Transcripts For CSPAN3 Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20160310

Not that still makes sense in todays market. They are putting together that work plan. Will be more than happy when that process is completed to obviously provide you Additional Information on precisely what were thinking. The key here is to make sure that the Playing Field is level between those who are owners and those who are producers to make sure theres not an unfair advantage in the relationship and to make sure in difficult times that those who have invested a lot of hard earned resource and time are treated fairly if a contract is terminated order for some reason a contract is modified. We have had examples where folks have been dealt a very serious and difficult blow in tight circumstances. The Avian Influenza situation was important. Particularly those who lost birds. We found not all the payments were going to the producers who were economically suffering as well. We want to make sure its a fair and equitable relationship. Thats the purpose of the review of the rules. What do you. He picture the tiexpect the time to be . What schedule are you on . I suspect some of the rules may be finalize and some may be proposed. G g given the nature of the concerns expressed in the past. I would hope we would get work plans completed and something over relatively soon. I would hope we would get that done sometime in the early spring. Then theres the review by omb which can take sometimes up to 90 days or longer. Then hopefully, that process is expedited so that sometime in late summer, early fall were in a position to provide information specifically to the public for their comment and review. At that point, any adjustments that need to be made can be made. Hopefully by the time the year ends, we know what the rules will be or what they are proposed to be. Mr. Secretary, you mentioned avian flu. Is there something this is a topic of conversation that you and i had one on one. Certainly in the hearing that we had a year ago on your budget, this was a significant issue and concern. Is there something that usda has learned that we would be in a better position should this kind of occurrence reappear . And then if you would bring me bring us up to date on whats transpired in other countries in regard to our exports in regard to avian flu. Well, we have learned a great deal, mr. Chairman. First of all, we learned that necessity of making earlier determinations and quicker determinations. So we beefed up our laboratory capacity. We would like to make determinations within a 24 to 48hour time period when something arises on a farm. We would then like to be able to work with the producer to depopulate within 24 hours. We learned there are a multitude of ways in which that can be done under each particular circumstance. We learned the need to preposition assets or to have an wearness and understanding of how disposal will be handled in advance as opposed to after the fact which can delay disposal which can create greater risk. We learned our indemnification systems need to be altered to reflect a more appropriate balance. We were cleaning up situations in some of the facilities that hadnt been cleaned up for a decade as opposed to cleaning up the specific cause or the problem with Avian Influenza. There was a better balanced approach there. The difference between providing the owner of the birds allindem equitable distribution. We learned the necessity of constantly researching this. Its constantly mutating and evolving. And we have learned the necessity of at least having prepositioned vaccine. Not that we would use it. But there may be a circumstance or situation where it is appropriate. We have sort of war gamed what that would look like and what we would have to do in order to utilize vaccine. In terms of the trade issue, we are seeing many of those who initially banned all poultry seal sales are beginning to understand the need to look at this regionally. We have seen some that have become even state specific and some bans that have been very specific to the county or counties. So we have seen an expansion of opportunity, about 77 of the poultry exports are currently in the right place. Were still working with some of our friends in china, for example. For the most part, people have taken the right approach to regionalization or statewide bans as opposed to countrywide bans. It seems as if you learned a lot. Which i assume means better usda, the federal government, better prepared for another occurrence should it arise. Is there any legislative changes that are required to help you accomplish a greater or better response . Well, i would only say, mr. Chairman, i think the research aspect of usda needs to continue to be beefed up. Were constantly dealing with things like this. I dont know that we necessarily need a legislative change. If there are, i will be happy to get information to you. I dont know of anything off the top of my head. Thank you very much. Senator merkley . Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Secretary. Were well along in the journey now. An eightyear journey serving president obama. I believe you are the only member of the cabinet who has been there from the starting line and is still with us. I assume planning to go across the finish line. I want to thank you for these eight years of service. Thank you. And as you indicated by the chairman, i know you wrote a lot on so many issues. Certainly in your introduction, you mentioned food, water and shelter. That is everything from snap to Water Purification programs to housing programs. It really reflects on the essential functions that your department has for millions and millions of americans. I just wanted to note, your march 7th speech where you talked about called upon congress to pass mandatory gmo labeling. I know you and i have a very different definition of what that would look like. But i stand with you shoulder to shoulder in that cause of mandatory labeling. I wanted to turn to the housing component. One of the issues we had last year is that under rent al assistan assistance, we where ran out of money to pay the share of the rent that we were responsible for as the federal government. That appears to be fully addressed in the budget for fy17. But i just wanted to raise it and ask if people across the country who were involved in providing projectbased housing can rest assured that weve got did covered this time. Senator, i think we do. Its what i have been told. I certainly appreciate the work of yourself and members of the this committee to resolve that aspect of our rental assistance program. We have, as you know, the other issue of maturing mortgages and loan payoffs which will result potentially unless we deal with this in a lot of the units coming out of the program. Which case, you are going to have a lot of families looking for housing and not be able to afford it. You turned to my second topic. We have recently been able to get some data from the department on maturing mortgages in oregon. Its important that across the nation we know when mortgages are maturing so that nonprofits can attempt to buy them and places where they would go to a higher market race. I know your team has been working on this issue. I just wanted to emphasize how hard it is to recould have they are hourecover this if we lose out of the affordable portfolio. I worked on a Program Years ago. It was a very similar situation, only in urban settings. Now we have this in rural settings. Anything that you can do im sure many members would say the same to assist the department in trying to make sure we identify the expiring use projects and do Everything Possible to preserve them, certainly, would like to see happen. Senator, 75 of these loans potentially will become due and paid off in the next ten years. So thats 75 of the units. One thing that you may want to think about is the ability of vouchering those folks who are in a position where their unit ultimately gets out of the program. Another way that were looking at is being able to extend the mortgages and refinancing so that the improvements can be made to the property with the savings that results from extension and refinancing. So there are some creative solutions. We need to get focused on this. I look forward to exploring with the subcommittee the possibilities. This will be very important to the Housing Stock in america. I want to turn to the Rural Energy Savings program. The Energy Saving program, consist was we could create jobs in Rural America if people could take loans on their electric bill and be able to replace their windows or add ensinsulat. It put a lot of people to work. Often the Energy Savings would pay for the improvements themselves. Plus, virtually all the products are made in america. So we get more bang for the buck, because we get the local Construction Contractor employed but it also creates jobs in american manufacturing. We had the initial program funded last year. I was wondering if you have any information on whether it get it stood up on its feet and have it running. Senator, as you know, we worked with a program that was similar to what you proposed with an Interest Rate that was high, higher. And we were in the process of implementing that and learning from that. Recognizing that there were some serious learning curve for what we were dealing with. We recently announced a statewide initiative in vermont where we learned quite a bit. The proposal that you were the leader on, we expect and anticipate to stand up this spring. We would anticipate and expect there will be an interest an interest free or zero interest program. Now that we know how to set it up, i think we will see more of the projects. Because i think it is popular. I think theres a great deal of potential there. I can tell you in oregon, the employment rate has not rebounded at all in rural airs the way it has in urban areas. I know this the case across the country. Its a Win Win Program on several levels. Help us fix the fire situation and that situation in rural oregon will change. Thank you, chairman. Secretary vilsack, i want to join merkel and moran in appreciating your service, appreciating really how much you bring to this job i think every year more than the year before. Its amoazing how much there is to learn. Im impress by how you dedicated yourself to learning how important this is. The future challenges and opportunities for agriculture is great