Transcripts For CSPAN Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20140509

To as amended. And without objection, each of the measures as amended is ordered favorably reported as a single amendment in the nature of a substitute. Staff is directed to make any technical and conforming changes. And that concludes our business for today. I want to thank Ranking Member engel and all our Committee Members for their assistance in this markup. The committee is adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2014] earlier today, nancy pelosi help her weekly briefing. Here are some of her remarks. Stunt. Fact is this is a this is a political stunt. Issa just a damaged goods. They had to move from into another venue with another chairman. That is what this is. . Regularthe order. Does the minority have a right to call witnesses. They try to use the climate and Energy Select community. It was only established that we can have a couple of bills duns. The record there was there is only one subpoena in four years issued and it was unanimous. T was unanimous this is a completely different set up. I think the chairman has already called an investigation. Think he called it a trial. A trial. Does that tell you everything you need to know . Says i dont want this to be a certain is. I think he is saying something that are looking Service Circus like. I have evidence that not only are they hiding it that there is an intent to hide it. I cannot disclose that yet. A decision to withhold certain documents from congress. I have ahe statement . Great respect for the speaker. Able, ixtent that he is think he was trying to have this. It serves them better than to let them be themselves. Them show wholet they are with all of this. Any of our witnesses can hold their own. There is another school of thought that we are seeing how they operate. Todayswas some of briefing with the nancy pelosi. You can watch the entire briefing anytime online at cspan. Org. And sarah of the center for American Progress has federal policies that trickle effect working mothers including Maternity Leave and the pay gap between men and women. High School Seniors talk about preparing for the events placement u. S. Government exam. Let me be clear. I am not defending ms. Lerner. I want to hear what she had to say. I have questions about why she was unaware of the inappropriate criteria a year after they were created. I want to know what she did not mention the inappropriate criteria in her letters to congress. I cannot vote to violate an individuals fifth amendment right just because i want to hear what she has to say. In much greater principle is at stake here today. The sanctity of the fifth amendment rights for all citizens of the United States of america. Quite i have never alleged this goes to the president. I have said the tea party with clearly be described as enemies to the president policies. That is easy to understand. This is citizens united. In support of the president s position using her power. With that i yelled back. Ehouse debate on holding lois lerner and contempt of Corner Congress for refusing to answer questions about targeting conservative. John argues the obama administrations foreign policies will harm regional and International Save the. Sunday at 7 30 p. M. On cspan2. Tv, thecan history newly unveiled restoration of George Washingtons mount vernon dining room. Next, a house hearing looking at the drake, the decriminalization of marijuana. She says they House Oversight said committee is singling out edc Council Approved a bill to end arrest for possession. Vincent gray has signed the bill but has yet to take effect. This is one hour and 15 minutes. I would like to welcome everyone and called to order the subcommittee and operation. Its is the subcommittee of the south oversight committee. The title of todays hearing is mixed signals, the administrations policy on marijuana. Ofs is the third on a series hearings that we have been in on the subcommittee to conduct some andhe changes in the law also some of the practices that we are seeing across the country in the heart to the use of an enforcement of law relating to marijuana. Other members wish to be recognized. When we finished with that, we have two panela this morning. We have the delicate from the district who we will hear from first. Fourwe have a panel of witnesses that we will hear from in the second panel. We gather today and i will start out by saying an opening statement. The filling an important responsibility of the congress. That is the oversight role of this committee. Peoplesent here by the not only to legislate on some the mosts also conduct important oversight role in the house of representatives. This is a longstanding committee. I am a Senior Member having served chair anywhere. It does this still an Important Role in keeping government accountable and responsible. There were some announcements about what the committee was doing looking at the districts law. All, the district of state. A is not a it is not a territory. It is not a possession. It is a federal district. It is provided for under the constitution and a specific statute. Me just say that the law we are talking about will impact not only the people of the district but the people of the United States. We have millions of people visiting us each year. Law that is in contact with some federal laws. We have a responsibility to refute its implications. Am i singling out the District Of Columbia for examination of the impact . Absolutely not. We have helped to previous hearing in which we specifically colorado the impact in were just gone beyond the statute in the district. States. Ooking at other they are the marijuana for medical use. Directed to our responsibility under the constitution in law, particularly in unique responsibility of congress. In response to the responsibility over the District Of Columbia. March 4 we did a hearing with a colorado u. S. Attorney. Day thatout on that the d. C. Council voted to do terminal eyes to decriminalize the possession of marijuana. It is significant. , let me put the slide appear, more than 20 of d. C. Is federal land. Thes unclear as to how criminalization will affect marijuana position possession and consumption on federal land. Im colorblind but they tell me the green you see, there is a great deal of territory that is federal land. They asked the question of staff what if i am standing on the mall which joins the avenue with , what then each impact of enforcement would be. No one could tell me. Many questions that have been raised by the districts adoption of a bill that reduces the penalties for Marijuana Possession is currently punishable by jail time to a civil of the its. It is in conflict with some of the federal statute. Currently we have marijuana as one narcotic. Ofhave Different Levels penalties for its use on federal property which you can see we have a great deal in the District Of Columbia. That is one of the reasons we are here. We have some people including our witness question. Remi review the of your teeth. Let me review the authority. Isicle one section eight very evident to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over the district. Our authority in this regard stems from the constitution. Ofwas created by an act congress in 1790 and a 1973ently there is law. You want to put that up russian it says the congress of the United States reserves the right itsny time to exercise ofstitutional the doherty legislature for the district. We do have very clear at doherty. We have the Reform Committee that dates back to the early 1800s. Theress wanted hunt only authorizers to conduct appropriators,he those who created agencies or the District Of Columbia but also who appropriated this. They wanted a third heartbeat. We happened to be that thirdparty on the committee. Rule that thiss is our responsibility. Will so sell are constitutional and statutory responsibility and conduct of this hearing. The the here to did merits or demerit of criminal law. We are here to examine the impact. We are here to examine the enforcement question and a host of questions. This is not the last hearing. We started out with a Deputy Director of the white house policy drug. He testified to a number of items in conflict with statements we heard from the president s of the United States about the impact of the current marijuana that we see in the marketplace. Impact, its impact on the performance and intelligence of individuals. They told us some reasons why we should not lessen penalties and why we should again let that what is being done around the United States. Some agencies of the administration are not in turmoil trying to figure out how they can comply with changes in the District Of Columbia, colorado, or some 20 state laws that have been passed. Fact, with many local and