people prevents the beckham working to raise the minimum wage so people can have a living wage, allows them to make massive cuts in the prior written which provides fuel assistance a lowincome people. Many of them are on record as making massive cuts in medicaid, medicare, trying to end Social Security to approach us Social Security. The concerns today about the needs of lowincome people might be held up to some question. Senator white house, did you want have anything to that . One last question for the administration. The well take the position that the costs of this regulation are dwarfed by the benefits commander think that is the epa judgment is from. I also take the position that it is not fair for people to always look at one side of the ledger in evaluating this legislation. The kansas look at the interest of a couple. Then need to look at america more broadly, and there are a lot of those on the other side of that equation of foreign coal releases a harm pretend we can work in rational ways to try to balance that but please dont pretend that my son does not exist. The third is that there is legitimate concerns and then there is concern that is before rhetorical purposes. Then there is probably a little bit of a blend between the two, but if we look at the his dream that epa has seen of industry reaction to proposed in vermin regulation all four Republican Former epa administrators who testified in those very fees indicated that over and over the industry concerns were exaggerated. They did not prove true in that the actual facts of. That was because they were exaggerated for rhetorical purposes at the beginning of that was because innovation was brought to bear to reduce cost. Both can be true, but let me ask you. You have been in this business or long term at the state as well as federal level. You have worked for republican governors before. What is your view on what the track record is ben of industry projections and warnings about the cost and consequences of environmental regulation. They always exaggerates the cost. Theyll listen the project environmental benefits of being contrary to Economic Growth and goals been hidden it just has not come true. And so i think one of the points that we have not talked about a little bit that you hit on is one of the great benefits of looking at setting up a course for Climate Change that is longterm and flexible. What we are actually sending is a tremendous investment single. With the United States values and cares about it will unleash innovation and investment money. This is not about race cover at the end of a pipe or a smokestack. This is really about investing in things people care about, investing in things that people will make money on. One of the great things, frankly, about regulating is seeing how the regulated community, will star in the process. But in the end it appears set out to make money the great old american way. You see that this proposal is designed to be moderate based upon practical and affordable, but the vision minded, the direction it is going to take to my think we will be significantly more benefit than we are requiring because were asking for the things that the American Public actually wants to spend money on. Lest waste chemical energy, jobs, Economic Growth this with this is all about. As you can sell, i am pretty proud of it as a proposal. I no listen to folks, but in the and this is going to be something i am hoping we will all be proud of. If i could pick up on the senators questioned, administrator, what i hear you saying is you believe the United States could be a leader in the world in new technologies which help us reduce Greenhouse Gas emissions and in the process see significant economic development. I will tell you just in one area in vermont we have put some money, federal money into whether position. And reduced fuel bills for people who kept their fuel bills by 32 percent of the cut Greenhouse Gas emissions. We have created jobs in the area, and i suspect appointed is that once industry is moving in terms of Sustainable Energies we can be a leader in providing the technology some and in the process could the world wide Companies Moving as well. Is that kind of what your saying. Sets were meant to say which he said it better than i did. While last question before i give it back, again, the issue of money and politics as the price of this hearing with the suggestion that environmental folks are pouring huge sums of money in. Do you have any thoughts on the amounts of money we are seeing in lobbying, can treat Campaign Contributions is not your issue of lobbying that comes from the big energy companies. Let me hit the issue. This has to do with the New York Times article which has been given surprising credibility. I know how hard there a great staff at epa worked to design this rule basically from whole cloth listening to states and utilities and Energy Regulators and environmental regulators and stakeholders from all walks of life the playwright extraordinarily proud of the work they put it. They did not sleep for virtually any night well for a month. We worked weekends protect themselves you, i had two hours of meetings on this will alone every week for the past i dont know how many months. I think it is a discredit to them to suggest that somehow this was designed miraculously into one group many months ago and he just had it in our pocket ready to unveil. This was the result of hard work , lots of listening to and 40 years of history. And thats what this is all about. And the results of a process in which the electric utility industry, the coal industry, the fossil fuel industry, the chamber of commerce and others also have their input. Are well also guarantee you that i have met many more times with utilities than i have the nrdc. Thank you. By way of brief closing statement, i just want to thank senator sanders are raising this issue. I. Du clamans ps every year and every year, every week on the seventh floor. And this will come going to be talking about precisely the point to ureys. He looked back at our history, and chair has been a very constant, strong harpooned of papyrus of activity. Many of our colleagues who are so here have had promised histories of engagement with significant, but partisan climate was a mission after 22 noon he sees that a repeat of bipartisan activity is the outline. If you looked at what happened in the early 2010 that might explain why it suddenly ended. You find a Supreme Court decision called Citizens United that allowed of unlimited corporate money or limited billionaire money to bombard our politics. The way people often think about that is they came in and be tempted democrats on behalf of republicans. This is a partisan thing. I have heard over and over republican colleagues, what are you complaining about . Theyre spending more money against us than you put him in there has been a time when actually the unaccountable anonymous start my the Citizens United of least was being snatched more for a republican primaries against republicans and it was against democrats. In fact, i think it, it has suppress debate and have a corrosive effect of our politics and suspended was over many years it proud, bipartisan tradition so i think that mr. Mccarthy for being here, all of her and courage. Thankyou very much. With that we adjourn the hearing. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] about. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] coming up, the director of the center for disease ieden, on, tom fr antibiotic resistant infections. Thousands die each year. He spoke at the National Press club. His comments you and call to action at 7 00 eastern. Mcfarland talks about president obamas foreignpolicy initiative and immigrant children crossing the border. At theke last week western conservative summit and you can watch her remarks at 8 00 eastern. Tonight, on book tv i thought it would be compelling to tell the story of a white family and a black family with the same name who come from the same place and follow them from slavery through the civil war, reconstruction, jim crow, civil rights, up until today. And compare and contrast. Chris tomlinson on his familys slave owning history in texas and how the legacy affects society. He spoke with the brother of living in thomason about their familys lineage. Tonight at 10 00 eastern. Week, the Senate VeteransAffairs Committee held a confirmation hearing for Robert Mcdonald to be the next secretary at the department of veterans affairs. He answered questions from senators about why he wants the job. You dont need this job. In the midst of all of these problems, in the midst of partisanship why do you want this job . It is a question we have talked a lot about. I think i can make a difference. I think that my entire career, whether it was starting at west point or being in the 82nd Airborne Division one of the most advised it has paired me for this task. I think there is no higher calling. This is an opportunity for me to make it and in the lives of veterans. If not me, who . That is just some of the confirmation hearing. You can hear it at 10 35 eastern on cspan or anytime online at cspan. Org sugg. Esting that look at the escalating violence in iraq. This is hosted by the Atlantic Council. And with the threat of isis or whatever i should call it today could forge a coalition among states in certain ways that rarely see eye to eye. We really want to push this dimension of the overall question. I am particularly pleased to welcome to the Atlantic Council his excellency, ambassador littman family. Ambassador lukman faily thank you, ambassador, for coming. Iraq is really at a breaking point, as many of you know. Haley headlines illustrating ongoing conflict and battles. Syria continues its conflict, and isis certainly appears to be making significant gains in various ways. Despite efforts for a more inclusive government, which many see as the key to helping to it doese the country, not look like it is heading in that direction. It looks increasingly like a. Ore intensive sectarian war isis continues to challenge iraqi forces and have been successful in taking key territory, including oilfields am including the city of mosul, as many of you know, and there is an ongoing battle for parts of tikrit, almost