Minister scott pruitt testified before the Senate Environment and public works committee. Good morning. I call this hearing to order. We have quite a full house today and i welcome the audience. This is a formal senate hearing. In order to allow the committee to conduct its business i will maintain the core of. That means if there is any disorder or demonstration by a member of the audience that person causing the destruction will be escorted from the room by the capital police. First, i would like to welcome the administrator of the Environmental Protection agency, scott pruitt for your tax money today. With respect to todays hearings we will abide by the committees fiveminute rule for length of member questions in the first round. Time permitting we will also have a twominute second round of questions until 12 30 when administrative pruitt has to leave the building. Of course, members will have the ability to submit written questions to administrator pruitt for the record. Todays hea
America. Everybody. But today i want to focus on one aspect of American Life that remains particularly skewed by race and by health, a source of in equity that has ripple effects on families and communities and ultimately on our nation and that is our criminal Justice System. Now, this is not this is not a new topic. I know sometimes folks discover these things like they just happen. There is a long history of in equity in the criminal Justice System in america. When i was in the state legislature in illinois, we worked to make sure that we had video taping the interrogations because there were some problems there. We set up racial profiling laws to prevent the kind of bias in traffic stops that too many people experience. Since my First Campaign ive talked about how in too many cases our criminal Justice System ends up being a pipeline from underfunded inadequate schools to overcrowded jails. What has changed though is that in recent years, the eyes of more americans have been opened
Open up to the world, including the u. S. And that was one of the platforms like you said. Iranians definitely dont want to be a second iraq. That is something that a lot of regular iranians were afraid of. But they are in general not antiamerican. They are definitely not antiamerican kind of life and this is something that the hard liners are trying to project. And they know it resinates all the way through, the u. S. Senate well it is the same here. Sort of the loudest voices take up the most air. All right. Stand by. We are standing by right now, because the Armed Services committee of the senate has taken a temporary recess. We are covering the Iran Nuclear Deal hearing, and there are several key cabinet members that are trying to sell the deal to congress. We earlier heard from ash carter who says the deal will keep iran from getting a nuclear bomb. On iran this new deal when implemented will place significant limitations on iran that will effectively cut off its pathways to the f
For them to tighten it up a bit. I think secretary muniz you certainly have got confidence in it my time has expired. But i would say to the chairman its incomprehensible that we didnt have full access to that. Senator nelson. Thank you, gentlemen, all. Thank you for your public service. Mr. Secretary lou, i want to go down a different road. We have heard so many different commentaries about how much of a winfall the sanctions relief would be for iran. We have heard 100, 150 billion, the chairman is speaking of 50 or 60 billion. You tell me if this is correct, that basically sanctions relief of what has been withheld is about 100 billion, but in that 100 billion there are contractual obligations of iran to pay some 50 billion, and therefore, the net that would approximately come to iran would be about 50 billion. Is that somewhere in the ballpark . Senator that is roughly correct. Im happy to walk down the numbers to the best of my knowledge you dont need to. Im trying to get concepts
Those statements were very clear. First of all, the aim is not to go to military sites, and by the way its not us its iaea of course. The aim is to go to where is there suspicion of nuclear relevant activities. If they are on a military site doesnt matter. There is still the iaea access to those sites. I only have a few seconds left but i would hope that you would reconcile those statements for the public. We cannot control their statements. You stated the 24day waiting period wont allow the regime to conceal any illegal activity. But as i read the agreement and many other have point t out the inspectors request to visit those sites could be delayed much longer than 24 days. I know you are not concerned about the 24day period you believe that the iaea would be able to handle that but if you if you look at different parts in section q of annex 1 of the agreement, i think that we have the potential that were looking at an 89day delay. Do you think that would be possible we certainly cann