if not greater than they have ever been. Hopefully, we can figure out how to make the most of that. Just two or three pretty quick questions here. One is, i continue to hear from our friends in agriculture the desire for more streamlining in the reporting process. My good friend, who is the chairman of the Missouri Farm Bureau was telling me he has to go into the fsa office and file his report on Crop Insurance. Then he has to go to his Crop Insurance agent and then the agent has to refile the same information with Risk Management. Are we making any progress in trying to steam line that time cost both to federal employees and to the people that they work for . We are, senator. Last year we launched and this year we implemented fsaplus, which is allowing folks to access records at home. This year we will do we started with a Pilot Project in iowa and illinois to test market how we would be able to have better coordination between rma and fsa and the reporting. We then extended that to a number of other states. Now we are prepared this year to go nationwide. The concerns that he has expressed i think by the end of this year he will be much happier than he has been. He will also be able to access all of his records, awful his maps, all of his information from his home computer with fsaplus. I know this is a project that has been out there all the time youve been running the department. Frustrating and challenging for all of us. I look forward to seeing it come to a conclusion. You will remember my mom and dad were dairy farmers. I come to this next topic with my own personal point of view, which is pretty strongly held. I believe that there are significant parts of the country now where packaged bottled water is being offered as a substitute for milk in school cafeterias. Histor historical historically, usda recommended schoolchildren consume 2 1 2 to 3 servings of milk every day because the potassium and vitamin d and calcium. I believe the facts thats an accurate statement about water as an alternative. Is packaged bottled water reimbursable in the National School Lunch Program . I believe it is. I dont for a fact know that. We can check. I do know that we are encouraging more dairy products. It doesnt necessarily have to be milk. Greek yogurt is now a protein substitu substitute. Theres a lot of interest. Were trying to be responsive to what School Districts are asking us to provide them with. And for. I will check on the reimbursement issue. Im not a big advocate for us buying water as one of the alternatives at lunch. There are other ways to get water, i would think. Usda being funds being used, you think thats through the National School Lunch Program then . Or might be and you are going to check and get back to us on that. I will check on that. Senator mccakackaskel wrote letter. Our concerns are the remaining Funds Available under phase two of the connects america fund critically important that rural constituents all over our letter was focused on missouri have the same access to fiberoptics and other advanced Broadband Networks as their urban counterparts at a comparable price. We have conveyed those same sentiments to the chairman. Thats our hope is that as they look at connect america and some of the other programs that we are will continue to see an expansion of broadband. Also we believe its going to be important for us to continue to stay in the game from a grant and loan perspective. Thats why our budget has an increase in the broadband access. All those things matter. Maybe social access may lead to my last question, which is one you and i talked after the president asked you to play a leadership role in this effort to curb heroin and opioid use on the floor of the senate this morning as were trying to move through this bill, i made the point that actually more people die of drug overdoses now in Rural America than urban america. More people die outside a metropolitan statistical area, even if they live quite a than they do if they are in a metropolitan statistical area, even though that area may be far from the hub of that. Do you want to talk a little bit about the challenge to Rural America of this epidemic of opioid and heroin use and overdose . Its a complicated problem. Its one that requires a series of steps. We have to have more prescribers trained in the appropriate prescription of pain medication. I think we have to have frankly reasonable expectations on the part of patients as well in terms of precisely what doctors can and cant do in terms of pain relief. I think its going to be important for us particularly in rural areas to have First Responders to have access to the overdose reversal drugs that are available that are nasal spray, more readily available. In fact, we might want to consider a general prescription that would allow family members to have access to that reversal drug just in case knowing if a loved one is in trouble being able to respond quickly. Its going to be necessary for us to look at ways in which we can encourage states, specifically the state of missouri, to have a more a better Monitoring Program so that we can prevent doctor shopping and we have int interoperability. Its important to look at ways in which we can increase support for medication assisted treatment and having perhaps not just limited to physicians but perhaps physician assistants or some other medical professional, particularly in rural areas, involved in the prescribing in materials of meeting the needs. You mentioned broadband, telemedicine and access to services may be a way of providing Services Without necessarily a brick and investment. We need to understand services are covered by insurance. Theres i think a lack of understanding about that. We frankly need to engage the entire community, the faithbased community, in making Recovery Support efforts more readily available. I know in my own personal circumstances, my mother struggled. She would never have been able to recover but for aa and some of the support that she got from people similarly situated. There arent places today in many Rural Communities where those meetings can take place. Faithbased organizations have a particularly interesting role and opportunity there. It takes a broad approach. I think the administration looks forward to working with you and others to make sure we put the resources behind all of these solutions. Because it is a hproblem and people are dieing and thousands hundreds of thousands of families are being impacted and affected by this. Thank you for your leadership there and other areas, mr. Secretary. Chairman, thank you for time. Thank you, senator blunt. Senator chester. Thank you, mr. Chairman. For allowing me to speak and giving these glasses so i can read. Its good to have you here, secretary vilsack. Im going to start out right now with a station in sydney. I dont know all the information about it. It was just pointed tout eed o today by a producer from eastern montana that its being repurposed or potentially maybe taken a step towards closure. I want to get some input from you on whats going on. If you dont know, you can certainly get back to me. These guys do incredible research and a incredible facility. On soft lie, other pests and the issues with barley scab showing up. These Research Facilities are important. Can you give me an idea what the plans are for that . Go ahead. The budget that we propose requested an increase. Part of that would be targeted towards the facility that you mentioned. Currently supports 41 scientists. I dont know of any plan to reduce that number or reduce the support for the 41 folks. Obviously, Research Projects come in. Some get concluded and new ones begin. Im not sure that thats necessarily repurposing. Perhaps theres a different focus given a particular disease or pest. I dont know of any desire to close or to reduce the importance of that. Thats what i wanted to hear. You answered that very, very well. The research for smith leaver dollars is flat at about flat at 30244 respectively. These are very, very important. Could you shed some light. Is the use of those also flattened out . Is demand for exceed . Its tell me whats going on. Its a combination of having an overall number for our budget and the challenge in our budget where fire suppression, wic, rental assistance and food safety eat up 50 of the budget. Often when those items have to be increased, it impacts the other 50 . Its a fact that we are trying to look at our competitive Grant Programs in a way of encouraging more collaboration between universities and many universities are receiving resources from that that ultimately help to support the university and support the capacity university. Its a balance. I got you. I think that youve done some positive things for research in here. You know, you know how Important Research is. For farmers to do trial and error is a good way to go broke. Moving forward, you are in office for another ten months. Im in office for one for another day for sure. I serve at the pleasure of one guy. One never knows what might happen to you. I stand corrected. Moving forward, are you confident that this budget that you are putting forward, those priorities on research particularly will be heading in the right direction moving into the next administration, whoever that might be . I am confident. I think we have addressed both shortterm and longterm, traditional and nontraditional challenges that agriculture will face. This is an incredibly complex and changing world that our farmers are living in. And i think we have figured out a way in which we can provide them the assistance and help if our Research Budget is adequately funned. I want to talk about Rural Development and infrastructure. Critically important in Rural America, as you well know. 244 million for loans and grants to rural businesses. Tripling of funding to broadb d broadband. Which is really important. Theres a reduction though in grants and loans for water and Waste Disposal programs. If you look around this country i know im preaching to the choir here. These systems are for the most part wore out. So why the reduction . Because in the past several years we have reduced the business industry loan programs. We have reduced and not adequately funded some its about balance. Number two, we are looking for leveraged opportunities. Were trying to get the private sector more engaged in investing in the water projects. Were finding there is interest in this. Pension