>> i wish they would both care law and the le of constitution -- in the constitution. and if the republicans care, to stop these things president obama is trying to do. up over the e open weekend. is it here to stay, do you think? is obama care here to stay? >> i hope the republican stop it. i think they have to defunded if they're going to stop it. if they let it go for another two years, i seriously doubt it will be removed. if it is not removed, it have tially means we created socialized medicine. more and more people will be -- subsidies you talk about? it is $90,000 for a family of four. remove that subsidy -- if you go one dollar over that poverty level, which means you are middle class person, you can have a $10,000 increase in your annual insurance premiums. so what we have done is put ourselves at the mercy of the federal government. one of the most important things in our life, health care, which involves life-and-death situations. and also, we are about to hit $18 trillion in debt. the country is headed towards bankruptcy even without obama care. the costs -- the bankruptcy will be moved closer, and america will be fundamentally changed. not just because allawi care, but because the economic crisis we have gone through. scenario, there be a then, somehow resolved? >> before obama care was in place a year ago, there were systems in this country for taking care of people who didn't have the money to provide their own health care. first of all, we had a medicaid in place. you also had institutions around the country that provide free health care to people. and there were religious hospitals all around the country. they are not going to turn people away because they don't have the money. the mission was not about -- i don't think obama care was helping ly about people's health care. i think it was about putting the government in charge of health care. >> terry "washington journal" continues. >> joining us, adam green, the cofounder of the progressive change campaign committee. >> good morning. >> for those who do not know, tell us about the progressive change campaign committee. is about a million-member organization to fight for democratic issues. raise 4, we are proud to over $1.5 million across the country, as well as make 4 phone calls for candidates like al franken. >> how did you do, track record wise? >> it was quite good. but there's a larger point that we have coming out of the elections, which is that democrats lost the country because there was a failure to have big ideas. big economic ideas. whereas people like al franken, 312 hours ne bite by 10 -- points this time, one by 10 points this time. they won because, for six years they were proud, progressive -- the message to president obama at large is the time to pit bold ideas. >> elizabeth warren, now a member of leadership on the senate democratic side. >> yes, congratulations to elizabeth warren. it is really a thrill for her to be in their. she was the most popular campaigner for democrats in 2014. that is because her economic expanding social security benefits, making more affordable, reforming wall street, is popular among everyone. they saw her ability to fill beyond their wildest dreams, aand they want that was represented in the room. >> do think part of the reason is given that position is because democrats were not selling that message before -- during the election.? >> yes, absolutely. been -- d, there has this election somewhat filled in -- with somewhat filled in with nothing. there was not an economic agenda that was worth the voters while. their ability to have control if they went to the polls. you cannot motivate people with nothing. elizabeth warren is out there with big ideas. her colleagues recognize that, aand they want her to help the situation. >> so the list of big ideas -- what is on top of that list? >> well, look, we have the republican congress right now. the worst-case scenario would be starting with the lowest common denominator ideas. that would just be horrible. to just also be that adopt -- democrats actually have a unique opportunity now, the ng the minority and in face of a residential election, with a bold d agenda. one of the ideas is break up wall street. two, college affordability. votes for her bill this congress to, basically, really billions and billions of dollars for student debt. let's talk about free college education. let's talk about making public universities truly public. talk about things like extending social security benefits, instead of cutting them. this will change millions of people's lives. like the things employment act, which basically says that anyone who wants to work hard, the government will you jobs building bridges, working on the energy grid -- let's do that. these ideas are wildly popular, so let's talk about those ideas opposed to smallbore ideas and predicting what members of congress will agree to next. >> was up early because obama that selling big ideas? >> yes. wanting president obama to adopt elizabeth warren's ideas. they cannot come down to one speech. small who won by very big in last time, by margins this time, they expect stick tto their streak. that is what will motivate them to vote. >> why do think president obama doembrace those ideas? well, he has been sometimes catering to what washington dc wants. our point is that bipartisanship is fine, it just to be made straight by partisanship, not d.c. bipartisanship. these are ideas that democrats of and went on if they choose -- win on if they choose. passed stion is, do just something washington for the sake of passing it? or is it because you have ideas that should be passed into law? it is the lowest common denominator versus big, bold ideas. >> our guest, adam green, the progressive the change campaign committee. the next alk about progressive ideas, and take your comments come as well. 202-585-3880 for democrats. 202-585-3881 for republicans. 