federal Law Enforcement agencies, i would ask the staff, have we got a list . In the District Of Columbia we listthis pretty extensive of Enforcement Agency starting with the United States capitol police. The United States secret service. The United States part lease. Even these the sodium police. We have a whole host of agencies here fewer cars with enforcing the law within the District Of Columbia. Here. Cars enforcing the law within the District Of Columbia. Again. We have issues that relate not only to the district or Law Enforcement with other multiple within the District Of Columbia and have a legitimate Law Enforcement role in the district. Theyre here to look at some of the issues to ask for the implications. Whether or not we will make any further recommendation im not going to prejudge. We have not heard all of the testimony. Invited the district to also send a representative from the district town will. I think i chose not to do that. I am disappointed they are not sending someone that actually adopted the policy. We do want to provide an opportunity for the representative of the district, ms. Norton, to testify and to have her position stated on the record as we will do in just a minute. Are there further members that would seek recognition . Thank you. I want to thank you for holding this hearing. I think the statements in the previous hearings, the Deputy Director that came here spoke for themselves. They speak for the need of the president to replace those people will and that people in positions that reflect the values of america and 2014 and the values president obama has a spouse and the people have espoused voting in the state. Recreationale marijuana. This particular case, one of the things that i really like but the states adopting this is lewis friend ice louis brandeis. Try things the others could learn and see what is good in that. This is a separate jurisdiction. It can be a laboratory of democracy. No better laboratory of democracy right here with the members are situated where they can see and be around the next. Hall this law affects the populace. It has an impact upon africanamericans. It has a big effect on this d. C. Budget. It takes away from other priorities that could be people spending on human issues that need to be addressed. Job. Es such a wonderful i am a strong supporter of them having the autonomy to address the issues as they did a 101 vote. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this. Thank you. Thank you. I should have asked for unanimous consent to since youre not on the specific committee to participate. Without objection we have granted you the ability to participate. Unanimous consent be allowed to participate without objection. So. Me recognize further members of the subcommittee first. If you want to be heard. Ok. Will go to dr. Fleming. Your recognize. You are recognized. Thank you for allowing me to sit in on this. I would like to speak for a moment not so much specifically about the law and levis ability of relaxing laws on marijuana but just to speak as a physician as a father. A family physician who has been an alcohol and drug medical direct your twice, someone who , the director twice someone who wrote a book and what the impact of marijuana is today in america and changing attitudes. It was back about 20 years ago i believe that there was identified some theoretical value with the use of marijuana medicinally in the case of dying cancer patients. They gave them some comfort. No one has any problem with attending to the needs of the dying patients, someone with a terminal illness. Intoow this has morphed claims that marijuana actually cures cancer, that it is necessary to treat nausea and many other claims that have been completely disputed by the medical community. Theres nothing that marijuana treats today that cannot be divided by other medications that are much safer. The most common diagnoses for young will admitted to Rehab Centers today is for marijuana addiction. Make note mistake about it no mistake about it. Theres a discussion as marijuana as a gateway drug. Drug addicts tell me every drug is a gateway to another drug. Marijuana is not excluded and i would include alcohol and perhaps tobacco. Any exposure of an addicting substance also often needs to a worse addiction. What else do we know . We have many studies now that confirm this that the human matureoes not fully until almost age 30. Yet the average age of a child he has first exposure to all alcohol or marijuana is around 11. These actually modify the rain and its chemical the brain and its biochemical pathways and the neurotransmitters and sets the stage for addiction later in life. Children who are exposed to such addicting substances prior to age 15 had a fivetime greater risk of future addiction than those who are not. Is no question that the rate of addiction goes up with exposure in young people. Two very recent studies have come out with an important impact. One is eating published in neuroscience. The peoplei scans who use marijuana only once or twice a week. What they found was profound changes into aspects of the brain, areas that confirm what we believed all along. That is something call the motivational amotivational syndrome. Also, the incidence of psychiatric diseases, particular schizophrenia is higher. Heart disease. We are seeing a spike in Heart Disease among marijuana users as well. There is also a libertarian argument on this that why should government stand in the way of old utilizing a substance that they wish to do so . Theoretically that mixed antiof sense. The problem is you never hear libertarians and make the claim that when i am unable to get and keep a job and i can no longer support my family that i will also tell the government not to take care of us through our going entitlement system. Always challenge those who argue on a libertarian bases you cannot have it both ways. You can do whatever you want with your body, ride a motorcycle without a helmet or whatever, do not expect taxpayers to take care of you when you are suffering from those circumstances. Have, i want to be sure we the facts in front of us. Were getting reports in colorado were marijuana has recently been made been made legal. It is finding its way into food. Children have actually ingested emergency marijuana become quite ill. These are all important things i want to make sure we have on the table. I thank you for the opportunity to join everyone today. I yield back. To other members wish to make Opening Statements . With all due respect, i want to clarify the libertarian position. This should be the libertarian. I interact with people every day on the subject because of my stance on that. I would actually say that there is a faux Libertarian Group out there who make the claim on the basis you say but they never come with the second part. I agree with you. If you were to take a stance, if i were to ride a motorcycle without a helmet or to use marijuana and tell the government to stay out of my life, and like you we should also demand that government not provide us the charge ofo the taxpayers to take care of us. Philosophically. There are many who make the claim under the umbrella of libertarianism. It is not libertarianism at all. I agree. Question . Sk you a time which tohad yield. Your argumentat should be. Outlaw alcohol so we do not have to pay for the alcoholics he cannot do a job . Should we get rid of alcohol . Great question. Has been ancohol accepted part of our coulter and religious practices for centuries. We did try, even with an amendment to the constitution to prohibit the use of it. It was not culturally except did. It is problematic. A medicalso say on bases that moderate amounts of ingestion of alcohol actually have positive health effects. That is not to diminish what it can do. It can damage the brain and many other organs. Event therealistic cultural acceptance of alcohol to prohibit it the same that the strip tobacco. As recently as the 1950s, does recommended smoking at least on commercials for health. Of course a 1969 that it causes lung cancer and many other problems. We have done a lot of things to mitigate the damage of it. Marijuana is different. The public has never excepted marijuana as part of our culture. That seems to be changing. I think we can change it. I yield back my time. I think the gentleman. As you can see, there is a lot not only among various groups but among members of congress on both sides of the aisle and parties themselves. Is raisingpening many questions across the United States. Because of the change in the law and the district. It does have implications. Im going to yield in just a sec him. I do want to provide that this link in the proceedings the penalties for Marijuana Possession starting for federal section 844 has simple foression, they can