plans, some of the private investment that we have been cultivating at usda to leverage our skwarcarce resourc are seeing 3 or 4 payment on a 30year loan attractive. We are actually working to try to look at our own portfolio to see whether or not we could maximize the value of that portfolio and create an incentive for the private sector to invest hupds of millions if not billions of dollars. It doesnt necessarily mean that less work is going to get done. We have to be creative about where the financing will come from. We are being very creative at usda. We appreciate that creativity. I just want to talk about something. We had a round table that the chairman and Ranking Member put on. It was a couple weeks ago. One of the things thats going on in Rural America that i also know you know about is depopulation in a big, big way. Were seeing Rural Communities dry up. I think faster rate than i have seen in my lifetime. In the last 40 years since i graduated from high school, the little town i am if you go by enrollment in the high school is twothirds smaller than when i went too high school there. More than twothirds. I know theres Big Equipment out. I know that its more efficient and we do have more technology which makes things move. I mean, when i was where i live its different in every area. 1,000 acres was average farm. Ive got folks around me that farm 20,000 and north of that even. So is this just something thats going to continue . Or are there things that we can do to encourage smaller farms maybe or encourage more people moving into rural . You got schools closing down. You got cities that have to build schools. Its all sorts of social problems that all cost money. Senator, american agriculture increased productivity 170 , with 22 million fewer farms on 26 less land. We did not krocompete a compani economy. We now have a companion economy. It involves local and regional food systems. We supported nearly 1,000 infrastructure supporting 162,000 producers. Were beginning to see that prosper. Were seeing conservation. Howard buffett came to our forum and talked about the need for people to understand that conservation can be profitable. He is proving in in his operation. The biobased economy, the ability to transfer and produce a multitude of materials and chemicals and fabrics and fibers and fuels from a biobased system. Were headed in the right direction. One, the Unemployment Rate is coming down, which is good. Poverty rate in Rural America in the last years has come down faster than any preceding 25 years. Were beginning slowly to turn around. Were not going to get out of the fix you mentioned overnight. We didnt get into it overnight. I think we are headed in the right direction. Im hopeful this companion economy that you all have helped to support with farm bills and budgets continues. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator from montana. Montana and montana. All good. Thanks for being here today. Agriculture in montana is the number one industry. 5 billion a year economy for us. Last year i was pleased to be able to work with the montana Grain Growers to reform the grains standards act to ensure farmers are protected from grain inspections like what happened at port of vancouver. I remember farmers jumping off the combine running to meet with me to talk about the crisis. I was glad to see we got it resolved. Im looking forward to make sure the new law is implemented. I want to talk about bruce alosis. I live north of Yellowstone National park. Theres a significant bison within Yellowstone Park and the e ecosystem. My question,how is your department and afis in particular, coordinating and cooperating with state agencies in montana like the fish, wild life and parks of montana and the department of life stock on disease management efforts particularly regarding this. Well, a number of years ago we entered into an arrangement with the folks at yellowstone, the state officials and others to address this. I can get you more information, senator, on the success of that. But i think we were able to isolate and provide a much better environment relative to the bison and other animals. So i would be happy to get you more detail about that. I know we have been working collaboratively with folks on this. Speaking of collaboration im going to throw something out there to consider. In prior years there was extensive collaborative effort. I think actually we had better communication. A lot of moving parts here between state, federal agencies and private groups. It was called the greater yellowstone committee. It brought together stakeholders, including representatives from representa idaho and usda and the interiorry, working group improved communication further efforts to provide sound science surrounding wildlife and disease management throughout the great area. Unfortunately this effort lapse in 2006 ten years ago and no similar working group fill that void. Ive heard concerns talking to farmers, ranchers and steak holders the result is a deterioration of communication between agencieagencies, federa and private groups regarding diverse management. Would the usda be supportive or reestablishing the inner Agency Committee or perhaps something similar. Senator, appreciate you bringing this up. My understanding was that we were in the process of a focus collaborative effort and we need a way to be more collaborative as a working group or whatever it is. We have been trying to stress collaboration with the local folks at every level. So if thats not happening, we need to make it happen. I appreciate that. That would be an outcome from the hearing, we could certainly have the communication and bring the concern. The word from back home is it really was valuable. I want to shift gears and talk about whats going on in the area of gmo and biotech. Last weekend you were quoted at a conference in front of gmos stating im here to say they are safe to consumers. With that in mind and not with standing marking efforts are the hurdles of getting leg station is a top pick of discussion. Are there any safety concerns or any sound sicientific research would warrant the labeling of gmos . No, but thats not obviously the issue. The issue is that the folks in states have made decisions based on referendums and state legislators to create labeling systems that are applicable within state borders. And that creates a circumstance and situation as you know where were going to have a hodgepodge circumstance where individual states and or individual companies are going to make their own decision about what they are going to put on the package. Its going to create confusion. Its going to created a digs l expense. It doesnt have to be. And there is a way in my view where you can respect a consumers know and the process by which their food has been produced but doing it in a way that doesnt convey the wrong issue of the food. To be clear, a decision to implement labeling but on other factors . It would be based on balancing the desire on the part of a growing amount of consumers to want to know and at the end of the day, companies in the business of selling to consumers, obviously the customer is always right kind of thing with doing it in a way that doesnt send the wrong message about the safety. In the past we labeled, we put something on the package to talk about contant or known risk. Thats not what this is about which is why i suggested the establishment of a part label process that would give consumers interested in information. I think we agree its critical, we addressed this issue in a timely manner given what is going on in vermont and i have no issue with voluntary programs that being said, i believe the usdas priority is making determinations based on sound science regarding the safety of Biotech Products within its jurisdiction not on marketing fo efforts that have bearing on floood safety. Im trying to avoid a chaotic circumstance and i hope there are at least 60 of you that feel the same way i do. All right. Thank you. Were pleased to have the committee char man. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Thank you to the panel for being here and helping us sort through the request we have for funding of various activities administered by the department of agriculture and one of the bright spots in what appeared to be some questions that all seem to be having trouble being administered or costing too much or contributing to the deficit, all kind of bad things, but what we found out is that the department of agriculture has won a big victory in the labeling of domestically produced fish, farm fish, grown and sold in the United States that were having to compete with fish from overseas that were mislabeled or suggested that they were superior in someways to domestically produced fish. So thank you for the good, strong support and effort in defining the new limits and the new requirements that helped give customers and consumers an opportunity to choose. They are finding out they are choosing to buy america and thats encouraging in this day of real tough International Competition and so many areas of agriculture and Food Production and marketing. End of my speech. [ laughter ] mr. Chairman, thank you for joining us. Now recognize the senator from new mexico. Thank you very much chairman and thank you senator bill sack for your service. Im a secretary, im not a senator. Secretary. I understand. I understand. You were a governor before that and you like to get things done. Would you like those words stricken. Stricken from the record. Respectfully. You like to get things done but secretary, thank you very much for your service and thank you for being here. Just a couple things i wanted to ask your support on, the new mexico delegation recently sent you a letter in support of the navajo promise zone application submitted by the Navajo Technical University and submitted by the Navajo Nation for whats called a triable promise zone. Its an extremely high priority for me and let me tell you why here. The Navajo Nation faces significant challenges, high poverty, lack of basic in infrastructu infrastructure, lack of housing among other things. The Unemployment Rate is near 50 and an equally large percentage of the population is below the Poverty Level and they have made steady progress on economic dwpment in recent years but they really need a boost and i think this promise zone would really make a difference. As part of the president s efforts, this promise zone will help the Navajo Nation, help tackle the issues outlined in the application which ive talked about a little bit here and i simply urge you to give consideration to their request. I know there are many communities in need but few face the extremely difficult conditions we see on the Navajo Nation. Well, its one of the reasons why we have already included that area in our Strike Force Initiative but youre right, the promise zone would extend that approach to all the federal agencies. Appreciate the comments, senator, and ill take that back to the team. Secretary, could you tell me a little bit about the strike force effort there . Sure. Strike force was designed to focus on the areas of persistent poverty in the country. The reality is 85 of persistently poor areas in this country are in fact in rural areas and what we found early in the administration was that we werent doing enough work in those areas to get folks to understand how to basically apply for a program that they could get help. So we instructed our team, our fsa team, our Nutrition Team and Rural Development team to go to communities across the country where thuf,vn is persistent poverty and basically work with a Community Building organization to identify projects and needs we could address through usda programs. It is now operating in 920 counties. 