202-585-3882 for independents. we will begin with dan in michigan, the democrats line. to make a just want comment about an observation i made while i was watching the senate for the other day. mitch mcconnell had the floor and he asked for any questions from his colleagues. at the time, a couple people were not ready. mary landrieu said yes, i have a question. his mitch mcconnell turned back to her, until a couple republicans were ready. i cannot remember the man's name, i think he was from north -- he heads up the -- the bill for the keystone pipeline. mitch mcconnell totally let the led her, republican speak, and then left the floor with the rest of the republicans. that is an indication, to me, that the republicans are not willing to work with the democrats. >> yes, i think there are a couple symbolic things about what he has done. people are watching mitch mcconnell, like yourself, literally. that kind ll continue of gamesmanship, aand the challenges for the democrats is to make sure that he walks the plank wwith that type of gamesmanship. let's not let him stutter over between the parties -- to just do what he will on the senate floor. if democrats -- if president obama goes forward with some of these executive actions, and republicans want to use gamesmanship in the senate to that, good, let mitch mcconnell say very clearly to latino voters that he is that with them. if elizabeth warren was to make to make college affordable for millions of children, and mitch mcconnell that kind of games, great, do it in open and to take that position. and let the american people decide whose side they are on. >> richard is up next to the republican line from kentucky. >> that republican line is the key here. am a lifelong democrat who voted republican for the first time since 1972. a while ago number that 200,000 some jobs were created -- my son has three of those jobs. my daughter has two of them. my wife and i, we had to change our doctors. do remember that you can change your doctors if you want to? i will never, ever -- aand i am union construction worker -- i will never, ever vote democrat again. >> okay. well, first of all, i would be very interested to know your children, because them having three jobs is not what the american dream is about. if you feel let down by the party in some respects, i think a lot of people are in your boat, including democrats. i'm very curious on what you would think about raising minimum wage. in red states -- my guess is that if it were not benefit your kids directly, it would benefit your area. people in red states of america who support that idea. what i ind of stick to am saying, democrats need to offer big ideas that regular people by. it is a change that the democratic party has left -- some of them -- bbehind. we need to remold the party, the path ink that is to success. on our l is in michigan independent line. go ahead. i'm talking about your plans to d your destroy america -- >> what is your question? government to eed control our country and destroy the whole situation of america. we need freedom. freedom for the people. all of america, for the people. agendas and communism. >> thank you. we do need freedom. so let me tell you about one of the biggest shackles for them is -- student at. there are so many -- student debt. there are so many people who graduate college with thousands of dollars in debt. good in ho want to do the community have to take a job at a big bank to pay back the bills. there is a big brain drain in the country because of student debt. i would hope at a minimum, you would support paying less for college. that is one of the big ideas we're advocating for the democratic party. one of the things shackling us down is wall street winning over our economy. wall street basically paying workers very little, shipping jobs overseas, really kind of polluting our economy. i do not know if you feel like side of wall e street, but democrats are it is not about -- to everyday middle-class families to have a job?om go to a e freedom to college with a choice? month, we had s jonathan cullen, and how a more can should adopt moderate agendas, may be concentrating more on tax reform and things like that. >> so, i think that the democratic party has to think on two tracks. one is, what can you do, really, over the next 9 to 12 2016 really heads up. where you can find substantive ground with republicans. that is probably not going to be on the minimum wage, it is be on tax oing to reform, trade policy, energy are places hose where there is already well-established, bipartisan , ground. the second piece to what democrats into think about goes to longer-term message. in 2016, if y -- democrats focus on a prosperity and agenda, there is not throwing people in life preserver, but fixing -- their prospects in 2016 and beyond will be really good. if the party sticks with the that they used -- the same economic playbook they the cycle, even though a presidential cycle is better for democrats, it is still not good enough. >> mr. green. >> so, first it is important to know what they're all about. the majority of the third-rate board 's corporate executives and people from wall street. the lion share of their funding comes from wall street, something that we actually just this past year -- wwe got them to admits that the majority of their money is from wall street. we also got them to admit that there is no grassroots on their side. it is just a corporate funded think tank. not surprised that jahn would advocate for lower corporation tax -- john would advocate for lower corporate taxations. i would also not be surprised who he supports companies sent jobs overseas. you know, he talks about -- it that he talks that we shouldn't throw people like preservers. it is not about throwing a preserver, it is about saving lives. to make sure we have enough pay al security benefits to for people's needs, a preserver them to live ws life. that is the choice the democratic party has to face. whose side are we on? do we side with the corporations, or do we side with millions of people? >> so the democratic