provide a fine of not less than a thousand dollars. Law in new zealand is a 25 law. They can have a jail term of up to six months here at there are 26 agencies that are responsible for Law Enforcement. I have this joint here. Ok. Do not get too excited. This is not a real one. It is a mock one. I am told by staff that this that the penalty is, lets see, you have up to one ounce or less. Is 28 grams. Is that correct . Eat joint has about one gram. Over 20 joints you could be in possession of and the District Of Columbia. Here is the list of penalties which i am submitting to the record. For the record, i will submit this. Like did you roll that . Staff do it. They have more experience. [laughter] aside, there are very serious implications to what the district has taken. Honest an open and airing of what is going to happen. This is why we brought in other officials to discuss this in an open and honest manner. I welcome our delicate. I want to thank you very much. Opportunity tohe testify. Under the policy, i think youre safe with that joint. Enforcecy is not to marijuana laws here in the District Of Columbia. Even in the capital. Before i summarize my testimony, i do have to say it is almost quaint to hear a jurisdiction that they referred to these as a federal district. Rule act the 1973 home that says it was wrong to have a Nations Capital where people could not govern themselves that referred to my district as a federal district. The congress that cap into itself a power. The citizens of this city have a right to govern themselves and make their own law the same way as the members of the panel and their local jurisdictions. Have those laws made. Notwithstanding that ultimate with greatnote pleasure that this full committee on which i serve has, in fact, respected home rule. This is the first time i can remember that there has been a on a purelyongress local matter. Notwithstanding the power of congress over the District Of Columbia. Andimply has the good sense fails to violate its own control byof local almost always not interceding into our local affairs. Of the district columbia that is set on land, six or seven today indian six or seven states have most of their land to be federal land. Claim and this committee does not claim that presents any particular problem when it comes to the enforcement of local laws which may differ from federal laws. As to the location of the number of police forces, they will be enforcing federal law under the attorney general. That means they will not interfere with local law as it has been passed with respect to marijuana decriminalization. I appreciate the opportunity testify. Protests as in the usual sense of testimony. Sub committee has singled out the District Of Columbia on its marijuana decriminalization law as it has not singled out any of the eight team restrictions which have 18 restrictions i have similar laws. Ere these oftenerve cited in appearance to the 10th amendment. By not calling any local aticials even when it looked colorado in particular which along with washington has gone much further and has legalized marijuana still. No local official was called to to be cross examined. This is at the root of our constitution. Set for a few new rated exceptions. Marijuana decomposers was not one of them. The first that decriminalized marijuana was alaska. Since then red and blue states decriminalized marijuana from california to new york to mississippi to nebraska. Nothing was similar about the states. The District Of Columbia is the only jurisdiction that is gotten a fullfledged hearing on its local discrimination laws. The National Government has to do but make the framers turnover in the gray. Makes officials in their own jurisdiction. A local control of local affairs. His hearing stands out of what my the days republican colleagues often preach about devolving power at two local states and jurisdictions. Snatch power by making the District Of Columbia vindicated local power. Its local policy before the state legislature. Cities defend this decriminalization bill against any and every attempt to block or change it. There will be a city official here today. They have informed me that he to this hearing and he has refused to provide, as has the council, any official who has had anything to do or will have anything to do with the devising or carrying out of the marijuana decriminalization law in the District Of Columbia. Thatalso pleased to note two majority members of this carried out the principle of local control and local affairs. Last week voting for the amendment to prohibit the allocation of funds being used healthement the veterans directive that for bids a theider from completing recommendations or options regarding veterans participation of marijuana programs. A took me 11 years to remove medical marijuana amendment from the district appropriations. Have marijuana. To make what has really compelled the district to pass its own decriminalization law. Whites inh blacks and the United States use marijuana recent studiese, show that African Americans in our country are four times more be arrested for the. Ere possession it was interesting to note that in your own state of florida you had your number three in the for aom arizona marijuana arrests at a rate four times. Even in the District Of Columbia were half of the population is worsee found an even record that African Americans were eight times more likely to be arrested for a mere possession then whites in our city. All were africanamericans. Rate are extremely troubling. Have athe country they lot of African Americans, especially Young African that start in life ofrounded by a host stereotypes, regardless of where they are and where they live just because they are black. Arrests,na possession particularly for the gentleman from low income areas will almost surely wipe out the opportunity to find a legitimate job. That in turn can lead to the underground economy, even selling drugs. Who is paying that price . Is it the black community itself . Conclude. Like you to were almost in a half minutes over what we a lot. I would like to invite the gentlelady to join the panel. You will have time to ask questions and submit Additional Information for the record. I do want to say, particularly given the concern that a member has indicated about the use of marijuana itself, that is a very legitimate concern. He can be assured that the district of olympia, a big city which has experienced a big real problem, they are very clear about the problem of people smoking marijuana. If gone out of the way to make sure that decriminalization does not lead to more. Is goingy, i think it to start up for the first time an understanding of thethe risks that may be associated with smoking marijuana. We must respect the liberty of americans to use such substances opposing risk. Asset they not be unfairly targeted in that members of this samenity give this the respect for their local decisions as they would certainly demand for their own constituents and jurisdictions. We appreciate her testimony. We can go ahead and have the second panel seated. If we can go ahead and do that. If you can join us here, we wouldve received if it. Will receive it. This relates to marijuana. The department of justice issued a memo saying the department of justice will not enforce marijuana laws and safe that have legalized it. One of these eight areas are preventing Marijuana Possession. It is important under these policies it seems the District Court would prosecute marijuana is ushered on federal land. This is contrary to what we just heard. That is one of the reasons. No one is here to negate the district law. 26 federal agencies are responsible for enforcing different penalties. Do we have all of our different witnesses . We have the assistant chief metropolitan police. Well him. We have robert as the acting chief of the United States park service. We have mr. David oneill as the general. We have our fourth witness, direct during in the American Civil Liberties union of a national capital. If you can remain standing, we do swear in all of our witnesses. If you would raise your right hand. Thisu solemnly affirm that is the whole truth and nothing but the truth . Let the record reflect that all of the witnesses answered in the affirmative. Least be seated. We try to get you to limit your testimony to five minutes. We will be glad to request this to add to the record additional record. Well start with peter newsom who is the assistant chief metropolitan police. Your recognize. Upif you could turn that here at i am a lowly congressman. Good morning. Other members of the committee, i am the assistant chief of the District Of Columbia and metropolitan Police Department. Tom pleased to be here discuss the recent legislation to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana. Possessionna