21 states and several triable areas and we invested 23. 6 billion and 190,000 investments. I would imagine a significant percentage would never have been made but for the attention and work relationship. Working with over 1500 Community Building organizations and partners and its been, i think, a successful endeavor and i think that has led us to take a look at the promise zone and some place base initiatives. Thank you very much for that initiative because i have many communities in my state that i think need that kind of initiative and kind of push that youre making there. This next issue is an issue i raised last year and yet to be resolved. Two communities in new mexico are designated neighborhoods or communities within 150 miles of the u. S. , mexico border that are economically distressed. And they both have been designated colognous and ineligible for funds because of usdas formula for determining , even though they are in new mexico and dont benefit from a scity or county like el paso an not in the same state, these communities have high poverty rates, limited Public Sector funding, separated by over 40 miles from the nearest city. These Community Need Development Funds for critical housing projects, Economic Development funding, Infrastructure Improvement improvementment, the area seeing increased traffic which is post tive. Waivers have been used for similar situations in the past but were experiencing with difficulty. Would you work with me and within your authority to ensure that these two communities do not fall through the cracks and are made eligible for Rural Development assistance . Senator, as you were outlining your request, i turned to my staff to ask whether or not waivers were available and we will certainly work with you and your team to figure out if they are how to use them and if they are not, what else we could potentially do to provide because its part of our Strike Force Initiative, so we obviously are aware of the challenges and well try to find a solution to the problem. Thank you very much. I couldnt think of a better person to be secretariry of agriculture because you served as governor of a rural state. You know Rural Communities and i sure appreciate this effort in terms of the strike force and look forward to working with you. Thank you very much. Yield back, mr. Chairman. You had no time to yield back but thank you for the effort. [ laughter ] senator from north dakota. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Good to see you mr. Secretary. Thank you for your work on behalf of the farmers and ranchers. We want to make the farm bill farmer friendly as possible and thats important with low commodity prices. Were seeing the stress on thing a world in part of the formers and ranchers with the low commodity prices. In terms of making sure the bill is farmer friendly is with the National Statistic service data and i think youre already working on this with your fsa director, but in some cases, that data because there arent enough survey forms sent in for some counties, were getting a bad result. So for example, in north dakota and its not unique to north dakota, its occurring in other states, as well, iowa and i dont know about kansas but aan number of states we have counties and not enough of the survey forms that come back in so that the navs information is not used and were using Risk Management information and getting a bad result. What i mean by that is if you take counties for example in nk, logan and la moore and compare them to similar counties in terms of the average for corn, for example, for the year, if you use the nas data, excuse me, if we dont have enough nas data, were using the rma data and getting a result that doesnt correlate with like counties. Other counties that typically have the same yield, those farmers get in our payment because the rma data is so high, its disqualifying farmers in logan counties for example from getting an ark payment on corn. There are other examples around the country. We asked to be allowed to work with the fsa director in the respective state and use comparable counties that have adequate nas data so we dont get a skewed result. Very important to farmers particularly with low commodity prices. So what can you tell me in terms of your willingness to provide this flexibility . I know youre doing an inner Agency Analysis or study, i think is the right term for it but what can you do to get this fixed . As you know, the congress made the decision to do a county program as opposed to an individual program and probably did that because of the cost of the individual program and the need to generate savings in the overall program. So we obviously have to deal with the county program and have some kind of process by which we can try to treat as many of the several thousand counties were dealing with as fairly as we can. Weve come up with the proposal from the outline you addressed. If there are inadequate numbers of surveys, we ought to be focussing on making sure we get farmers to respond so we have adequate information. If we dont, we go to rma information. If we are not satisfied that thats an appropriate enough or correct, then we have empowered our state committees to basically take a look and provide some direction. So we think we have some degree of predictability and consistency without creating a circumstance where we cant address the anomaly or inaccuracy of information. Im more than happy to go back to the team and basically make sure were in a position to be able to explain why were making the decisions were making and if we cant, we obviously need to do something different. My understanding is its currently in the the inner agency review. If, in fact, the state committee is empowered to make a decision, i think thats where we need to go. Again, its making sure youre giving discretion in the field to your directors to make a good decision. Well, thats the key. A good decision we dont necessarily want to create a circumstance where everybody is not happy with whatever it is they ultimately get because then you create a very confusing circumstance and end up getting an individual program when you really by statute are directed to have a county program. There is a balance here. Im more than happy to be flexible but i think we do have to have some system. No, i hear ya. Of course, we want the nas survey forms to come in so you have adequate data and good data but where that hasnt occurred, just so that that state committee or fsa director, however you decide you want to do it is empowered to say okay, this is a nonsensical result, well make an adjustment and my question is i dont think weve gotten that response back from fsa. They are still doing the review. This has been going on since november and im asking for your help to get an answer. Well, you deserve an answer senator and well try to get you one quickly. Thank you very much, secretary. The other thing ill mention if you have reaction, thats great. Very concerned about any reductions to the support for Crop Insurance, thats the number one Risk Management tool for our farmers and youre probably not surprised to hear me say that because ive had this discussion before, but i am very concerned about that and make sure i do everything i can to support Crop Insurance and in fact, we included language in the farm bill to make sure that didnt happen. And on the positive side, though, i appreciate the support that you have provided for Ag Research Service and for nifa. That Research Area incredibly important, incredibly impactful for our farmers and ranchers. So if you have some thoughts there, i would welcome them. Just briefly on the Crop Insurance. There are two areas, one is on the preventive planning. Our Inspector General and i think the General Accounting Office have been critical of the way in which that program operates. So i think its appropriate for us to be responsive to the criticisms and what we have proposed in the budget is being responsive. On the price harvest loss option where we were proposing a slightly different arrangement between the producer, the fwovt a government and Insurance Company financing 62 of the premium, we think its probably fair to taxpayers that it be more of a 50 50 partnership. Those are two propels. I would point out since 2008 weve 8 billion excuse me, 12 billion, since 208 12 billion is taken out of Crop Insurance support and you want a robust number providing Crop Insurance to have a competitive market and we have to be careful or youre not going to have enough competition to have a robust market. Thats true. Projections for return on investment is 18 . For which they have to cover all of their costs. Not all of their costs because thats in addition to the there is also an additional resource for ano. Again, at the end of the day, if they cant make enough money to continue to stand out business and cover their cost, you will have fewer and fewer agencies and not have a robust market or Insurance Group out there providing crop coverage. Im not sure that either one of these two propels necessarily impacts the issue that youve raised but im certainly