party, when looking at wall street -- has that been enough in your opinion? >> no, it did not do enough. gone back to y consumers and save the millions of dollars. there were some -- some like that.reform the banks who are too big to fail before our bigger now. they are bigger and they will fill, unless you break it off some point -- and they will off at nless we break it some point. what we need is an outcry around these ideas. the fundamental question is, side are you on? come s will be inspired to to the polls if they can affirmatively say, yes. >> this is chris from maryland. go ahead. >> yes, how you doing? >> good, thank you. my issue is that the you y has not -- see how they cater to the republicans -- and i agree with all the ideas they have set forth. of them is, unfortunately, is obama care. gives millions of americans health and life. think the last caller had lies that are not true. obama care went to the congress. a chance to had present grievances. they chose not to. >> thank you for pointing that out. a lot of e has helped people, and we wish it would've helped even more people. if you have the opportunity to, you know, and $1000, instead in order to that earn $100, you earned that. people to buy into healthcare was wildly popular. around the time of the health there was a poll over 70% of about 60% of independents, and even 50% of republicans wanted a public option. push that into law. be pushing to through these big ideas. i saw present obama the day after the election give a what he said was -- the ok forward to hearing public governing agenda, and i the republican governing agenda, and i will offer the democratic agenda. but i will offer -- and when you think about it, it is very scary the way things could go we hear years -- all about is present obama's ideas going up against mitch mcconnell. to encourage democrats -- and i talked to incoming members of the senate and house -- they are ready to have a spine. they're going to push the democratic party to go in that direction. what we need is a contempt of you among the party that we are big, bold tand for economic ideas. we want elizabeth warren's image. we'll be talking about victory at the polls. >> a couple tweets to give you -- for all hear, who pays these programs that you talk about? >> let's start with the last one. right now, big oil companies get $4 billion in subsidies per year. corporations that ship jobs overseas and have tax incentives to go overseas pretty much rabbit treasury of of dollars -- rob the treasury of millions of dollars every year. the loophole is how we pay for these programs. it is not a question of, do we pay for something? the question is, who side are you on, and where are you distribute in your budget? on the agenda for, this is a really interesting question. it is one of the greats we have with the democratic party, and taking bad republican ideas -- not fretting about them -- instead just into a rating them larger bill, stuttering over the ideas between the different parties and the different ideologies, and then tell the voters, hey, this is a democratic bill. who wanted to help insurance mandates? the biggest insurance companies wanted to help it. not people. for people were of much for the public option. if you look at the stimulus bill, for some reason stimulus has a bad name now. why does have a bad name? of ause we took hundreds and ions of dollars republican tax cuts, and call that an economic stimulus. surprise, surprise, that idea the network. that is why we cannot start with a lowest common denominator approach. we need to say we are going to take big, bold economic ideas that are wildly popular in red, purple, and blue states. if the republicans use the majority to shut that down, then fine. we'll take that message with clarity into 2016 and we will win. on the from california independent line. go ahead. are saying what you is that you think that the democrats progressive populist agenda is the way to go. it didn't work. although, elizabeth warren coming out for -- in agreement concept of a party fail is too big is spot on. be a think if you want to viable party going forward, to get my independent vote, i think you need to pay attention to that. the way i feel is that i am getting screwed on both sides. for that is because too big to fail is allowed to be there. agenda that you that is way, way, way too copperheads of. if you just start -- to comprehensive. just that with a financial system, everything else is start to fall into place. >> thank you, gary. >> i'll accept that as a friendly amendment. three start with the fiscal issues -- one of which was taking on the big banks. 20 popular. there are almost no no votes. you know, basically, there was a path for populists on the republican and democrat side: people like yourself think you are getting it from both sides. what you really mean is the corporations have been funding our political parties, both of them, and as a result, exporting trade deals, lowering corporate taxes and stuff like that. you want someone to fight for you. i agree. >> clive iowa, republican line, fill ip caller: i have a question for the listeners as well as the guest the listeners, i want to give them a question to pose to progressives. the question is: what does a self-describe progressive progress toward? what is the mathematical limit that you can say, we are now progressive. we have progressed? what does that look like? what does it look like with regard to private property rights and everything else? what is the actual goal of a progre progressive? you progress toward something at least to the point to where you reach it. if not, what does that look like? thank you. >> guest: that's a great question. i respect the intellectual honesty behind that question. >> we would stop progress is a little counter-intuitive but what are some bench marks along the way that represent progress? one easy one is that somebody who works 40 hours or more a week, a full-time job should not be living in poverty. right? >> the