decriminalization Amendment Act which is projected to become the flaw in approximately mid july amend the District Of Columbias code to decriminalize the possession of one ounce or less of marijuana. Instead of facing a misdemeanor charge punishable by up to six months in jail or thousand dollar fine or both, once it goes into effect, individuals will be subject to a 25 civil fine. The officers can seize any visible marijuana. The use of marijuana on public space will remain a critical a criminal penalty up to 60 days in jail or a fine of up to 500. The act defines public space as any street, alley, sidewalk, park, or parking area. A vehicle on any street, alley, sidewalk or parking area or any place to which the public is invited. Ugly attitudes about marijuana use have changed significantly in recent years with many excepting it to be no more harmful or addictive than alcohol or tobacco. Decriminalizing marijuana may help reduce the number of people with arrest records for possession of small amounts of marijuana which may enable them to more easily find gainful employment. The act maintains chemical penalty for selling marijuana and public usage which is important to combat drug dealing and to ensure the quality of life. Even though the District Of Columbia will decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana, we will continue to send the message, especially to our young, of the danger and affects just as we do with alcohol and tobacco. Status, someique federal Law Enforcement agencies such as the part police have concurrent jurisdiction in the District Of Columbia and can enforce federal law anywhere in the city. Although the officers one force , federal Law Enforcement agencies are not bound by the act so long as the possession or use of marijuana remains a federal criminal offense. I thank you for the opportunity. You are recognized. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the government response to the potential decriminalization of the District Of Columbias Marijuana Possession laws. Im the acting chief of the United States park police. I would like to submit the full statement for the record. Without objection. The entire statement will be made part of the record. U. S. Park police is one of the oldest uniformed federal Law Enforcement agencies. The park police has enjoyed a Long Partnership with the citizens of the District Of Columbia and cooperation with the metropolitan Police Department. It is responsible for safety and Crime Prevention and all park lands administered by the service. The District Of Columbia, they jurisdiction which compromises 22 of the District Of Columbia. Including the national mall, it east and west potomac are, rock park, and mcpherson square. The park police is a unit for withinional park service the department of the interior. Archers diction is usually set by congressional legislation. Are about to make arrests for any offense against the United States committed in their presence within areas of the National Park system. Acts say they have the same powers and duties as A Metro Tollefson Police Metropolitan police [indiscernible] department. They are left it is left to the discretion of the officer on the ground. If an individual is arrested for civil possession of marijuana by one of our offices, the rest he can be criminally charged under d. C. Code. Under existing law, possession penaltydemeanor with a of incarceration of up to six months and a fine of not more than 1000. If the violation occurs on federal park land, the rest he can be charged under the Park Service Regulation at title 36 resulting in a misdemeanor with a possible plenty of incarceration for to six months and a fine of not more than 5,000. It is a schedule one controlled substance under the United States code. The possession of which is a misdemeanor. In the event of a conviction, it is determined by the court. 20102012, 35 of the part Police Arrest for marijuana charges and the washington metropolitan area occurred on federal park land within the District Of Columbia. The majority of these arrests were for simple possession. We understand that the District Of Columbia decomposition Amendment Act of 2014 would only him and to district law and would not alter the National Park Service Regulation or federal law on marijuana. We understand that the d. C. Act would still make it a misdemeanor to smoke marijuana in a public space or park. Then we will law, work closely with the United States attorney office, the District Of Columbia, to determine our options. Especially if the person is on federal park land. This concludes my statement. I will respond to any questions you may have. Thank you. We appreciate your testimony. We will now turn to david o neil, it he acting assistant attorney general of the Criminal Division at the United States department of justice. Welcome. You are recognized. Thank you. I appreciate your invitation to testify at the u. S. Department of justice. On ourimony will focus marijuana enforcement programs nationwide and the guidance the department has issued regarding our program. The controlled substance act of 1970 makes it a federal crime to possess, grow and distribute marijuana. Financial transactions including proceeds generated by a marijuana related conduct can also form the basis for federal prosecution under andylaundering statutes the Bank Secrecy Act. Starting with california in 1990, several states have authorized the cultivation and distribution and possession and use of marijuana for medical purposes under state law. In 2012, voters in colorado and washington approved initiatives legalizing marijuana use under state law and establishing state regulatory systems for marijuana use. In 2010, the council of the District Of Columbia operates use of marijuana for medical the council has enacted broader decriminalization legislation which is currently under congressional review. Demonstration would treat d. C. And the same manner as every other jurisdiction with respect to the enforcement of marijuana laws. Columbia,strict of the u. S. Attorneys office will investigate drug offenses. And across the administrations, federal Law Enforcement have targeted sophisticated drug traffickers and organizations while state and local authorities focus their enforcement efforts under their state laws and more localized drug activities. Since medical marijuana laws and decriminalization laws have been enacted, the department of justice have continued to work with the state and local partners to target dangerous Drug Trafficking organizations. At this point, more than ever, we will maintain strong partnerships and coordination among federal and state and local enforcement. On august 29, 2013, the department issued a mandarin to directing our prosecutors to investigate and prosecute marijuana cases that implicate anyone of eight federal priorities. All memorandum applies to of our federal prosecutors and guides the exercise of discretion against individuals and organizations that violate any of our interest no matter where they live or what the laws are in their state permit. ,sing our prosecutorial attorney offices have devoted resources to cases involving these eight priorities and will continue to do so in the future. For example, with targeted Enforcement Actions against marijuana businesses and residential growth near schools. We also actively investigate and prosecute cases including International Smuggling of wereuana, marijuana grows firearms and violence are concerned, on public lands, and cases with potential organized crime involved. And february 2014, the department issued guidance to all federal prosecutors about marijuana related financial crimes. That guidance seeks to mitigate the publics safety concerns by cash based businesses without access to banking and Financial System while at the same time ensuring the organization, gangs and cartels do not have access to Financial Systems to launder terminal proceeds. The guidance states clearly that the the provisions of the moneylaundering statutes, and the Bank Secrecy Act remain in effect with respect to marijuana related to conduct. The guidance advises prosecutors to assess marijuanas financial crimes under the priorities laid out. The department expects Financial Institutions to continue to apply appropriate riskbased the antimoneylaundering policies and procedures and controls sufficient to the risk and clues conducting Due Diligence with any guidance issues. The department of justice is committed to a forcing of a controlled substance act in all states and the district of colombia and we are grateful for the dedicated work of our Drug Enforcement administration and agents, our friend our federal prosecutors, and state and local prosecutors and protecting our communities from illegal Drug Trafficking. Our goal is to ensure the action that we are effectively focus on the eight priorities outlined an august 2013 and february 2014 guidance from the department. Ultimately, achievement of that goal requires Cooperation Among Law Enforcement agencies at every level. I look forward to taking your questions. But thank you and appreciate your testimony. We will go to ms. Sadanandan dashes the Program Director at the American Civil Liberties union. Welcome, maam and you are recognize. Chairman mica and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to address the overwhelmingly opulent decision to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana. Andame is ms. Sadanandan down the Program Director of the aclu. We were to protect Civil Liberties and civil rights in washington, d. C. About public education, advocacy, and the litigation. In 20 13, the aclu publish a nationwide study of the Racial Disparities in marijuana arrests from 20012010. The report documents marijuana arrest by race in all 50 states and the District Of Columbia. The aclu at the nation capital soon there after publish a report behind the ddc numbers. Focusing on Racial Disparity in in thet arrests district. While the study found black people to be 3. 