sensitive to the fact and thats why we continually look at the return on investment and had a couple years where it was difficult but were beginning to see more profitability in that part of the operation and i think at 15 or 13 last year, 18 projected for this year. Well, again, i just i appreciate that. I understand your point of view, though i dont agree with it, but i do want to again emphasize that Crop Insurance support has been reduced by 12 million since 2008. There are a lot of programs across the federal government that have not contributed as much in terms of help of finding savings of Crop Insurance. You dont have to tell me about reductions, senator. My overall operating budget is less than 2010. Secretary, thanks for your willingness to take a look at the nas data. Appreciate it. Senator merckly. Thank you. I thought i would turn to a piece of the picture i hear about a lot that hasnt been mentioned yet and thats rural broadband. Everywhere i go in oregon, folks note the importance of it to the success of their Rural Communities. So i wanted to explore this a little bit because as i understand it, usda recently rewrote the broad band loan Program Regulations to reflect the changes in the 2014 farm bill and it really has kind of just gotten going but i believe youre now proposing eliminating this, meanwhile, the Grant Program which has increased is a distinctively different program. The Grant Program serves a small number of poor unconnected communities, the number of communities that focused on last well, in 15 was five communities and so i think theres concern that theres going to be a sacrifice of a program that serves large expanses for assisting a small number of communities and whether or not that really reflects the demand for rural broad band and probably a lot more thinking behind it and i thought i would give you a chance to explain it. Well, senator, appreciate the question. What we have found is that it is not impossible for companies to secure loans but to the extend they can get grant funds that either reduced and the amount they have to borrow or reduce the loan, the Interest Rate on the loan, that makes it much more likely that they are in a position to do significant improvements and expansions. So listening to what we believe the industry is telling us is necessary to get more broad band in more places, combining that with hopefully what the fcc is attempting to do and hoping that it works properly to create more incentive and more resource for expansion of broad band, the combination of those two. Thats why were proposing an increase in the Grant Program because we think that will generate more activity than simply a loan program. Well, thank you for that explanation and i look forward to tracking that, because it is of so much importance. My colleague from wisconsin has arrived, and i want to turn this over to her but just closing out my comments, thank you again for your service over seven plus years and counting and theres many more questions i have that ill be submitting to you for the record but i dont need to address them at this point. Thank you. The senator from wisconsin. My intention is to have the senator from wisconsin ask her questions. I have a few followup questions and we would anticipate concluding the hearing. I think the chair, mr. Secretary in wisconsin water issues are on everyones mind as Rural Communities are facing challenges to protect equality. Counties in wisconsin Northeastern Region have nitrate and bacteria contamination in the ground water. Testing is showing more and more vie pretty wells are contaminated. Groups are working with the state department to talk about longterm solutions but as deliberations continue, rural families remain without Immediate Solutions to these very pressing concerns and the obvious need for Drinking Water. I believe your department can help but its going to take some really, really hard work. I would ask how you see the usda playing a role in these communities in wisconsin and will you commit to working with me and the local communities to offer immediate and longterm solutions that help watersheds in this vital region of our state and our country . Senator, what are the do you know off hand what the population is of those two communities . I would have to is it greater than 10,000 or less than 10,000. Both counties i believe would be greater but they might be clo close. Counties or . They are sparsely populated. Well, the first line of response to your question is to the extent that the infrastructure treats water can be modernized, obviously, the usda has our water and waste Water Treatment programs that are available. We also have a partner ship with farm credit agencies providing infrastructure loans that cant do or wont do or enough resource to do is leveraging our resources. Weve had a series of partnerships with the system where well fund half a project and the cobank will fund the other half so they made a 10 billion commitment to infrastructure across the United States. The third alternative is on this side to work with us to identify private sector enveinvestors. Those are three basic avenues of financing infrastructure and more than happy to work with you and have our Rural Development county work with you. You asked for a longterm solution to work with conservation programs to try to tremendous ve prevent the problem from getting worse and wisconsin has it in a number of communities trying to create echo system markets where essentially regulated industries would pay farmers for conservation that would allow them to satisfy a particular ecosystem or looking from a responsibility perspective, we just did an event with chevrolet on carbon credits for example in north dakota, a working ranch in north dakota and that requires us to measure and verify and quantify the results. If you can do that, and i would encourage those folks to consider a conservation invasion grant which we have used in the past to help create a measurement. Let me also one other piece of this. The regular programs and in fact, and the crp program, there are theres a Continuous Program that potentially could be used to develop bio reactors in those in those conservation programs that would allow for a better filtering of contaminan contaminants, nitrates and so forth. There is a body of steps that can be taken short term and long term to try to address this. I appreciate that and there has been, as i was mentioning, a good local collaboration not only with the state dnr but i know a real interest in these collaborations on longterm solutions at the federal level. I will just restate that many of the residents impacted have private wells and they therefore have an immediate need for clean Drinking Water and so i hope that we can follow up this exchange with ways in which the usda can help meet the very important immediate needs. What we were able to do on a slightly different situation in california where it was drought and people didnt they had private wells but didnt have water in the well, we were able to take a look at whether they were joining or area of municipal wells that could or systems that could potentially be extended to those private homes or service by a private well so i dont know if thats possible at all what youre talking about but something i appreciate your commitment to work with me and the local communities and we will certainly follow up. I had one other question that i wanted to address to you, mr. Secretary. In addition to being americas dairy land, wisconsin also produces a lot of specialty crops, and we have a very vibrant and rapidly growing organic sector second to california in the number of organic farms within our state. The specialty crop organic farmers have a great need for new varieties and breeds adapted regionally and respond to market demands that can help them grow their markets socalled seeds and breeds. In response to this subcommittees work last year and direction in the fiscal year 16 spending bill, i know the usda is producing a report on classical breeding investments, but this Committee Also directed the agency to create a specific competition for classical breeding so that propels for this specific type of research compete against each other and so we have to see progress and its about having the varieties they need right on the farm and to help them make it and so i i hope they push forward with the classical breeding research. Ill take a look that the and tell you there is an intent and interest in this piece, in this area and we are investing a bit more time and energy in it. And were also making sure that our own seed banks are available in the event there is a situation where we dont have seed in the past. So its a combination of preparing. Our research is already created over the time ive been secretary, 714 different plant varieties. We are involved and engaged in this and i think there is a good balance between where weve got information and using the classical breeding. Its a combination and balance. I think the chairman and Ranking Member for their leniency in watching the clock. Thank you senator baldwin for joining us today and thank you for your questions of the secretary. Mr. Secretary, let me editorialize for a moment in regard to agriculture research, rfy 2016 agriculture a appropriation bill, a 25 million increase, the highest funding level of the program received since the inception. We worked hard to Additional Support for agricultural research. My editorial comment is that we cant compete with administrations budget when they use mandatory spending as the solution to funding this and many other programs, not just the budget but across the federal government, federal government wide and again, it would this is not your skrco but administrationpropriator appropriators, they do not have the ability to provide spending and i think they know that. It sets a bar perhaps to suggest that maybe administration, your department is more interested in agricultural funding than we are. Whether we come to the amount of money within our jurisdiction to provide support for agricultural support, i you have been kind enough to include me in a visit to cuba. I appreciate that invitation and i have been a long advocate for lifting the embargo to cuba and had success. Your budget includes our relationship with cuba. Whats the circumstance you ask for agricultural representation in cuba and secondly knowing that the appropriations process in