principle behind the minimum wage. one can debate should it go up $07,510? >> the bottom line principlen principal with progressives. i would say that people should be able to go to college and not be saddled with debt their entire life. all of their life's decisions for the next decade, two decades should not be driven by how much the college bills were. that would be a sign of progress if we reached that point. there are many ways to do it. that would be one. do workers in our economy have the ability to both get paid more overtime and be assured that their kids will be able to get paid more than they do? that used to be the case. we have regressed and not progressed. >> that's partially because ceo did are paying themselves exorbitant amounts, shipping jobs overseas and not looking for american works. these are a few bench marks of success. progressive.org is where we have these ideas. >> birmingham alabama, democrats line, larry, go ahead. caller: good morning. first of all, i have your agenda a. a progressive agenda is the way to go. first of all, the republicans om this election, they came out with this white working class quote, unquote. black people work in america, too. the message and everything that's around, it changed their agenda on this election and called for an hour. i am going to reflect their agenda here it's their agenda and you put the conservative republicans ain your senate and it's a message. president obama, let me make a point. you all know that we have when president obama ran for office in 2008. anyone with common sense know that this man brought the economy back to full force. if you had a 401(k), it's on solid ground right now. the republican's agenda is to keep it 1%. we are going to see it. i want all you of you voters, when everything starts going downhill, don't blame the progressive movement because we are trying to do that. host: host thanks. >> guest: everything you said is pretty spot-on. >> that's why we need to fight together. we can't just debate it. we have to keep fighting. what can you do in your community? well, you know, if a presidential candidate comes to town or if your local member of congress or the senate has a townhall meet, go and tell them that. it's amazing how doing that, just two people in a crowd will make that be the big take-away from a local event. we need you to fight for big bold ideas. we need you to actually fight for us and, you know, continue moving the economy in the right direction. i encourage you to do that. please, i invite you actively to enjoy us, progressives.org. >> you mentioned senator warren. are you pushing her to run for president? >> in 2011, 2012, we raised over a million dollars for her campaign in small-dollar doane assess and overall were her number 1 grassroots ally. if she decides to run for president, we would be thrilled. we are not pushing her to run for president. what we are pushing is that any presidential candidate, including hillary clinton campaign on elizabeth warren's populist ideas such as extending social security, more reform of wall street and making college affordable. what we are doing is actually very soon sending our first organizers to new hampshire to organize our thousands of members on the ground and a local coalition offun youngs and progressive ofrlingsz to ensure whenever a presidential candidate comes to town to ask whether they agree with elizabeth warren on key issues. >> how much of a progressive agenda does hillary adopt? >> to predict or currently? >> currently? >> three boxes. foreign policy, social policy and economic policy. social policy, she isb on issues of gay marriage and for a lot of people, she is fine there. foreign policy is a little bit back and forth. we will see where she comes out on some of these war and peace issues. i found poplism, president big guy, little guy, when they are going in to each other that's the big tbd. the fact she joined elizabeth warren atacam pain event this cycle and paid homage to her agenda was a step in the right direction. part of our message to hillary clinton is that words will not be enough. it matters who she appoints to the economic team. will she continued the trend of goldman sachs for our economy or people like stig lits or a paul friedman time, dean baker or others. sheila behr. those will be concrete down payments on the. you know, economic ideas, siding with the little guy against the big guy. we will incentivize her. >> moving forward, should she become the democratic nominee, is there a sense that your organization might not endorse her if she doesn't embrace enough of those concepts that you hold on to? >> well, you know, we take the word "endorsement" very seriously. any candidate would have to basically adopt an elizabeth warren style populist agenda to get our endorsement. partly for us, the question is prior to prior to in 2012 while many others are focused, our number one prior to priorities was electing elizabeth warren. she has been a one-person game changer. she has inspired her colleagues to have more back board to use the words of one of your callers, leadership. we are on goal to advance the popular decision. we hope that hillary clinton is part of that, and we will do our part to incentivize her. >> outside from hillary clinton and elizabeth warren, anybody else who might be running for president adopts your kind of fi philosophies going forward? does anybody stand out? >> we will see. we will see. you know, bernie sanders is probably going to run. he is a good economic populist. there has been murmurs of brian schweitzer who won in a supposedly red state, take on the corporation. bo biden, the attorney general who takes on. >> out of maryland? >> mowrey, not sure where he stands on some of these issues, but we will find out. i think having competition is probably, you know, a helpful thing or even the processing expect of competition to allow secretary clinton to contemplate where she wants to position herself, and the one thing i agree