7 times more likely to be arrested for Marijuana Possession than whites , in the District Of Columbia am a black people were a staggering eight times more likely despite blackusage rates among and white populations. These reports catalog several months of highprofile, public ate about Police Informant enforcement practices. There emerged a consensus that in the aggressive enforcement of Marijuana Possession did not make our community any safer. In the face of increasing public pressure, in march 2014, members of the d. C. Council passed by a margin a 101 marijuana decriminalization Amendment Act of 2014. Prior to the passage of the act, it was a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail or up to 1000 fine. The act of decriminalize marijuana makes Marijuana Possession of one ounce of less a civil matter subject to 25 fine. In passing this act, the district joined 11 other states which had already instituted similar legislation. 2010, as you can see, the graph here, black and white populations in the district were nearly equal, yet 91 of all arrests of marijuana offenses were of black people. 5393 for arrest of marijuana related. 3 4 were for Marijuana Possession. In 2010, Law Enforcement officers and the District Of Columbia were making approximately 15 arrests per day. Do not explain this glaring Racial Disparity in the enforcement of the districts marijuana laws particularly where time and time again studies have shown that black and white populations use marijuana at remarkably similar rates. 2010 nationwide survey by the National Survey on drug abuse and health. We have the 2001 and 2010 survey here which show that based on selfreported usage rates between black and white equaltions, you have rates. In addition, studies consistently indicated that drug markets reflect our nations boundaries. For example, University Students tended to sell to one another. Map of all of the marijuana arrests and the District Of Columbia. The yellow indicates the arrest of black individuals and the blue points indicate arrest of white people. That theot demonstrate vast majority of the arrest in the District Of Columbia, east of 16th street, and anyone who lives here in the district who knows that if these are the neighborhoods where the overwhelmingly majority of black residents left. Live. Universities. He 4 when faced with a question of what to do with these disparities among the council considered several key factors in support of marijuana reform. Spends more cap to all marijuana enforcement than any other 50 states. Estimate, d. C. In 2010 spent approximately 26 million on marijuana enforcement. Police timeuable and resources on marijuana enforcement produces police ability to respond to and resolve more stimulus more serious issues. At battling thousands of primarily black men in the district for marijuana with a negative young with the negative congress is consequently did not serve out except it had a corrosive relationship with relationship between police and the community. That council overwhelmingly decided to remove criminal penalties under the sea law for Marijuana Possession. He for i close, i will address federal versus local before i close, i will enter as federal versus local. 90 93 of marijuana arrest in 2010 were made by the metropolitan Police Department. Less than three percent of all of the rest and the district of thembia arrests in District Of Columbia were made on federal land. 99 of all arrests were made under the d. C. Code. We do not predict significant tension between federal and local marijuana enforcement and the wake of reform. We urge this committee to respect this local and widely supported measure 20 rest disparity enforcement and the District Of Columbia. Thank you. To arrest disparity enforcement in the desert columbia. Thank you. Of ourk you to all witnesses for their testimony and participation. I failed to say after the opening thank you again. With had to change the scheduling of this here at least twice in reference to our jim oshurember, mr. And other members and i were at his funeral. That is the reason and i appreciate your comply. Let me start with some quick questions. All right. I cited in fact mr. Oneil that there arent 26 are 26 lawenforcement agencies. Memo that the2013 u. S. Attorneys would not be going after some of the laws in these states. As far as federal prosecution. Exceptions. 8 the eighth one i had at which i put in the record was preventing Marijuana Possession or use of federal property. Is that correct . Is that part of what was issued . Chairman, i would characterize the memo slightly different. It was not an indication would not prosecute federal marijuana laws. Except for those exceptions or with those areas that are indicated. Is the memo say indicated those are the areas will focus our priorities. We have instructed federal prosecutions to focus. One would be prevented Marijuana Possession or use of federal property . That is correct. And that is correct . Mademe comments have been about what the department of justice has said and what they would do. At and have also looked recalled from colorado, it is one of two states that we have 20 states for the medical marijuana, but they have the penalties they simply eliminated for possession and colorado in colorado and washington. Picking on the district. We are looking at the implications for federal prosecutors. ,s to the claim mr. Maclean you cite you will be enforcing federal law . Far as possession which will you enforce . On federal property . If i have this little joint here in possession, what are you going to do . And i am a federal property, park service and you told me, all the area you cover what law are you going to enforce if this goes into effect in a few more weeks here . The current law over National Parks and district columbia is titled 37. You will enforce the federal law in conflict to the in deference to what the district has passed him a right . Passed, right . That is correct. And you would prosecute, the agency would either be the district has a different law. It would end up under federal laws, is that right . The u. S. Attorneys law has authority in the district for prosecuting cases or offenses under the d. C. Code. An so to the extent that arrest was made under d. C. Code, it will be superior coat. Dashcode. If it was brought in violation of federal, it would be in federal District Court. Just testified us, i doof your, give not want to change the word, that Marijuana Possession was 55 of offenses. What was that number . 