which youre asking for this money to be included, that may be a controversial request, im not certain. But even if its not, this process takes a long time. What is usda doing in cuba today to help assist in the export, in the sale of Agricultural Commodities . [ laughter ] senator, the embargo statute basically prohibits the department of agriculture from using any of its market assistance programming money. So we cant directly help promote as we do in other countries and thats one of the reasons why we need to get rid of the embargo. But even if we got rid of the embargo tomorrow, we wouldnt necessarily be prepared to do everything were able to potentially do in retaining market and regaining market share weve lost over the years because we dont have the relationships and people on the ground to basically know the people that we need to know on the cuban side to be able to have more trade. Thats the reason we asked for personnel to be down in cuba and be permanently located there so when the embargo is lifted and we can use promotion resources, were in a position to move. So the i dont know off the top of my head that amount of dollars youve requested. I think 1 million and a half dollars for five or six. The point youre making is thats not to assist directly in support s support subdags to any program, its directly related to the ability to have usda personnel in cuba developing relationships with potential customers. And also to do an evaluation of the pest and diseases we may potentially confront when our relationship becomes more b bilateral. There are groups interested in doing business because we have a competitive advantage we havent taken full advantage of and they are asking us to explore in ways which they themselves apart from what we cant do can they be more aggressive in their promotion efforts and looking for ways to find a way for them to be more aggressive so that we without necessarily direct support from usda commodity groups, state ag commissioners, secretaries, individual farm groups will be able to promote the product. Mr. Secretary, in that regard, my understanding the current state of the law in regard to cuba is that we can sell agricultural commoditiecom food and medicine to cuba for cash its harder but we can, thats correct. We can. So commodity groups could promote those sales today, is that true . Yes. The question is whether or not any of the resources that check off dollars for example could potentially be used and were in the process of trying to figure out the answer to the question. We dont want to necessarily create a circumstance where were violating the law. We want to make sure we understand the law. This is a tremendous opportunity for us. Its just nuts that we dont have more of a market share than we do down there. Dr. Johansson in his commentary to us and conversation with us last week indicated significant opportunities that and compared it to the Dominican Republic as i recall. 80 of cuban food is imported. 80 and we do, what, 10, 15 of their need today . We should be doing 50 . Weve seen significant improvements in the opportunity. Its in 2010, maybe 2011 the law was changed to allow the sales and regulations were altered about at what point in time the money had to be received up front whether from the ship left in the United States or havana and then the Third Party Financing issues but those are regulatory issues that perhaps are and will be addressed but this issue of cuba will be one of broad interest in congress. It has its opponents which ive discovered in my time in working on this issue. Let me return to a top pick that we visited about last year in this same setting. I encouraged you and you indicated that you do and would continue your conversations with the federal communications commission. Ive expressed an on going concern about the ability for particularly Rural Telephone companies to be able to repay loans they owe the Rural Utility Services based upon decisions that the fcc has and is continuing to make and i would again highlight this issue for you in the sense that its important, i assume to you that we allow those companies to expand broad band opportunities in Rural America but also you may have a default rate of significant magnitude if the fcc makes decisions particularly as rerelates to the universal service fund that would have consequences to a telephone company, broad band providers ability to repay rus. Well, we are aware of that and we indicate to fcc a concern in that space. So we are keeping an eye on it, and we have advised them of your concern and of our concern. On the same top pick of broad band, im an advocateover usely for expansion of those opportunities in places that are unserved. I have worried from time to time that various programs perhaps more related to the stimulus package than programs under your department have provided loans and subsidization for companies to compete in already existing territory in which Broad Band Services exist. Could you tell me the current state of at least your programs, those that youre responsible for and their ability to obtain, obtain support from your department to compete with existing broad band providers . Yeah, we dont have, you know, we dont have unlimited resources so we have to make sure they do the job and were mostly we are mostly focused on unserved and under served areas. Were not creating a circumstance. I dont believe we are creating circumstances where were encouraging competition here. Were trying to meet an unmet need. Would you sure. You used a few words that caused me to ask would you confirm that to me. Im not trying to be evasive here. I am reasonably certain our focus is unserved and under served area, not a place where there is already service. Now, i would say that we may be in a situation where were trying to upgrade the service being provide sod that download speeds and upload speeds are increased. And that, i dont know if that falls within i dont think that falls within the scope of your question because its not about competition but working with an existing operation to improve their service. Well, i know of circumstances in which loans or grants were made to provide service to areas that had no service but in order to make that financially possible, the territory in which the loan could be used included areas that already had service. So areas that already had service got competition, they were larger communities and i assume the revenue was generated in a larger area makes it more makes it economically more viable for service to be provided in places that are much smaller that has no service but in the process of using my view is the Government Program is the subty and support areas that dont have service. You deserve an answer, more detailed answer and well make sure you get that. Im almost done, secretary. Food aide and particularly the program in kansas, you are proposing reductions in the spending in that area. What does that if we agree with your position, youre bud get request, how would usda absorb that . Do you have countries you would specifically exclude from the program so if there is less money, how would you implement, how would you spend the money that you would have remaining . Well, it may very well be there are countries that are, as you well know, the Dole Mcgovern program is designed to show the wisdom of basically linking education and food with the hope that the host country would eventually take over that responsibility. So there may very well be countries where we have been active and involved in providing assistance for an extended period of time which we think its time for them to basically pick up the mantle, if you will. That may be a consequence so it may be that theres not a circumstance where were necessarily going to cut off or cut out people that are currently receiving Service Without some or assistance without some substitute, either from the host country. The other possibility is that by i think were proposing to use a small portion of Mcgovern Dole for local purchases that may leverage the dollars more. Id be more than happy to give you a more detailed response to the question but it does point out the challenge, you know, whenever we have conversations about budgets, we focus on individual programs but the reality is your circumstance and our circumstance and putting the budget together is all about choices and if we didnt have a number we had to deal with and fix the is there another opportunity youd like to say that, mr. Secretary . Yes, i mean, to be very, very candid, this is one area that has frustrated me more than any, since ive been secretary because everybody, Everybody Knows this is a problem. And the reason why i feel so strongly about this is last year during our award ceremony, i had to give out seventh american flags to family members that lost loved ones in forest fires and the reason why some were lost is because we havent been able to do a job we need to do to restore and make our forest more resilient because we borrow money from those accounts to put fires out and to me a fire is no different than a flood or a tornado or hurricane. Where we fund not out of an operating budget but an emergency budget and if we could just create a circumstance where those large uncontrolled very expensive fires could be dealt with, it would create more flexibility within the budget and many concerns you addressed here, which we share, could be more potentially more adequately addressed. Thank you for your passion and compassion. Mr. Secretary, i appreciate you being in manhattan, kansas when we cut a ribbon on the facility, soon to be a department of agriculture operation. I would highlight as transition occurs to in bath my impression is that there may be usda employees who do not relocate. We want to work with you to make certain that the training and recruitme recruitment, retention opportunities existed a usda to make certain that when the day comes, that you are fully staffed with a highly capable and significant expertise in this important issue of protecting our homeland. Thats certainly an appropriate request. Thank you. Finally, our budget proposes a 5 million increase in the office of secretary. This sounds like a difficult question but for something i find very appealing for beginning, women and veteran farmers. Im not certain how you intend to utilize the dollars but i would highlight for you the subcsu subcommittee intends to have hearing on this topic how to bring veterans into agriculture. We have finally after a good deal of effort secured commitments from the department of defense to begin the process of going on base as servicemen and women are being, leaving the service. They receive a series of briefings on opportunities and in the past agriculture has not been part of that process. Now we are getting permission to be part of that process and e with want to be able to provide those veterans with the opportunity to know how they might be able to access the chance to be a farmer. If you go on our website, the most popular aspect is the beginning farmer website we revamped. You can actually go in now and plug in your wish list of what youd like to be, what kind of farmer youd like to be, what youd like to grow, how big you want to be and it will give you essentially a personalized plan for the programs within usda that can moe ploe viprovide a mr whatever it may be. We think the combination of more education of those returning veterans about opportunities that do in fact exist within agriculture, the greater the interest will be. The more we can spread our arms, will be better. 