with is they said hillary clinton's decision on some of these populist issues, should she side with the populist agenda or wall street agend. we are going to do our part to ask every candidate for president including hillary clinton and any of the others whether they agree with elizabeth warren on these issues like social security, more website reform and making college more affordable. >> jenk, independent line from north carolina. caller: yes. my observation is, i think he made the statement that anybody that opposes the president's executive action on immigration does it to the detriment of the hispanic voter. but if they are illegal, they can't vote. and then you also commented on al franken winning in 2008 by 384 votes. how many of those votes were found under a church pew or came from the prison population that couldn't vote? and why is it that the progressive party seems to rely on the stupidity of the american voter? >> guest: that's a great question. right-wing talking points, they are still alive six years later including the al franken vote. he turned 312 votes victory margin in a high electorate presidential election year into a 10 point marge maintain low turnout year. the question is why? the reason is voters aren't stupid. they saw him for six years and he has a populist vision. he put key parts to force insurance companies to give rebates to customers he ripped off. put at a time key provisions in the wall street reform bill that would stop corruption on wall street, stop some of the way they get a corrupt way. he has been out there for overturning citizens united and net neutrality. voters aren't stupid. they voted for him. >> that's where we disagree. >> married, tom, republican line. go ahead. caller: yes. good morning. i would like you to focus on keeping things simple. you may get through to more people if you slow your temperature o down. number 1, my litmus test for any politician is: will you support food stamps? because anybody that will not support children and elderly who have benefits of food stamps to 70% of the program doesn't deserve to be in washington. and you said as a flash point, a land mine for these republicans. host: okay. well, first of all, i would like to say hello to my grandmother, barbara watching in new jersey, and i am often reminded to slow down a little bit. so, i appreciate your words of wisdom there. and i agree with you on the values front. something like food stamps, something that third way would call a life preserver and criticize that is a fair proxy for who's side are you on? will you give people the minimum basics in life like food? social security is part and parcel of that same thing. the decision to expand social security idea advanced by tom harkin from the first presidential state of iowa and marg begich from the red state of alaska already carried forward from brian shots and ohio. will we give seniors the minimal amount they can afford both -- housing, medicine and food? and i think that's a completely fair proxy to judge people on. >> austin texas. here is more on democrats line. >> hello. thank you for taking my call. i have two points to make. the first one, the first one has to do with immigration. and being fro of texas, we are very sensitive to illegal immigration down here. texas has flagrantly disregarded the federal immigration law by allowing a great number of illegal immigrants into the state to the point where u.s. citizens -- i have four university degrees and i can't find a job. and they are in the stem disciplines and i can't find a job. so first of all, i do support the progressive movement. i don't support it with respect to injecting 4 million illegal immigrants into the workforce. and the effects that will have on social security. it will blow it up because every one of those who get a provitional work permit will also get a social security number. it will destroy that program. and i just -- i can't understand why that isn't talked about or even if you guys realize that. >> can i ask a question caller: sure. >> if the president adopts this, does it change how you vote or who you vote for? caller: in this past election, i voted for anything other than a democrat because of that, and if he does abuse the executive order, i will support impeachment. >> from austin, texas. >> you seem like a good person and you have my genuine sympathy that you are struggle to go find a job. i guess i would ask you the honest question: do you believe that people who are illegally coming across the border are -- have the skill set that would compete with you in four degrees? do you think that they are actually taking the job that you are in contention for, or is it possibly a matter of american companies not creating jobs here because they have written the tax rules such that they are incentivized to ship jobs overseas, they have the ability to have your skill set, have it done in china for a 5th of the cost and they can write the tax laws in such a way that they can keep the profits seers and not have to pay taxes? might that be a little bit more of the caused of you not having a job than somebody illegally coming across the border? i would ask you to think about it. i think there is a lot of skate goeping, picking on the little guy. democrats have been complicit in not calling out corporate abuse of our system. that's why we need to he let's not have the corporations. let's fight for fem like you. >> her sentiment about future votes concerned particularly over immigration? >> guest: in his executive order host: yeah. >> guest: there will be some right-wing push back to that. i hope he there are a certain set of people like laura who will be always open minded and look for the proper it scapegoat, not pick on those who have no power, and, you know, i think that if president obama helps millions of people by signalling who's side he is on and we have a robust debate about this, that will give us the opportunity to change some minds and set the democratic party in a trajectory