55of the specific year, arrest made by parks occurred on parks . We could have an increased number given the disparity. I am not here to negate the district law, we are here to andew whether the district there have been president s precednents for that we have at least 2 states and with had at least one hearing to see how this would be administered and executed under the law. , and i have already put this in the record, federal prosecution it would be at a higher we still have the issue a you brought it up. Sham of this been a schedule one narcotic even though the district reduced the penalty and you have a jurisdiction under all of the nonfederal lands. You will prosecute under the new statute. Is that correct . Yes, that is correct. It is a local matter particularly given the relationship between the again,t of columbia and in thenique status scheme of political and enforcement jurisdictions. Question there is disparity in the prosecution when it comes to black. Know thens, i do not current number, probably have the population of the prison, state local jails are filled with africanamericans. Jail forr of people in various penalties, theres probably a Larger Population of africanamericans in jail and prosecuted for a whole host of crimes. And that is wrong. Is wrongny cases, it that today find themselves in that situation in the beginning. I am not certain that again, changing the penalty in the District Of Columbia is going to benefit of that population that much. Becomesately, marijuana a gateway and archiving and that is what narcotic and that is what we have said under the president of the United States who brought up some of this topic by comparing the use of marijuana equivalent to alcohol. Orin, it is not a question response to some of your questions. There are in equities that need to be resolved. I appreciate each of you coming. We are trying to sort through the implications. I didnt know what to the administration will do of the categories i do not know what that demonstration will do on the categories. In terms of scheduling marijuana . No, theres a process of considering that will be referred to the apartment of health and Human Services for a study and recommendation. Bring in people from the scientific area to see what is out there and again, review that whole process and right now with the law changing as you testify to and we all see across the land, we need to see where we are going. Of you are Law Enforcement officers and the job youre doing. And i hope you see problems that we are trying to sort through. Ms. Norton . I will try to stick to the five. We do have five votes scheduled. Thank you. Just to clarify, parkland and federal property, nothing i said was meant that i heard nothing that federal land would be different on federal property. Federal park services, federal buildings, i joked about how you will be arrested. This is federal property. You may be in jeopardy up here, mr. Chairman. But, what i was pointing out is the part land and federal treated theto be same way here as in other parts of the United States. Isnt that true . P that is correct. Yes, maam. I mentioned when 20 of the land was federal property there were any number of states eight you had give me some of the nevada, alaska where the entire state virtually is owned by the federal government. Does that create any particular , forculties with respect example in alaska where they have decriminalized marijuana, has the fact that much of the alaskan federal land creating particular difficulties and enforcing federal law on federal land . Mr. Oneill . I am not aware of any particular difficulty arising from the percentage of federal land in a state like alaska. We are goingd out, to approach marijuana enforcement in the distro in statesust as we do like colorado, washington, other jurisdictions that have chosen to amend their laws and this away. I want to note for the record that the admiral government owns 81 in nevada. Mr. Newsham, does the districts deal change d. C. Law around the sale and distribution of marijuana or intent to distribute marijuana . That would be an arrestable offense. What about notification of younts and guardians if find marijuana in the hands of a youth . The youth would be issued a notice of violation and again, with regard to distribution, it would be an arrestable offense and parents would be notified. Ms. Sadanandan, you noted that where there are great many young people, this a college town, east of 16th street, almost no arrests west of 16th street. In the map, and showed high in many areas where africanamericans left. Why do you think . How come there are so many arrests . How do they come about . The study we did was a descriptive study so we look onely at the arrests based anecdotal evidence, there are a number of Different Reasons that have to do with the way in which marijuana enforcement is prioritized by various agencies. I think if you can look at even law the number of various enforcement agencies here in the district am a you see more than 92 of the arrests are happening through the metropolitan Police Department. Are these youngsters or age, do youever think because of the smell or odor of marijuana . According to reports from young people in the district, it was under the alleged smell of marijuana that they were being singled out and stopped. What we found in our data is the wereity of people who actually arrested were not young people at all. Juveniles made up less than 4 of arrest. Juveniles. Mean i mean young people. Yeah im a absolutely. The pretense of odor was being used yeah, absolutely. What is the reason for the low fine . Finee reason for the low is the majority of the area of the district where people were being arrested are areas with high rates of low income individuals and to the application for a 25 fine is very different for a personal who is living at or below the poverty line than a person who is middleclass middleclass or upper middle class. The 25 fine is more likely based on the arrest pattern you levied against somebody of low income. We wanted a finding that was a deterrent for engaging in possession, but was also manageable and realistic and did not saddle someone with an additional burden which would be all released it for them to pay. Thank you and thank you mr. Chairman. Mr. Massey. I find the Racial Disparity aspect of the enforcement prosecution of these laws a very disturbing. Itd destruction invented the answer might not be just to ignore the law would we find a problem like this. , did you find Racial Disparity in a distribution, crimes as well as possession or have you looked at that . Report did not look specifically at the distribution. What i can say is this, based on just a survey, a general survey of number of distribution crimes in any area like a district seven of the metropolitan Police Department which is largely africanamerican section of the district versus district 2, we did find in district seven there arrests for distribution. In district to a mother were approximately between 20 two, there were approximately between 20 and it was much higher in district 2 thand 7. Will you anticipate, there still be arrest for intended to distribute, that does not change in the d. C. Law. Do you anticipate a Racial Disparity in continuing in the enforcer of this law . We anticipate there will be less arrest, but yes, the disparity will continue, but not on the scale that we are seeing now. 2 of thewsham, witnesses have testified that there is a Racial Disparity in application of this law was in european, why are blacks arrested at a higher rate than whites . What are you doing about it . What can you do and what have you done to address that disparity . I do not know if i heard folks say it was the enforcement of the law that was causing the disparity. Think, would you take a look at Something Like this if youre looking at the race for particular crime, other factors have to be considered. Before you draw any conclusion of what to because it is. One of the things we looked at at at the department because we are very sensitive to the allegations that laws are being bio sleep and by a sleep biasedly and forth. If you look at the study where they talked about two separate areas of the city, we call Patrol Service areas of the wall is in the Second District the way the southern district. This one the things we saw that in psa 204, which is predominately white, there were 12 drug calls that we had 12 marijuana arrests. 2, whisper dumbly black neighborhood which is predominately black neighborhood, we had 18 service, and over 200 marijuana arrests. Police, the Community Calls the police to come and take enforcement action. I guess why i say all of that is i do not want anybody to leave with the impression that the metropolitan Police Department or any Law Enforcement in the its taxes is causing. We need to take a closer look at the causes. Mr. Oneil, who determines the prosecution priorities after the department of justice at the department of justice . Old lady attorney general and the Deputy Attorney general ultimately, the attorney general and the Deputy Attorney general. Ultimately, eric holder . Yes, and any particular district. And discretion about how to enforce based on the particular circumstances. Have you had any directives, i heard you say earlier that you enforce the laws and d. C. Of federal land as you would in colorado or washington. Going to be any more or less diligent about prosecuting arrests on federal property in more lenientave marijuana laws than in other states . Going to approach it that was the point of the guidance. This is the enforcement priorities of the department across the entire country regardless. Note no deference to state law . Think our enforcement of marijuana laws on federal property will be the same regardless of whether the applicable state law is. Recognize mr. Jordan. Mr. Oneil, will