70 of the worlds farmers are women and there is a greater interest among women in this country to participate and requires out reach and requires a little time, a little access to information in providing an easy way for people to get information. So thats the purpose of this. The deputy no longer with the agency a great proponent of this and i think her work has been very successful. If you look at recent census, youre going to see an increase in Women Farmers and increase in farmers of color and working with other veterans groups to bring veterans into the farming business. Mr. Secretary, i applaud those efforts. We have seen a number of just individuals. Gary lagrange who is retired military in my town created opportunities for veterans returning with traumatic injuries to enter farming, in this case, bee keeping in a very successful way. Incidentally, legislation that ive introduced has past the Small Business community to create an opportunity for veterans to use the g. I. Bill and i welcome my colleagues to join us in the effort, to use their g. I. Bill to get education training, vocationally to become farmers or other businessmen and women to become entrepreneurs which farming is. So we look forward to working with the department to accomplish that. I would be less than polite if i didnt give my colleagues a chance, i hope they say no but does anybody have anything to follow up before i conclude the hearing . Senator merckly. Since you offered, i want to address fire borrowing because we have been working and been chief advocates of fire borrowing and worked hard to persuade administration to back the plan. Administration backed it. Thank you. Its not in the jurisdiction but absolutely important and i hope every meeting you go into, youll be talking about it. We did make a significant change last year and that is that Fire Fighting was funded at 100 of the previous tenyear average plus a 600 million buffer. Given the impact of the pacific blob and the force of the northwest, there is a chance there will be no foreign borrow this year. Well wait and see. Youre absolutely right. I just put up a huge exclamation point. The mega fires, large fire should be treated as the natural disasters they are. We have constantly robbed fire, health and hazardous not waste but fuel buildup. Yes, thank you. Hazardous fuel build up on the floor of the force. We constantly robbed that to pay for fighting fires. People say why do you always go to the back when its at the point of disaster rather than treating the forest right on the front end. This is thank you for youred a participation in it. I am not going to authorize transfers. Oh, yes, well im not going not from this committee to another but thats not your point. I understand. Youre going to say youre going to block im not going to authorize it im not going to authorizeba everybody off the hook. I think that should focus a lot of minds on capitol hill. I hope so. Thank you. Senator baldwin. Thank you, at the risk of not saying no to your offer, i want to also add my words of agreement with tackling the fire borrowing issue. Certainly wisconsin is not a state where we have many forest fires but we have significant part of our north woods with very active Timber Industry and Small Businesses depending upon Sustainable Management of our forest and i feel like we absolutely must tackle this. I just want to say not only to the secretary but chair and the Ranking Member how pleased i am to be on this subcommittee and how much i look forward to working on a number of issues with you over this appropriation season. I wanted to just call attention, too, that i didnt have a chance to refer to during my question period, which is promoting agricultural invasion through the value added producer Grant Program and everything we can do to help new producers get their start with the beginning farmer programs in addition to the secretary, im a big fan and look forward to working with all of you on that. Senator baldwin, appreciate your partition passion on this and we look forward to working with you and senator merckly, thank you for your kindness and working relationship. Mr. Secretary, youve been complimented on both sides and i would add my compliment to you, this is only the second year i chaired this committee and while on it, this is the time i had the most opportunity to get acquainted with you. Mostly in this setting and what i would say is that im impressed, pleased, about the level of your knowledge. The amount of detail, that you know. There is something perhaps to what senator blunt said about experience. Seven years, i guess i shouldnt assume this is your last opportunity to appear in a Budget Hearing before this subcommittee, perhaps it is. But i would like to thank you for being a secretary who apparently seemingly knows what is going on to large extent that the department of that you had. And thats pleasing to me and were going to try to do everything that i can do to become comparable so i can have a full and complete understanding as best as possible on the details of what goes on and in our case, the food and Drug Administration i want to be knowledgeable as well and look forward to developing greater expertise as you have developed over the last seven years and i thank you for your public service. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Its been an honor to appear before the committee and i really feel bliessed i get to work with incredibly dedicated people and we all work for just an Amazing Group of people who live, work and raise their families in rural areas and do so much for the countries and often times what they do is under apripreciated or not appreciated at all. I appreciate this privilege and consider it a deep honor, thank you. Mr. Secretary, thank you very much. I wont diminish that by sounding formal but for members of this subcommittee, any question for the hearing record should be turned into the subcommittee staff within one week, which is wednesday, march 16th. We would apprecia appreciate i had responses back within four weeks of that time. I thank the gentlemen that accompanied you today and i believe that concludes our hearing. Thank you. [ no audio ] [ no audio ] [ no audio ] the newly elected preem Prime Minister of canada Justin Trudeau is here for an official state visit. That will be followed by a joint News Conference live at 11 40 a. M. Eastern also on cspan3. When the white house with an official state coverage. You can see that live on cspan. Org. I think whats so unusual is that if i can be sappy for a second, to be able to have professional and personal partnership over more than 15 years, is a really unusual thing. Susans temperament and great vision in terms of editing is something i dont have and dont i dont spend as many time on it. I stuck very closely to the grunt side of the equation. Sunday night on q a, Susan Glasser and New York Times chief White House Correspondent peter baker who are married join us to talk about their careers and their upcoming plans to move to isra israel. Its going to be a great adventure. Susan and i were Bureau Chiefs for tthe Washington Post for moscow. We dope the overseas before. We never spent time in jerusalem or israel, i think were looking forward to learning a lot. Its going to be a real adventure. Its part of the world that has so much history to it and part of todays issues. We spend a lot of time writing about it in washington but never spent time there on the ground. I will also basically be changing roles and continuing at politico in a role around helping to lead our editorial growth and innovation. Were continuing to expand both here in the United States and also internationally. This past year, we launched politico europe. Were looking at creating and launching new things. I came to politico to start Politico Magazine about 2 1 2 years ago. We started that, i think its been a real exciting new platform to sort of take us into both ambitious long form rereporting and the war of ideas. Sunday night at 8 00 eastern on cspans q a. Regulators from five states were on capitol hill to talk about that stair etes relation with the epa. This is just over two hours. The meeting will come to order. First of all, im very happy to have the five witnesses that are here today. We always like to hear from the states, at least some of us do. I would like to at this point have any of our members who want to introduce those from their state. Yes, thank you. I would like to welcome randy ruffman, our cabinet secretary and has been for many years in West Virginia at the department of Environmental Protection. Randy has served for three years, he was three years as the deputy but he has worked in all variety of areas including abandoned mine lands program, hes a graduate of West Virginia tech. Weve seen him or i see him around time all the time, welcome, randy, thank you for your testimony and for your service to our state and to our nation. And senator . Thank you mr. Chairman, yes, i would. First id also like to thank all of our witnesses for coming here today to testify in front of this committee on state perspectives. I particularly would like to welcome to our committee today the secretary of the south Dakota Department of environment and Natural Resources or as with he used to call them dirt and water. Secretary