where on this and many other issues, they answer the question of who's side are you on and it's for the little guy. >> adam greene is the co foindzer for the progressive change campaign committee, allprogressives dog >> guest: that's right. host: wanted to check. >> monday night on the theunicators, tim woo, columbia law school professor who coined the term net neutrality on how to manage the internet. >> one of the things that is , not everyoneoked is overlooking it, but generally, the question about broadband. how are they going to get it? no one is addressing that right now. title to does give the agency more power to do things like mandate universal service, like we did for telephone service back in the 20th century. which rightmoney, now goes mostly to subsidized telephone service, which could be a position to create rural broadband centers. that as possibilities future president or fcc chairman could say, we need a universal service program. people all over the country need to have broadband. >> monday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. the 2015 c-span student cam video competition is underway. all middle and high school students to create a documentary on the theme, the three branches and you, showing how a policy, law or action of the government has affected you are your community. fore are 200 cash prizes students and teachers totaling $100,000. for a list of rules, go to studentcam.org. att, a house committee looks cutting off funding for the isis terror group. after that, q&a. live at 7:00 a.m., your comments on washington journal. >> on thursday, the undersecretary of treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence told the house financial services committee that the administration is 100% committed to combating isis. he outlined what the treasury is doing to attack the terror group's funding sources. experts outlined additional steps that could be taken. this is just over three hours. >> the committee will come to order. the chair will declare a recess at any time. before we begin, if you think you are in a strange room, you are. we did not change the portraits, as i have announced previously to the committee. our hearing room, i think, is the last hearing room in the raburn building to receive a sound upgrade and other modifications to make the room ada compliant. as a reminder to all members, we will be a no maddic tribe between now and theoretically the end of march. we hope that doesn't mean mid-may. and we will take whatever committee room our friends will allow us to have. so if you see chairman shoouser on the floor, thank you for his kindness in allowing our committee to use his committee room. this hearing is entitled terrorist financing and the islamic state. i wish to advise members who are unaware we have two panels today. we also have organizing meetings for the 114th congress that are ensuing. so we are going to release the administration witness, secretary cohen, at noon. we will convene the second panel at that time. then the hearing will be gavelled down at 1:00. please know this will be our first hearing on this vitally important topic. it will not be our last. so members who don't have an opportunity to ask questions, if need be, we can call the witnesses back in the future. and at least for those on the republican side of the aisle, once we have the second panel begun, wherever we last left in the cue, those who didn't have an opportunity to ask questions, we'll start with you on the second panel. i now wish to recognize myself for one minute for an opening statement. the 9/11 commission estimated that al qaeda's brutal evil attack on 9/11 cost the terrorist half a million dollars. so terrorists were able to murder 3,000 of our fellow countrymen and inflict immeasurable suffering upon our nation. today we face another terrorist enemy for which a half a million dollars appears to be pocket change. organization that reportedly raises between $1 and $2 million a day. and unlike al qaeda and other terrorist groups with which we are familiar and rely mainly on private donations in spate sponsorship to fund their activities, isil is internally financed rather and apparently is sitting on assets of almost $2 billion. so today's hearing continues this committee's ongoing efforts to ensure our government is doing everything possible to stop the islamic state and other terrorists from using the global financial system to pay for their evil activities. fighting the financial war against terror will demand constant innovation and improvement. the tools we have use edd in the past may not be suitable for the future. i look forward to hearing from the witnesses on what may be necessary to upgrade and improve our capabilities to starve the terrorists of the money they so desperately need to carry out their attacks. i will now recognize the ranking member for three minutes for an opening statement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, for scheduling today's hearing. i would like to thank undersecretary cohen and each of our other witnesses for being here today. i'm looking forward to hearing about the administration's efforts to degrade isil's financial capability and to review the effectiveness of our current legal framework in deteriorating terrorists and money laundering known as isil or isis is an incredibly violent organization that has shown a particularly callous disregard for human life for shocking and brutal tactics that include beheading, mass mu a

Related Keywords

Alabama , United States , New Hampshire , North Carolina , Texas , Alaska , Kentucky , China , California , Georgia , Michigan , Washington , District Of Columbia , New Jersey , Iowa , Maryland , Ohio , North Dakota , Americans , America , American , Adam Greene , Jonathan Cullen , Elizabeth Warren , Mary Landrieu , Brian Schweitzer , A Paul Friedman , Al Qaeda , George W Bush , Tom Harkin , Al Franken , Marg Begich , Mitch Mcconnell , Sheila Behr , Bo Biden , Hillary Clinton , Bernie Sanders ,