mark one disclosed lois lerner that the Internal Revenue service was targeting concerted later the four days attorney general announced that after san this activity was outrageous and unacceptable that after this activity was outrageous and acceptable unannounced. That we had fbi director mueller three questions. Who is the lead . How many agents have you hired . His response was i do not know. What he also said was i will get back to you and find we should know some of the basic information. I would like to know a couple of things. We know ms. Boxer man is involved. She has interviewed many of the witnesses. She is in the civil rights division. The attorney general have told us the Public Integrity is involved. Is that accurate . And careerights agents at the federal bureau of investigation and treasury Inspector General. Can you tell me some the basic information about the questions i asked mr. Mueller, who is the lead agent on this . I am sure we can provide information to you. We have asked you seven times. We have sent seven inquiries to the department of justice and each time they cannot tell us. Ueller did not say that, he said he would get back to us. Mr. Oneil, you are acting assistant, see mentioned the integrity . Yes. Are you involved in the investigation . I would disagree with characterization. What are you involved . Ily the investigation oversee public in turkish and i oversee Public Integrity. Ihne, we have heard he is involved. I am not familiar with the name. But who is leading the investigation . Queens who is leading the investigation hole is the leading investigation . I will say you oversee the criminal investigation involved, i want to know you did not know, this one the biggest cases a you didnt know who is leading . There are leading numerous prosecutors can you tell me how many . Ive a tried to get this for 11 months. But i cannot tell you that. Is this an important case finding out how First Amendment rights were violated and they were targeted by the irs . I would disagree with the characterization. It is an important case. You do not know how many ages are involved . Agents would involve from the federal bureau of investigation. How many attorneys from your i cannot give you a precise number. Week in a this bipartisan majority, 20s and 26ats joined republic and democrats joined republicans and said we should have a special counsel take over this investigation. 26 democrats joined with us saying this the actions of the irs and department of justice in connection with the matter have served to undermine the investigation. That was part of the resolution. 26 democrats agreed. Do you think we need a special counsel to take over this investigation was mark investigation . Nobody seems to know how many agents are involved in who is leading. Even the people involved, do you think we need a council . I see the attorney general and others in the department have answered that question and i think the answer is, no. You will not reckon is a special counsel . No. You do not think the attorney general will consider that . Even though 26 democrats have said this is not the kind of investigation we want. But again, that suggestion has been made suggestion but a vote by the u. S. House of representatives with 20 six democrats joined republicans say what is going well and the Justice Department is not a real investigation. When the person leading gave money to the president s campaign. Even 26 democrats agreed somebody else should be in charge. , i think congressman, i think the prosecution is being led and managed by career prosecutors in the Criminal Division and civil rights with assistance from career agents in the fbi and Inspector General i hope the attorney general will listen to what 26 fellow democrats in the United States house of representatives had to say earlier this week when they voted. Here is what is going to happen. We have less than a minute now remaining and a vote. Until recess the hearing 12 15 p. M. Ill try to conclude by 12 30 we have at least a few more questions to be asked. The subcommittee will stand to recess until 12 15. I will call the subcommittee back to order. Thank everyone for their indulgence of a couple of minutes. Once again, i appreciate your patience and accommodating. We have at least one more member who wanted to ask questions we want to give everybody time to ask those questions. In the meantime, one of the questions that i would pose as we wait for the other members, the affect of penalties related to marijuana and an increasing rate of drug driving, we do not really have a standard. This is something i went to look at and nationally to determine the level of narcotic in the bloodstream. , itink also that marijuana can be detected in the blood stream for some time after it is used. The whole question of driving impairedd is raised is raised. Newsham, do you see any problem of increased n with of marijuana, agai the penalties and also the inability to come up with a test that would indicate the level of attack intoxication by marijuana . I do not think i would we would assume it would increase any use due to the decriminalization. I guess theres not going to be any changes and the way we currently in force people who are driving under the influence. That is not have a test administered and a National Standard or within the district or the amount of marijuana, do we . Know, the way a driver would be tested on the scene, they would be given a road test as to their ability to perform certain functions. If they are unable to perform a mother will be an associate they are impaired. You do blood samples . We can if necessary. Thats another question for another hearing. We see that issue across the United States. Let me yield if i may to dr. Fleming. You, mr. Gain, thank chairman. I want to welcome our panel. First of all, it seems in listening to your testimony today the justification for decriminalizing marijuana is made on the basis of Racial Disparity. Argument i only real have heard. I would like to ask our 2 police professionals, can you give me a rough estimate of the white versus a nonwhite numbers among your officers in the field . The ones who actually make arrests, both of you. Just a range would be fine. Sure how many your Police Officers in the field who would be making arrests. Metro is0 of africanamerican. The majority is africanamerican and the District Of Columbia. But how about you . I do not have an approximate number. Usa it was evenly balanced perhaps you would say it was evenly balanced perhaps . You are well per well represented by African Americans and whites . We have a very diverse workforce. If you accept these numbers ratios, the 8 ratios, the 1 implication are the officers are racially biased. How do explain in the case of d. C. Wary of a the majority of officers that are certainly youan, do not think they are racially biased against their own race . Excellent that is an question. What we are really seeing is the phenomenon of communitybased profiling. Certain communities are treated and police in a certain kind of way and those strategies are not necessarily applied in other communities. With regard to drug Law Enforcement, i can give you a specific example. What we heard from across after American Communities had to do with drug interdiction units known as the jump out car, the toice officers jumping out stop and search pedestrians in which people consented to searches which sometime reveals small amounts of marijuana. You would conceive it is not a racial bias. Again, you have the same africanamerican officers who are were who are arrested africanamericans. It sounds like certain communities have a higher density of police enforcement. No, i would not say it was not a racial bias. I do not think the race of the Police Officer necessarily determines whether or not there is an institutional bias in which communities on the basis of race are policed. I do not think that just because a Police Officer is black, that Police Officer does not carry implicit bias that is carried throughout our society and a numberl races due to of different factors in which we do not have to get into. Let me shift a little bit here. So what about other crimes . Grand theft auto . Murder . Do things reduce enforcement or penalties because theyre also found to be Racial Disparities in their . Would you also recognize that will reduce or perhaps not sentence someone who has committed murder to prison simply because of potential racial bias . Say withe can certainty about marijuana is the decriminalization of marijuana has not had an impact on either that is an answer to a different question. What about other crimes . Would you dimension those sentences . I think we need to look at whether or not our criminal justice approach to Public Safety issues is in fact making us