Have to measure a lot of things including the firing angle, engine speed, transmission speed, pressure, air flow, voltage. For batteries you need to measure voltage current. Temperatures. If you add all of the sensors together, i would say hundreds and typically 100 microprocessors. They are already getting this standardwith car. Now we are talking about adding more technology to interact with those. We are at the beginning of making cars intelligent enough to cooperate with other vehicles. Has been yourwhat biggest frustration in this project . That ismy biggest a tough one. Very complicated problem, not just limited to technology. Because after all, technologies must be doing something good for the society. Otherwise, we probably should not be doing it. We need to interact with so many different people, companies, government, students and so on. To bring the awareness to the society is very tough. I would not say i am frustrated, it is a tough job. It certainly takes more than what i
Paul. And that is on the Violent Crime side, we tend to have a lower crime rate than a lot of other states while at the same time keeping our incarceration rate lower by using more probation and using more treatment options. So thats why im a fan of the work thats been done here. And my first question is really along those lines of drug courts. Ive led some. Efforts here on drug courts and getting funding for drug courts carrying on the work of many that came before me, including ted kennedy and jim ram stead over on the house side. When we look at what this bill might save, we know that drug courts save money. And we know that getting some of the nonviolent offenders out of the prisons will save money or reducing their sentences. Do you think we could use some of this money to pay for things like drug courts ms. Yates, do you think that will be helpful as we look at how we are going to make up for the fact that we are going to be bringing people out of prison. But they not only need R
Forward, but also to people who were convicted and sentenced under old laws. Inmate sentences under the old mandatory minimums can ask a judge to sentence them in accordance with the new mandatory minimums. But a prosecutor gets to weigh in also. And the inmate will only get a lower sentence if the judge agrees it is appropriate after the judge has considered factors like the inmates danger to the community. But others have raised concerns about the department of justice going to stand idly by and let dangerous criminals walk. So this is my question, kind of a statement. I hope that i have your commitment that the department of justice will review each of these resentencing on a casebycase basis and that the determination on these resentencings will be made by local u. S. Attorney offices. Senator, we are anything but idle at the department of justice. You have our commitment that we will carry out the Retroactive Application of the provisions of this proposal in a thoughtful manner, o
A factor s it is not at all. Our line for 81 republicans know if you nt to think pres. Obama is a factor in your midterm vote, reach us on our facebook page. Him not a considering it was 45 of those responding. For those who did factor it was 32 responding. Those figures drastically different from also the folks from pew looked at how people would use their midterm vote. In 2010 56 of republicans vote they would use their and that he president figure in 2014 was 61 of did a dents. Usa today story yesterday about what the is what s found. Here they wrote. Half of likely voters say the president is not their vote for congress. But amongst those who call obama factor by two to one would vote for him. When it comes to your midterm vote we are interested in hearing from you as to whether the president is a would and if so how you use your vote. Again at the numbers are on the screen. Wanted to let you know about our Newsmakers Program because is an expanded version, a 45 minute discussion w
Would authorize that, nor am i aware of a policy seeking authorization to do that. If could you share more information with me . My question is about the constitutional limits on the federal governments power. Attorney general holder repeatedly declined to answer the question about whether it is constitutional for a drone to use lethal force against an american citizen on u. S. Soil if that individual doesnt pose imminent threat. Now, let me be clear, i think the answer to this is very easy. My question to you is, is it constitutional for the federal government to do so . Senator, i think with respect to the use of lethal force by any means, one would always want to look at the Law Enforcement issues involved there. And certainly if could you provide more context there i could place it in the scope of a case or an issue that i might have familiarity with. It is in the nature of a hypothetical. But you are certainly aware that the federal government is currently using drone strikes over