perna served as the dean of secretary for three south dakota governors but he has also been in various positions at dean ever since 1979. Secretary perna has more than three decades of experience with epa regulations and is truly an expert in the field. Secretary perna has an impressive breadth of experience in every type of environmental regulation. He has extensive experience in epa rules, regulating water, air and toxic substances. Secretary perna leads an agency with approximately 180 full time employees and the small group of employees is responsible for administering nearly all of the federal environmental laws on the epa such as clean water act, Clean Air Act and safe Drinking Water act. Also responsible for administering various state and environmental laws in the state with over 77,000 square miles of land. Secretary perna knows all too well a man on a small state agency with limited budgets that they face while attempting to administer the increasing multitude of epa regulations forced upon the states. Every day he is confronted with the challenge of managing his agencys resources in a way that will allow them to fulfill all of their state and federal duties as the Environmental Regulatory Agency in south dakota. It should be noted that over 30 of deans operating budget is relying on federal fund. Every day he ensures south dakotans enjoy the cleanest water and air possible and south dakotas environmental record is a source of pride for all of us. I can tell you during the time that i worked as governor in south dakota eight years steve was the secretary of this department. He comes with a wealth of knowledge and an interest in seeing that things get done and get done correctly. Im very happy that he has been age to make the trek out here for this very very special meeting thank you. Its very nice to have you here. Senator did you want to introduce i do. I want to say to randy welcome. Its been a lot of years growing up as a kid back visiting my grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins all over the state so great to have you here. I think you have somebody with you today from beckley, nice to see you, withal come, good to see you. You have a name thats going to be most pronounced of any of our Witnesses Today. Just to make it easy for my folks, it would be easy to call him ali, his last name is mirzakhalili, nice sound to it. Good. Hes been a servant for the people of delaware for close to 30 years, a key leader in the department of Natural Resources, Environmental Control. He used to work for the guy sitting behind me who is our secretary of the department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control so this is like getting the band back together and we welcome the opportunity. Ali is the director of the division of better quality with the department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control. Hes responsible for implementing all aspects of the Clean Air Act requirements. His 30 years of experience in all quality, all aspects of air Quality Management including a program in regulatory development, planning, compliance, and enforcement and permitting. Hes professional engineer and holds a b. S. In engineering from the university of delaware, and m. S. In Environmental Planning and management from Johns Hopkins university. Its been a great servant and friend, welcome, ali, were happy that youre here, thank you. Thank you, senator carper. Becky well hold you until senator boseman comes here. I had a Prayer Breakfast with him this morning and i told him id do that. Well postpone yours. Deborah, nice to have you here and welcome along with the rest of the witnesses. Well give Opening Statements and then ill hear from you, since there are five of you id like to have you try to comply with the same time that we do up here. Todays hearing is critical to our understanding of the success and the lack of success of the environmental groups across the country. Indeed in appreciation of our unique system of federalism, congress in particular this committee must check in with states to ensure this system is fully functioning, when it comes to actions initiated by the United States Environmental Protection agency, the epa. For this reason i want to thank our state regulators to share your feedback where the framework between the states and epa is working and upholding the principles of cooperative federalism. Cooperative federalism is a core principal of environmental status statutes, including the clean air air act, and several others. Unfortunately under the obama administration, we observed a flood of new regulations, breaking down this system in what seems to be uncooperative federalism, the obama epa has embarked on an unprecedented regulatory agenda that simply runs over states by imposing an increasing number of federal regulatory actions on states while requesting even less funds to help states carry out these actions. As some state regulators have explained, epa is requiring them to do more with less. Many of these actions are driven from the epa headquarters to fulfill a political agenda, in years of litigation and inefficiencies that cost citizens more taxpayer dollars and reap little to no environmental benefits. Today we have a Diverse Panel of witnesses from states across the country working with different epa regions, and experiencing unique environmental issues, who will expand on this breakdown, while state feedback varies, there are several troubling themes that have consistently emerged. Epa has neglected their responsibility to consult with states at the beginning stages of regulatory actions, the epa gives states little time to digest complex regulations and provide meaningful analysis during short comment periods. Epa has allowed environmental activists to set regulatory deadlines imposed on states through sue and settle agreements without state input. The epa has increasingly used Regulatory Guidance to circumvent the regulatory process. Epa has a severe backlog of approving state implementation plans yet has issued an unprecedented number of federal implementation plans over state air programs. Epa budget requests have called for decreased levels of state funding while requesting an increase funds for epa bureaucrats, and epa is deviating from its Core Functions and duty to uphold cooperative federalism as we defined it. These concerns are not limited to our Witnesses Today. Last month i sent letters to all Committee Members state environmental agencies asking for feedback on epa actions, in the level of cooperative federalism. I appreciate the many responses i got to this committee, and without objection well make them a part of the record. Look forward to receiving additional state responses and to hear more from our Witnesses Today as we take a hard look at what works and what does not work and to hear the other side, senator boxer. How did you know thanks. Friends on the panel, thank you all for being here. And do count me in on people who want to hear from the states. So many of our states are leaders on the environment. My own being a prime example. We have proven that we can clean up our environment and also create very good paying jobs, and its been proven over and over again. I think that all wisdom certainly does not reside here. I think every one of us would say that, and thats why ive always liked the idea of minimum standards being set by the federal government to protect all of our people, but allowing the states to do more to protect their people from pollution, and thats really at the heart of what this debate is all about. To me, its not about states rights. Its about protecting people at a minimum level and then allowing the states to do more, if they want to. Now, states have a very Important Role to play in carrying out our landmark environmental laws, which we can talk about them all day. I will make a prediction. We will never repeal the Clean Air Act. We will never repeal the clean water act. We will never repeal the safe Drinking Water act. We will never repeal the superfund act. We will never repeal the brown fields act. Why . Because 90 of the American People support that. So what happens here in this committee, since my friends took the chair, it was tough to swallow, but nothing personal, what has happened is, were trying to see an undermining of those laws. Theres a back door, making it impossible, lawsuits and the rest. So i just want to say this, and ill ask unanimous concert to place my full statement on the record. Without objection. You know, you have to learn all of us by what happens, we have to learn history. We have to look at current events, and im speaking for myself, and only for myself when i say this. When i look at what happened in michigan, when i look at the way that state handled the situation in flint, i think for us to be holding a hearing saying the federal government shouldnt do anything. The fact is, epa in writing warned them, did the epa do enough . Not in my book. But they warned them in writing. They told them to put anticorrosive treatment into those pipes. They ignored it. And im not pointing the finger at any one person, but somebody there is going to be blamed for this at the end of the day, when the suits are finally, come to the courts. But to me its a moral crime. Its a moral crime. So to just say the state should do it all, there shouldnt be minimum standards, you know, we shouldnt really triple check these water systems. I just dont buy it, and i think that what our laws do i think are very happy compromise between the right of the people who vote for president , who vote for senators, who vote for house members, to know theyll have a basic standard, so that they can be protected and their children can be protected, and then say to the states, look, youre the laboratory. If you can do more, fine. But protect them to at least a minimum level, and thats been the way i have viewed this job. Thats why when we preempt states on this, i think its a terrible thing to do. And i have shown that through, you know, my whole career. But again, i want to say thank you, whether you agree with me or not. I know two do and three dont, Something Like that but im very happy to see all of you here. Thank you senator boxer. Senator boseman would you like to introduce your guest from arkansas . I already told her i was about half hog and explained the genesis of that statement. In the interest of time i just want to thank her for being