safer. Will we measure the efficacy, we need to look at more than how many people we are rest. We need to look at whether or not just yes or no. Should we diminish penalties for those other crimes that are for more serious far more serious . If there are Racial Disparities and the approach to criminal justice is found not to be effective, we should seriously consider examining the type of sentences and approaches we take in dealing with the Public Safety issues. I take that as sort of a yes. Back to our Police Officers, do you agree that perhaps there is some a racial bias or bigotry perhaps that leads to these are rates of arrests . That peopleope would not draw that conclusion based on analysis that is based on race alone. You have to look at other factors that may be caused. Is calledup one which where the Community Called the police to a particular area so there are more police and area and are likely to be more arrests. It is something, it is an issue that needs to be looked at. It needs to be looked at carefully. Ive worked on the metropolitan police force from was 25 years. Folks i have worked with with in would bey obviously, very upset that they are being accused of bias enforcement. It is one of the things we work hard at. Again, to reiterate a statement you made twice, you are saying that you are not going into communities seeking out criminals. You are getting calls. You are getting a higher density of calls. Obviously, your offices are responded to the calls and certainly reacted to the loss laws. That is one of the factors that need to be looked at. What i might also suggest in drug counselor told me back in the 1980s, if you see a pure alcoholic take a picture, it is probably the last one you see. What he meant by that was nowadays when it comes to addition, it is formal policy. Anybody use you see just marijuana. I am not suggesting everybody who uses marijuana use other drugs, but those who do use a drug for equally who are addicted, oftentimes use many different drugs. And so, it would seem to me and i would love to get your response to this that while you might find marijuana on the person of that individual, that person could have been using other drugs to which it could have created a behavior that generated that call to service. I think i would respond like this. We on the metropolitan Police Department, we enforce of the laws of that are in place. That a person is using one drug or another is not really what we do. We enforce the laws that are in place. I do not think anybody has said there is going to be a for Marijuana Possession and the addition of columbia, just the consequence have changed. It is change from a notice of violation for less than an ounce to an arrest situation. The enforcement is still there. There is still at least the laws want to be enforced and we will continue to enforce those. I yield back, mr. Chairman. Thank you. Ms. Norton, did you have additional questions . Was icing an informative answer that you gave, mr. Areas. , about high crime we call them high crime areas. Large number of calls and here is what i want to speak of a consequence. He received a large number of calls. Before this law was passed and Marijuana Possession is in fact against the law and you have reason to believe that a person is in possession of marijuana will whether you are black or white, marijuana. Whether you are black or white, a policeman will enforce because possession of marijuana in the District Of Columbia is against the law. So, yes i agree. I am shaking my head. Africanamericans police boat would not be inclined to give a pass to africanamericans if it is the law of the land. Because they enforce the law in the same way that our white officers to do. Would that not be the case . That is accurate. If the law changes a good the same number of calls, particularly in areas where there may be more crime than believesd the officer that someone may possess marijuana, that same officer, black or white, will act the opposite of how he acts today when a marijuana decriminalization possession is against the law . Action will be different. I do not know if it is necessarily but how would he been how he behaved today . He would issue a notice instead of arrest. The person is still subject to a fine. He does not get a record. Councils bill says that the odor of marijuana, the smell of marijuana is not enough. Do you believe and therefore for mere possession of marijuana there would be a decrease in the number of people arrested . There will certainly be a decrease in arrests, if you are told about enforcement action is taken possession of marijuana. These are people arrested for possession only. I can understand you being arrested for looking at a number of different offenses. Where the officers suspect the person may the arrest would decrease. Absolutely. , think enforcement action whether enforcement action would be taken is hard to say. Is somese there enforcement action that is still possible. For example, i suspect it would be more likely if the person were smoking openly the marijuana. In that case, i would expect enforcement action to be taken. There will be. Yes. Smoking marijuana in public will still be an arrest. I would expect our africanamerican Police Officers would be as likely to arrest for smoking marijuana ornly as our white officers of other backgrounds. That is fair to say. Thank you very much. Thank you. I want to thank each of our witnesses for appearing today for their testimony and participation as we sort through some of these issues. We are seeking answers. No dissertation has been made yet decision has been made yet if congress will contest or overturn or attempted to overturn the district law that has been passed. Very clearly our responsibility when under the constitution, the creation of the district act of 1790 went 1973 the home rule act of that gave us specifically 60 legislative days to review these laws. Particular change in the again, a have heard, number, 26 federal agents in the District Of Columbia that are charged with the responsibility of Law Enforcement. There are other factors and we are trying to sort through the position of the administration, the u. S. Attorney, and others who will help determine policy. We will continue this series in our next hearing. As i said, we will look at other implications as far as changing the status of this particular level of narcotic which is a schedule one narcotic which has been pointed out again in this hearing. Some of the contradictions enumerated or as possible changes in policy enumerated by the president and selecting statements by drug Enforcement Agency and office of National Drug policy and under the president , the United States, it is an important issue. Perception of in the use and abuse of her kylix. Of narcotics. Nd we will organize and focus every body will have an opportunity to participate will stop i think the gentlelady from the district for comment to participate both as a witness and the record objection, the will be left open for 10 days for additional statements or questions that maybe posed to the witnesses here today. Again, i think our witnesses. With there being no further business before this subcommittee, this hearing is adjourned. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] richard, a concert of hq discuss the tea party influence. The center for American Progress with federal policies that affect working mothers including Maternity Leave and the pay gap between men and women. High School Teachers talk about preparing for the advanced placement u. S. Government exam for what will be on the test. Plus your calls and tweets. 7 00ngton journal, live on on cspan. Clear i am not , iending this ms. Lerner wanted to hear what she had to say. I want to know why she was unaware after their we created. I want to know why she did not mention the inappropriate criteria and her letters to congress. I cannot vote to violate an individuals fifth amendment rights just because i want to hear what she has to say. A much greater principle is at stake here today. The sanctity of the fifth amendment rights for all citizens of the United States of america. I have never alleged that a goes to the president. I have said that the tea party with clearly and fairly be described as enemies or adverse roots to the president s policies. They were targeted by somebody who politics with the president i was trying to overturn the president i am sorry, the Supreme Court decision of ofizens united and support using her power. With that, i yield back. This weekend on cspan, house debate on holding lois lerner in contempt of congress for refusing to answer questions. Saturday morning at 10 00 eastern. On book tv, john yoo argues the obama administrations policy will harm cause harm. And a look at the mount vernon dining room restoration